Aspden Free Energy Collection 3

1
ENERGY SCIENCE: AN INTRODUCTORY OVERVIEW

HAROLD ASPDEN, 2004
HAROLD ASPDEN Energy Science Ltd P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB England Preliminary Note The science literature dealing with the alternative energy sources needed once we confront depletion of conventional sources, and the escalating cost of power as that decline begins, includes a sector classified as free energy. This is a field of energy research which tends to be shunned by conventional science owing to it being seen as based on the belief that perpetual motion is an impossibility. Surely, as every scientist knows, energy is conserved in physical processes and cannot be destroyed or created, that being a proposition accepted as the first law of thermodynamics. Yet there is activity in this free energy pursuit that warrants attention, as do the fascinating stories about pioneers in this field who are no longer with us. However, it is not our purpose here to capture your imagination be retelling those stories. You can read about them elsewhere as in references [1 to 4]. Instead, under this heading ENERGY SCIENCE, but guided by those stories, we will here engage in exploratory detective work as we try to solve the secret of their underlying physical processes that allow energy to be tapped, as if from nowhere. The solution of the mystery is needed now so that we can choose the best route to follow in our immediate efforts. We do not have many years to waste, if we are to win in the game of survival as our oil and gas reserves are burned away and avoid the dangers associated with nuclear power. We cannot just hope for the miracle discovery of some as yet unconceived technological breakthrough. The answer has to be in whatever is already of record. Scope of this Overview By the using the word overview it is meant that we shall not here be indulging in a full and detailed in depth presentation for the physics student. That can follow in due course. Here the intention is to summarize the factors and steps involved so as to focus rapidly on the issues that come into play in delivering excess energy. The comments to be made are not arbitrary statements, but reasoned deductions, many of which are based on research recorded elsewhere. Thus, and without further ado, this whole account is based on there being two complementary options as to the energy source involved, both satisfying that first law of thermodynamics. The less exciting option involves thermodynamics, a breach of the second law of thermodynamics possible where magnetism is involved. We can tap into waste heat of our immediate environment and generate useful electric power by deploying that heat energy. Alternatively, there is the fascinating prospect that we can exploit an insight into the way Mother Nature supplied the energy needed to create our Sun and Earth, and accept that a real aether exists from which we can borrow energy to power our machines before returning it after use by heat radiation. This may seem to be a bold objective but, as already stated, the research involved is of record elsewhere [see later references] and, to put it bluntly, given that there is no rival theory that can match what is covered by this overview, one has no choice but to hope that our story here is correct. The onward account comes under 16 headings, each relating to a different example of an energy-related anomaly that has no feasible explanation other than the one suggested by this
2 author. Note that, concerning the description of the well known free energy experiments, the reader should refer to the appropriate references [1 to 4] already mentioned. (1) The Magnet System of Hans Coler Coler had six bar magnets arranged in a loop with a small carefully-adjusted spacing between the adjacent end faces of the magnets. Each had a solenoidal winding and these were connected so as to set up some kind of interaction as between their magnetic flux pulsations that delivered output EMF via capacitors with a frequency in the 100 kHz region. It is suggested that the relevant physical principles involved are those concerned with magnetostriction and the fact that magnetic permeability of iron changes according to internal strain, so that if there is a sustained longitudinal magnetostrictive oscillation of the bar magnets at that 100 kHz or so frequency the EMF induced in those solenoidal windings delivers the output power. To understand the energy input source we need to understand the true nature of ferromagnetism. It involves electrons (the 3d state electrons in iron) adopting a coordinated orbital motion so as to produce a polarized magnetic state. Magnetic energy has negative potential as we know from the fact that energy in excess of the specific heat requirement has to be supplied (as heat) to destroy the ferromagnetic state upon upward transit through the Curie temperature. However, though this might suggest that all materials should exhibit magnetic polarization, this coordinated electron state involves an associated high stress and strain condition and that means mechanical stress energy. Iron, nickel and cobalt are three of the very few atoms for which the electron interplay (that of the 3d state electrons) can release more energy owing to the magnetized state than is needed to sustain the associated mechanical stress condition. The implications of this are relevant to the discovery of Hans Coler. The magnets, when oscillating magnetostrictively at their resonant frequency, as determined by the elastic constants of the iron and as sustained by the superimposed magnetic field action produced by an oscillatory solenoidal current, will conserve mechanical oscillation energy whilst producing fluctuations of magnetic permeability, magnetic flux and negative potential energy of the magnetic state. The latter involves depletion of heat if electricity is drawn off as output. Therefore, the Colers magnets should cool as they deliver power to the output circuit. Though this might suggest a power source operating on ambient heat it cannot be a feasible prospect for solving the worlds impending energy crisis and so we must look elsewhere. For references to Colers invention see pp. 210-212 of ref. [4 ] and p. 221 of ref. [1]. (2) Bowmans Permanent Magnet Machine This is the best example of a perpetual motion machine. It is simple in construction and leaves no room for doubt as to its operability. Here it cannot be heat input that provides the motive power. The machine uses rotors having axes of spin that are parallel. On these rotors there is an assembly of cylindrical Alnico magnets spaced around the rim, their axes being mutually parallel with the rotor axes. The arrangement is such that the magnets of one rotor come into end face to end face relationship with the magnets of another rotor as the rotors spin, meaning that their cyclical alignment causes an increase in their magnetic flux as they come into register followed by a decrease as they separate. The magnets share the rotation speed of the rotors and so we know from the research of Michael Faraday that an EMF is set up in a radial direction between their axes and their outer cylindrical surfaces. Moreover, this EMF fluctuates owing to the encounters between magnets
3 of adjacent rotors. Somehow this initiates inflow of angular momentum that sustains the rotor rotation and accounts for the perpetual motion property. This is hardly likely to become a practical way of running the worlds power generating plants of the future, but it gives us insight into the mystery involved and can guide us forward in our onward search for that free energy source. What have we done in operating such a machine? We have displaced electric charge radially within an electrically conducting medium, the metal of those Alnico magnets. Something within the space occupied by those magnets has reacted as a result and delivered angular momentum. That surely is a pointer to the aether, the medium of the quantum underworld, the medium that has the built-in intrinsic property of determining universally the quantum unit of angular momentum that is basic to the theory of the atom. It is that medium that regulates the orbital motion of electrons in atoms and determines the motion of those 3d state electrons in iron as mentioned above and so we are now looking at the aether as the energy source that powers Bowmans perpetual motion machine. See p. 27 of ref.[2] and p. of ref. [5]. (3) The Homopolar Magnet Machines A so-called homopolar magnet machine is a curious name for one which merely involves a large rotating magnet arranged to deliver electrical output by a current circuit including a radial path through the magnet itself or through a conductive disc rotating with it and linked by its magnetic flux, the input and output being via electrical brush contacts. Such machines have extremely low voltage output at high current and are not normally regarded as having anomalous energy properties. However, the researches of Bruce DePalma and Dr. Paramahamsa Tewari, amongst others, reveal the anomalous energy properties of homopolar machines. These two examples are discussed here because DePalmas machine was tested by Dr. Robert Kincheloe, Professor Emeritus of Electrical Engineering at Stanford University who agreed there was evidence of excess energy, whereas Tewaris machine had features which, owing to an a.c. aspect, promised better performance. Quoting from Dr. Kincheloes report noted in DePalmas paper at pp. 283-287 in ref. [6]: During 1985, I was invited to test such a machine. While it did not perform as claimed, repeatable data showed anomalous results that did not seem to conform to traditional theory. In particular, under certain assumptions about internally generated output voltage, the increase in input power when power was extracted from the generator over that measured due to frictional losses with the generator unexcited seemed to be either about 13% or 20% of the maximum compound generated power, depending upon interpretation. DePalma then added that after a thoroughgoing critique and examination of his data Kincheloe concludes: DePalma may have been right in that there is indeed a situation here whereby energy is being obtained from a previously unknown and unexplained source. So why are we not seeing these machines scaled up for use in generating electricity? Well, in my opinion it is because physicists in general do not believe this excess power generation to be possible and do not understand the mysterious energy source. DePalma did not produce a commercially viable product. In my opinion such excess energy as was produced on a sustained basis owed its existence to the erratic pulsations in the brush contact output which affected the field within the rotor. Moreover, apart from its very low voltage, very high d.c. current ouput,
4 the machine would easily overheat and DePalma could not run the machine for prolonged periods. One can say that it is unlikely that the cumbersome machine technology of the homopolar motor can ever serve as a future power source, but here you have that pointer to the aether underworld as the supplier of energy and angular momentum as a result of charge displacement from a central axis, but it has to be a pulsating charge displacement because with no pulsation you merely have the one-off start-up input of aether energy and no sustained energy inflow. (4) The Discovery of John Searl Here again we are told that magnets can seem to perform a magical trick or rather display a state of perpetual motion. Here the magnets are Alnico, meaning that, unlike ferrite magnets, they are a metal alloy that is electrically conductive. If they spin about their axes then they induce electric charge displacement, suggesting that charge of one polarity can be contained within an enclosing boundary surface to which charge of the opposite polarity has been displaced. The key point of interest from the reports of Searls experiments is his use of a large central non-rotating magnet around the rim of which cylindrically shaped magnets held in contact with the central magnet by magnetic attraction were free to roll. What Searl discovered was that, once set rolling, those magnets kept on rolling! The motion escalated and seemed to bring into play what can only be described as an anti-gravitational effect, which led Searl into a fantasy world of flight rather than the down to Earth task of generating power in a new way. Getting the aether to spin whilst enveloping the apparatus inducing that spin may well affect the gravitational properties of that apparatus, but that is not what we are considering here. Our focus is on the extraction of energy from the aether and if those rolling magnets really do speed up for no apparent reason and with no visible power input then the aether as an energy source is in evidence. However, yet again, given that powerful magnets are needed, this is hardly likely to become part of the technology of our future power generation industry, but it provides a further clue to the mystery role of the aether underworld. Here there is no pulsation of the magnetic strength of the magnet but that motion is sustained. Somehow whatever it is that imports angular momentum is being replenished at a steady rate. So what is different here? One answer is that those rolling magnets are moving laterally with respect to their spin axes. The other is the presence of that central magnet. Now for a little creative detective work. Just suppose that, because we have referred to the aether, one can picture a chunk of aether coextensive with a spinning magnet as reacting to develop its own state of spin. Can it be that that spinning aether unit, which itself may have become a kind of quasi-magnet, is pulled free from its host magnet to be held in place by that central magnet? If so then the onward motion of the rolling magnet to a new position would imply regeneration of more aether spin, perhaps consolidating into a larger aether spin form and precessing or reorientating its spin axis direction as the initial process centred on each individual magnet is repeated. This is effectively a pulsation that generates a steady inflow of aether angular momentum that sustains the motion. Indeed, according to Searl, what he witnessed was not just sustained motion but escalating motion, speed up with somewhat alarming consequences! It is submitted from this that, guided by certain experiments involving spinning magnets, there is good reason to point the finger at the aether as a reacting source of energy, a source triggered by producing a concentration of electric charge of the same polarity so as to set up a
5 radially-directed electric field in the vacuum medium, the aether. See pp. 200-216 of ref. [1] for an extensive description of Searls efforts. (5) The Aspden Effect This author has assembled a motor using disc-shaped ferrite magnets of the kind used in loudspeakers, mounted on a rotor shaft and interleaved with electrical sheet steel laminations each having eight poles. Here rotation causes the magnets to induce radial EMFs in those poled rotor laminations and the passage of those poles past the corresponding poles of a stator assembly causes flux pulsation. So we have the induction of a pulsating radial electric field in aether coextensive with the rotor assembly, a recipe according to what has been stated above for inflow of aether energy. However, here again, this being an alternative version of a homopolar magnet machine, the thought of this ever being a way forward in meeting our future energy needs has been ruled out. However, the tests on this motor did give further insight into that interplay with the aether and the presence of an anomalous energy gain. When the motor was first started, spinning at some 1500 rpm, it was noted that it reached that speed after switch-on in a period of 20-30 seconds. If it was then stopped and restarted, its speed-up time to that speed was some 5 seconds if no more that two or three minutes had passed since it had come to rest, but the longer the period waited before restart, the longer it took to reach 1500 rpm. It was as if there was something there having a weak inertial coupling with the rotor that was spinning separately and slowing down at a slower rate. Here was what seemed to be an aether phenomenon. Before moving on from that research effort several tests were performed at different times of day and with different compass orientations of the rotor axis. The phenomenon varied with spin axis direction, suggesting that the quantum spin of the aether has a fixed orientation in space, a result consistent with the authors theoretical expectations dating back to the late 1950 period. This phenomenon has been named The Aspden Effect by Dr. Hal Fox, editor of the U.S. publication New Energy News, which is why that expression is used as the title to this section. For a detailed report of the authors tests on this machine (though not including that axial reorientation phenomenon) see ref. [7]. (6) Thunderball Energy It is appropriate here to include mention of a phenomenon that has long puzzled physicists, namely what it is that sustains for a noticeable period the glowing state of a spherical cluster of ionized air produced on occasion as a by-product of a lightning discharge. The answer, quite obviously in view of the above commentary, is that the concentration of electric charge, as by the so-called electrodynamic pinch effect associated with a high current discharge, can induce a reacting aether spin which lasts for several seconds, sometimes minutes, after the lightning discharge has ended. That aether spin would form a sphere in which the aethers own electric charge is displaced so as to have charge of one polarity in the body of the sphere and opposite polarity at the surface and, until it dissipates its energy in keeping coextensive air ionized, so we see what is known as a thunderball. In this way the evidence mounts, the aether plays a role we cannot ignore in our search for a future energy source. A paper on this by the author was published by the U.K. Institute of Physics, ref. [8].
6 (7) The Suns Energy Source To add weight to the argument, there is now of record some very strong evidence concerning the role played by the aether in creating the Sun and then in sustaining its energy radiation. Given the size and mass of the Sun and our knowledge of Bohrs theory of the hydrogen atom, one can work out that those atoms must be so close together as to have electrons of adjacent atoms banging into one another. This means ionization and energy radiation, but energy replenished once the electrons are recaptured by a free proton to reestablish the hydrogen atom. The process by which the energy is replenished has to be whatever it is that determines the quantized state of electron motion, and that can only be the quantum underworld of the aether itself. So the aether has to be a medium alive with energy owing to it comprising a system of its own electric charges in harmonious motion, a system which, when subjected to a radially directed electric field, will react in retaining the synchrony of that motion, by spinning as a coextensive bodily unit. Aether spin plus the quantum interplay with matter account for the energy inflow and angular momentum that is shed to matter by the aether. Cosmologists have puzzled for centuries over why the Sun and all the planets rotate about their axes in the same directional sense. They like to think that angular momentum is conserved, just as energy is conserved, but need to factor the aether into their equations to keep the books in balance! Those who see hot nuclear fusion as the way forward on the energy front, believing this is also the Suns energy source, need to heed the message here presented. Note that once an electron comes free from a hydrogen atom the proton is freed as well and so, since two protons have a mutual attraction by gravity that implies an acceleration rate 1836 times greater than that of the corresponding gravitational attraction of two electrons, the Sun must be positively charged body surrounding by a spherical boundary shell of electrons. Here you have the radial electric field needed to establish aether spin and import energy along with angular momentum. This is fully described in ref. [9]. (8) Our Earths Magnetism To add further weight to the aether theme under discussion, just accept for the sake of argument, that when a magnet spins it may be that the aether coextensive with that magnet also develops a spin as the induced displacement of electric charge in magnet and aether complement one another. It has been argued above by reference to the authors motor research that aether spin can have a characteristic dependent upon orientation in space. The Earth is a magnetized body. It seems logical, it being so massive and it spinning at quite a steady rate for eons of time, that its aether would share the same spin velocity. However, that does not necessarily mean that the two spin axes have the same orientation. Earth and its aether being in effect two interacting magnets, it is conceivable that there could be precession of the Earths aether spin axis relative to the Earths proper axis. On that basis we have an explanation of why the North and South magnet poles precess around the Earths North and South poles and that yields further information about the aether properties. Our quest to tap aether energy depends upon our acceptance that the aether exists and then probing its properties to see how we can gain access to its store of energy. So, before coming back to bench-type experiments, let us just look at one more factor of relevance, the Earths electricity. This subject is discussed in detail in ref. [10]. (9) Our Earths Electricity A sphere of aether that is spinning about an axis through its centre is a state in which aether charge of one polarity is displaced radially with respect to that axis relative to aether
7 charge of the opposite polarity. So imagine the Earth as a sphere sitting within such an aether sphere with the Earths ionospheric regions corresponding to its spherical boundaries. Both spheres rotate in the same sense. The uniformly distributed negative aether charge set up within such boundaries by displacement will, of course, be cancelled by the Earth itself shedding enough electrons to provide enough positive ions to neutralize the charge. Those electrons will have migrated to those ionospheric boundaries, where there will be a residual net positive aether charge equal to that of the electrons. Those electrons, as a concentrated spherical shell of charge, will share the Earths rotation and most of them will probably occupy aether sites vacated by displaced negative charge, though some, in repositioning between such sites, will be in transit and so seen as belonging to the ionospheric charge that we detect by its effect on radio waves. As to the residual positive aether charge associated with the spin-induced displacement, this will surely not be part of a sudden spherical boundary transition between spinning aether and enveloping non-spinning aether. Rather the boundary transition will be graded, with the mean effect that, on average, that residual positive aether charge will spin at half the speed of the main aether sphere. The net effect is to endow the rotating Earth-cum-aether combination with a magnetic moment attributable to a net negative charge. For the Earths east-west motion this will account for its North and South magnetic poles. Furthermore, this theory leads to a precise account qualitatively and quantitatively for the Earths measured magnetic moment, as shown elsewhere [10]. The physical picture thus portrayed tells us something else, namely that in the space between the Earths surface and ionosphere, our atmosphere, there should be a prevailing negative charge density, meaning that when we walk around in the fresh air of the countryside we are walking through aether that exhibits a net electrical charge density. We can measure its presence because it sets up a vertical electric field of more than one hundred volts per metre and this also fits well with the value derived from the aether spin theory under discussion. In addition this author has performed a laboratory experiment which proves that this aether charge density exists even in the empty space within an earthed Faraday cage, a feature which may help to unravel the mystery of why certain precision measurements of G, the constant of gravitation, at different laboratory locations give slightly different answers. Here, therefore, is one further factor confirming the claim that setting up radial charge electric displacement can induce aether spin and the converse that aether spin induces radial charge displacement in coextensive electrical apparatus, thereby giving us scope to tap aether spin energy. The author will report on this separately in the near future. (10) The Correa PAGD Power Generator The research of Alexandra and Paulo Correa has revealed excess power generation based on setting up a plasma discharge in gas at low pressure. PAGD is an abbreviation for Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge. Where there is cold cathode operation, meaning no heat input to cause electron emission from the cathode, the ion flow through the tube involving positive ions. These capture electrons from the cathode and as neutral units, atoms or molecules, migrate back to the anode where the high voltage pulls electrons free to sustain the current flow around the part of the closed circuit path external to the tube. The result of this is a concentration of positive charge, thereby setting up a radial electric field, and, given appropriate power input conditions, producing pulsations, we comply with the recipe for inducing aether energy inflow.
8 This particular research venture by the Correas was the first to recognize that this authors theoretical insight into aether physics is relevant to their findings. Apart from the aether energy inflow there are anomalous aether forces at work which account for the excessive cathode reaction forces long recognized where cold cathode discharge tubes are involved. Electrodynamic action has a way of introducing such forces, attributable to imbalance of linear momentum, whereas electrostatic action can introduce imbalance of angular momentum, all based on aether reaction effects. There is much of record concerning the Correa findings, including three U.S. Patents Nos. 5,416,391, 5,449,989 and 5,502, 354. See pp. 218-222 of Ref. [4] and also this authors commentary in ref. [11]. (11) Geoffrey Spences Power Generator Keeping in mind the proposition that the induction of a radial electric field as between a central cylindrical electrode and an enveloping cylindrical electrode can be a direct way of inducing aether spin, it will be understood why this author was particularly interested in the free energy claims made on the basis of what was disclosed by Spences U.S. Patent No. 4,772,816. See this authors reference to this in ref. [11] and be aware that Spence later told an audience at a talk he gave on the occasion of a political party meeting in Salisbury in England that he had closed the loop and his device was self-generating and delivered electrical power on a scale that could soon become commercial. We therefore look forward to hearing how the Spence project is developing. (12) Teslas Free Energy Quest There has been so much speculation about the free energy aspect of the research efforts of Nikola Tesla that it is impossible to focus clearly on anything definite. He sought to tap into the radiant energy source of our electromagnetic environment. Had he built an enormous wireless system of antennas feeding energy into electromagnetic wave pulsations of the Earths atmosphere then maybe he would have proved there is a way of tapping aether energy. He envisaged this as a way of delivering electric power without reliance on transmission by overhead power lines or underground cables. You see, one can argue that electromagnetic waves need energy input to establish them in the first place but it could be that the energy is merely absorbed by the aether over a short range of propagation, whereas the waves, as an oscillatory disturbance of the electric field of the aether merely ripple the sea of energy possessed by the aether. On that basis I can see scope for an energy gain that taps into the quantum underworld of aether energy, which is why I was interested in the research findings of Dave Giesking reported elsewhere [12]. As to whether Tesla did succeed in devising an over-unity power generating device, one can but speculate about the reports of an automobile he built in his later years that ran without gasolene and was powered electrically. Certainly, however, one can be sure that such technology was based on high voltage operating oscillatory circuits involving capacitors and inductors. Atmospheric electricity was the energy source he sought to exploit in his early research but he may have discovered that producing a high voltage in an enclosed apparatus such as could be housed in an automobile was a sufficient catalyst for tapping some of the energy of the omnipresent aether. As Keith Tutt states at p. 23 of his book The Search for Free Energy [4]: In one of his famous lectures of 1892 he (Tesla) told an astounded audience:
9 Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point in the universe .... Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static, our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is, for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature. (13) Dr. Henry Morays Capacitor Power Generator Moving on to 1914, and quoting again from Keith Tutts book, I see that he opened his Chapter 3 entitled: T. Henry Moray - Capturing the Energy of the Universe with the following quotation of that years date by Moray: It is the belief of the writer that all space is saturated with energies which are doubtless electrical in their ultimate energies or very closely allied to electrical action. The relation of matter to energy and energy to matter then becomes the potential of the universe, one continuous series of oscillations to and fro like a great pendulum across the universe. Here, hidden in these words, is a revelation that Moray could only have sensed but never explained. He had unknowingly referred to the universal rhythm of the quantum underworld of space, the aether with its cyclical motion at the frequency we associate with the name Compton, that at which the photon has energy equal to the rest-mass energy of the electron, the energy needed for electron creation. However, the story of Moray is about his success in discovering how to power electrical appliances without any obvious source of power input other than an antenna strung between poles a few metres above ground. I believe he needed the antenna input to provide a high enough voltage to prime his capacitors by a d.c. input which could not deliver a sustained inflow of energy, but by virtue of the electromagnetic fluctuations (noise) owing to atmospheric electrical effects, these were enough to trigger the oscillatory exchange of charge as between two capacitors. My guess is that these must have been of concentric electrode construction as otherwise there could be no radial oscillations of electric field in the coextensive aether region, the recipe for tapping aether energy. The reference to Swedish stone in what has been written about Morays demonstrations points to a component serving as a rectifier in converting the high frequency output into d.c. which could power the light bulbs and electric iron, the proof that here was a viable power source at least on a domestic scale. To generate kilowatts of power from apparatus of the size used in Morays demonstrations and by technology based on capacitors and inductors operating at what must have been a frequency of the order of 100 kHz implies scope for economic large scale exploitation, which is why this research of Moray in the early years of the 20th century is so important. If only he had disclosed every detail of what he had constructed! But, one wonders, did he really understand the underlying physics at work in what he had built? (14) The Methernitha Project Now it is as good as certain that Morays process of tapping energy from the aether is the secret also of the modern day apparatus hidden away in a reclusive community in Switzerland. What has been reported and demonstrated has all the necessary features, as I see it, in that there is a high voltage d.c. input provided by an influence machine (Wimshurst machine) of the kind I saw demonstrated in my youth in the physics laboratory of my school. The apparatus has two large Leyden jars (capacitors of concentric electrode construction) and the necessary inductors
10 to exploit resonant oscillations in transferring charge between the two capacitors. Here again, however, I suspect that those who have built this apparatus as well as those who have visited Methernitha and witnessed its operation have no idea how the device taps actually draws energy from the aether. Understanding the theory of its operation, meaning an in-depth insight into the physics involved is essential if one is to see a way forward on the commercial front and convince those in authority who need to sponsor and fund such effort on a large scale. As to that knowledge, here we need to recognize the link with the creative underworld of the aether, as brought to bear in forming our Sun, as described in my book: The Physics of Creation [9] (15) The Aspden Capacitor Project It was early in 2002 that I was invited to be a speaker at an Energy Symposium in Berlin to be held in June. Having already reached the conclusion that it should be possible to draw energy from the aether by suitable interplay of two capacitors of concentric electrode construction I faced the choice of diverting my attentions into that experimental pursuit or simply publishing my ideas in the hope that others having the necessary facilities would engage in such effort. My primary aim was to consolidate my theoretical pursuit of aether science by writing a new book updating what I had published earlier and so, in 2003, a first and then a second edition of The Physics of Creation duly appeared on my website www.aspden.org. It made sense to file a patent application in U.K. before disclosing what I planned to say at the forthcoming event in Berlin and so that was duly filed at the U.K. Patent Office on March 3rd, 2002. I am writing this now owing to that Patent Application having just been published bearing the number GB 2390941, it being accessible via http://gb.espacenet.com. The presentation I made in Berlin has been of Internet record since 2002 and will not be repeated here. See Lecture No. 27 in the Energy science section of my website www.aspden.org. One point, however, that I should add is that the basis of the invention recognizes that when a capacitor of cylindrical electrode construction is charged, its discharge returns the same net charge as was fed as input, but the voltage across the plates does not reduce as might be expected from standard theory. It is, at least so the theory based on aether involvement predicts, as if the capacitance during the discharge phase is somewhat higher owing to aether energy having been trapped and adding power to the discharge. The cylindrical capacitor construction with well-spaced cylindrical electrodes to assure the spatial annular character needed to accommodate aether spin means using and a high voltage to provide an adequate level of energization and d.c. to avoid the high energy source itself delivering energy continuously. Two capacitors appropriately connected via inductors are then needed to encourage oscillation as the charge is exchanged cyclically between them and surplus energy as output can then be drawn inductively from the inductors. It now remains to be seen whether what is here suggested will bear fruit in our free energy efforts, but at least I have presented the case as I see it, and so, until we know what emerges, I just now hope to be proved right. The next and final note concerns an experimental anomaly I once encountered but never reported. I am still puzzling over it but suspect it has some bearing upon the free energy theme under discussion. (16) The Aspden Motor Project I assembled a switched reluctance motor having eight rotor poles interacting with eight stator poles, the latter having windings powered by a pulsed d.c. input controlled by a Hall
11 sensor of rotor shaft position so as to run at a speed determined by the load and the voltage applied. The special feature of this motor was that the poles of both rotor and stator were inclined to the radial direction at an angle of 45 degrees. I just wanted to see if operation was more efficient according to whether rotation was clockwise or anticlockwise and so see if inclining the poles made any difference. The problem of fitting windings to the inclined stator poles meant that there was a price to pay design-wise because it limited the use of copper wire and meant higher resistance in the excitation circuit. I confess that after building this machine the fitting of those stator windings was offputting and I moved on to more interesting motor research pursuit at the time, but only after seeing how the inclined pole motor operated. I then witnessed something I had not bargained for. I had reasoned before building it that it would run steadily in either direction once given a torque impulse in the chosen direction, and my hope was that it would run on the same load at the same speed with less power in one or other direction. So I was quite astounded when I switched it on and gave it a starting turn in the anticlockwise sense. The motor increased in speed and ran well for a few minutes as I was assessing operation before gearing up to make measurements, but then I sensed that it was beginning to slow down even though the d.c. input voltage was unchanged. The slowing down action even escalated to the point where the motor passed through a standstill and started to rotate clockwise. Not only did it change its spin direction but, once rotating clockwise, it gained speed rapidly, accelerating much faster than it had on start-up in the other direction, settling eventually at a much higher speed in that direction that it had reached earlier in the clockwise direction. This was a repeatable performance and I even demonstrated it to a friend and later videotaped its operation for my private records. I admit being baffled by this. I had hoped it would function better spinning one way than the other but when it did I then wondered if I had introduced a bias by not setting the commutation control symmetrically, which is probably why I did not pursue the tests further. However, on reflection, since it did run steadily initially as input power matched the load, how is it that the machine rotor could then slow down, actually stop and then decide to rotate the other way? Something was introducing an element of inertia, a time-lag in the governing physics at work in the machine, but something that was saying to the machine at its moment of standstill: Go clockwise!. My thoughts then suggested two possibilities. The d.c. current input combined with the magnetic flux pulsations may have gradually introduced a polarizing bias in the magnetic state of the poles which may or may not have played a role. Yet this does not seem probable. Alternatively, in view of my awareness of the aether spin seemingly evident in the tests on the motor of quite different design (homopolar machine) mentioned above in note (5), I am now wondering if that same phenomenon was at work in the inclined-pole machine. At least, given aether spin building up and for some reason induced in a clockwise direction, this might explain why the machine, in coming to rest from its anticlockwise motion, had a hidden memory, an input that encouraged it to spin up in a clockwise sense. I admit this is speculation at this stage as I have no firm theory for what I observed, but hopefully I shall one day find time to pursue this matter further. However, in ending on this final note, I stress that I do not regard motor technology as the best route forward in free energy research. The capacitor theme seems to me to be the best candidate. It has real promise in view of the pioneer research of Moray and those involved in the Methernitha venture.
12 References [1] John Davidson, The Secret of the Creative Vacuum, C.W. Daniel Co. Ltd (1989). [2] David Hatcher Childress, The Free-Energy Device Handbook, Adventures Unlimited Press (1994). [3] Jeane Manning, The Coming Energy Revolution, Avery Publishing Group (1996). [4] Keith Tutt, The Search for Free Energy, Simon & Schuster (2001). [5] Jim Kettner, Space Energy Journal, pp. 22-23, v. XIII, Issue IV (2003). [6] Bruce DePalma, Speculations in Science and Technology, pp. 283-287, v. 13, No. 4 (1990). [7] Harold Aspden, Power from Magnetism: The Transverse Reluctance Motor, Energy Science Report No. 7, Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [8] Harold Aspden, The Thunderball - an Electrostatic Phenomenon, Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser, No. 66: Session VI, Electrostatics 1983, Oxford, pp. 179-184 (1983). [9] Harold Aspden, The Physics of Creation, Book Section of www.aspden.org. [10] Harold Aspden, Physics Unified, Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB, England.. [11] Harold Aspden, Power from Space: The Correa Invention, Energy Science Report No. 8, Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [12] Dave Gieskieng, An Antenna with Anomalous Radiation Properties, Appendix to Lecture No. 10, Energy Science Section of www.aspden.org. Note: References [7, 10 and 11] are all of full Internet record. See www.aspden.org.
Aspden Research Papers, No. 1 (2004)
ENERGY SCIENCE: A BRIEF REVIEW AND A CONCLUSION

H. Aspden, 2004 Introduction Exploring the scope for tapping energy from a new and non-conventional source is a research pursuit of a few worthy individuals, very few, in comparison with the many, very many, highly qualified scientists who work in the power industry. We need that new source of energy because our oil and gas reserves are being rapidly depleted, because reverting to burning coal, which also cannot last for ever, creates pollution and because nuclear power involves other dangers. In a perfect world we would have come to understand how what we see around us was created, meaning finding the answer to the question: Where did the energy needed come from? and then discovering how we can harness that mystery energy resource. Understanding Creation is not just an act of faith based on religious doctrine, nor can we rely 100% on the doctrinaire principles of science of modern physics. Something else is needed. Fortunately, there is now enough evidence of record to justify enquiry which probes into the secret world of energy science. What follows is a brief review, a summary, of my own efforts in recent years, followed by a culminating conclusion which may inspire others to undertake further work of their own. If future generations are to survive by relying on power from windmills, then let us just hope that there are those who, in the spirit of Don Quixote, find the energy needed to meet the challenge. Concerning Nuclear Energy Our ability to harness atomic power, a by-product of atomic weapon research, does not mean, as most physicists accept, that the heat generated within the sun and which, by its radiation, keeps the Earth warm is the product of a nuclear reaction at the suns centre. Gravitation pulls the suns hydrogen atoms so close together that their electrons collide and cause ionization. Protons are freed along with electrons. Then, because two protons interact gravitationally to set up an acceleration rate that is 1836 times that applicable between two electrons, the ionized plasma we see as the body of our sun contains more protons than electrons, leaving a surplus of electrons at its boundary surface. There is therefore a balance of gravitational compression pressure and electrostatic expansion pressure throughout the body of the sun, meaning it has a uniform mass density, and there is no reason to think that its temperature at its centre is any different from that at its surface. Its core temperature is not sufficient to account for nuclear reaction. Instead, the quantum interplay between the hydrogen atom and the underworld medium that fills all space sustains the atoms electron motion, thereby having supplied the energy needed to ionize when gravity brings hydrogen atoms into collision, but duly replenishing energy that might be lost by radiation, once free electrons are captured by free protons to restore the atomic hydrogen form.
The quantum underworld, the space medium, the aether is the energy source, not nuclear power! We are therefore being misled. It is one thing to build more and more nuclear power plants to meet future needs but quite another to do so thinking that we are merely replicating Natures processes at work in the sun and so be blind as to the true source of energy. Indeed, one might say that it is the energy of the quantum underworld that, in sustaining the suns energy radiation, controls the weather on Earth and so empowers those windmills that provide the alternative to nuclear power. On such a foundation one must see sense in looking for ways to tap energy directly from that all-pervading quantum underworld energy source, confident that it must be possible. Then, guided by certain reports of historical record, there is a path to follow, but it is not an easy path as there are sidetracks than can lead nowhere and so frustrate ones efforts. The Governing Rules There are two governing rules or principles that dominate energy science. One is the Principle of Conservation of Energy and the other is the Principle that Action and Reaction are equal and opposite. Teachers of physics expect us to accept these without question, as they form the bedrock on which they build, sure in the knowledge that experience over time has proved their validity. Yet when they discuss energy deployment as it applies to the real world of technology they do not even contemplate the quantum underworld of space and ask whether energy balance and so its conservation can include the latter. Energy conservation does not mean that we cannot transfer energy from that quantum underworld and bring it into the apparatus of our real world. The notions of the high energy particle physicist concerning the interplay between electron-positron creation and decay and photons do imply energy conservation as between matter and the space medium but, for some mysterious reason, such physicists are not open minded when it comes to tapping energy from that vacuum medium. As to the action and reaction theme, this happens to be enshrined in Newtons Third Law of Motion and so is taken as beyond question, but yet physics is taught also by reference to the Lorentz force law which, as applied generally between two electrons in motion, breaches Newtons Third Law, unless the force acting on one of those electrons is calculated as the average force on the basis of the other electron describing a closed circuital path. So, you see, when it comes to convincing those who govern opinion on what is possible and what is not possible there is uncharted energy territory to be explored in an effort to tap energy from space, but yet we confront unwarranted hostility and ridicule for aiming at the impossible. My Research My Ph.D. research addressed the problem of anomalous excess energy loss in the magnetization processes at work in transformer cores. That was back in the years 19501953 and I was destined to pursue a professional career peripheral to the research field, one concerned with evaluating and protecting inventions stemming from research in the electrical power industry and electronics. However, as early as 1956, I privately researched a few theoretical ideas of my own, one being an attempt to understand how energy is stored in the vacuum medium. I concluded that the medium reacts to the presence of a magnetic
field as if it is the seat of electric charge in motion that can act in opposition to the applied field. Energy criteria, meaning maximum amount of energy transferred to the medium, indicated that the reaction would be one that is exactly half the strength of the applied field. I saw this as resolving an anomaly in physics, one which had mistakenly given birth to the notion of so-called spin, the half-quantum state that supposedly explained the primary factor-of-two implicit in what is known as the gyromagnetic ratio. This was theoretical physics. It caused me to see the need to understand how the aether was structured, taking account of all the problems that had beset belief in the aether and caused its demise from the physics curriculum and its replacement by Einsteins notion of space-time. Apart from my onward theory leading to an insight into the cause of gravity and how protons are created an early conclusion was that the creation of an electric field radially directed from an axis would induce aether spin about that axis. The energy inflow from the aether needed to account for that state of spin was found to equal the energy supplied in creating that electric field. This all being a theoretical and not a technological interest, I soon found that I could explain how stars are created and why they spin, apparently in breach of the physicists rule that angular momentum must be conserved. To say a star spins poses the question of how it acquires its angular momentum, but that was answered by my theory as all I had to explain is how the star acquires the electric core charge within a balancing surface charge, and the explanation of that is presented above under that heading Concerning Nuclear Energy. The aether provides the angular momentum, it having a vast store of angular momentum by virtue of its quantum activity in the form of its electric charge having a jitter motion, the basis of Heisenbergs Zitter-bewegung and so his Principle of Uncertainty. When I did, after some 30 years in industry, move to a retirement position for 9 years as a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the university local to my home town, my research was aimed at advancing my theory rather than efforts to tap energy from the aether. Interest in the latter theme was aroused, however, during the latter part of that 9year period and has prevailed ever since. I became involved with motor experiments based on rotating an electrically conductive rotor magnetized parallel to the axis of rotation, this involving induction of an electric field radially directed with respect to the axis of spin. The object, by analogy with the action that imports energy and angular momentum from the aether when a star is formed, was to see if the motor behaved anomalously. The experiments proved positive and confirmed the speculation involved, but were not extended, there being an impractical feature in that, to import energy steadily from the quantum underworld, the action had to be pulsed. To have a pulsating magnetic field acting through the plane of a conductive rotor disc implies eddy current loss and limits possible speed of operation. That meant that there was little, if any, scope for any practical application leading to technology that could serve as a future power source. Other ideas involving motors did emerge but proved equally disappointing. Accordingly, it seemed best to switch interest to devices that are essentially solid-state and static in operation. Then the day came when, after pondering over the reports of the findings of Dr. Henry Moray back in the 1930 period said to tap energy from the atmosphere by the use of an overhead wire connection to a capacitor apparatus as well as the information concerning the modern day Methernitha apparatus, which incorporates large capacitors in the form of Leyden jars, I concluded that here were devices that set up a pulsating radially
directed electric field and import energy by aether spin. I saw this as analogous to my efforts on motors and my interpretation of how a star develops its state of spin. That was in the early months of 2002 and it seemed an appropriate topic to address as an invited speaker at a conference held in Berlin in June of that year. Not having verified operability but yet being about to disclose this at that conference, I deemed it prudent to file a patent application in U.K. before speaking at that event and so my Patent Application GB 2390941A was duly filed and then eventually published on 21st January, 2004. Not surprisingly, this has raised questions by those who saw this printed publication almost immediately after it appeared and so I submitted an article on the subject which has appeared in at pp. 19-25 of Issue 55, v. 10, 2004 of Infinite Energy. Meanwhile experimental work has been undertaken and the bad news is that there is no energy excess developed, at least on a practical scale which needs the apparatus to operate at high voltage of the order of 10 kV and fairly high frequency of the order of 100 kHz. This means that the angular momentum of the aether spin developed by successive pulsations, at a frequency far exceeding the pulsation rate of a hundred cycles per second as used in my motor research, cannot slow down and convert its spin energy into electrical form fast enough to be captured as output upon capacitor discharge and so deliver useful power output. Hence that capacitor theme is not the answer to the riddle posed by the Moray and Methernitha route to generation of what has come to be known as free energy. The Conclusion This brings my efforts to a conclusion, but a conclusion that still offers hope. Being forced to look once again at the common factors evident in the Moray and Methernitha projects there is the possibility that what Dr. Moray meant by the reference to his dependence upon the availability of Swedish stone implies magnetically polarized magnetite, otherwise known as lodestone. The Methernitha apparatus used horsehoe magnets and had coils of wire conductor wound around the legs of the horseshoe form. Moray could have had coils wrapped around a lodestone core. Then there is what has been reported concerning the findings of Hans Coler in Germany in the years preceding and during World War II.. Coler had coils wrapped around bar magnets and generated electrical power output with no other input power connections. So, in asking myself how it can make sense to take a material already magnetized and then pulse it magnetically by developing electric current oscillations in an enveloping winding, I was surprised to find that I was led to ask myself another question. We know that oscillating current in a solenoid enclosing a magnetic core will produce an oscillating magnetic flux over the whole cross-section of the core. A back EMF is produced which means that we feed energy into the solenoid as current strength increases and a forward EMF is induced which returns that energy as current strength decreases. This is the phenomenon of inductance. Now, within that core, it having ferromagnetic properties, there are atoms containing electrons in orbit, the 3d-state electrons in iron, for example, and as these turn to augment the magnetic flux when the solenoid current increases so whatever it is that powers the motion of those electrons will also experience a back EMF and so involve inflow of energy. Then, of course, one might expect as the current subsides so there will be a return of energy to those 3d-state electrons in their orbital motion. That makes sense
and is a natural assumption once that aspect of the magnetization process is considered. However, here now is that other question. How does the energy shed by the 3d-state electrons and stored pending its return force its way back by passage through the limited area of those electron orbits? EMFs are induced as a function of flux linkage by the current loops involved. Yes, I certainly knew how the magnetic field energy is stored. That is the basis of aether charge reaction theme by which I explained that gyromagnetic ratio factor-of-2. But here one has a reacting field system that is uniform across the area of the magnetic core. Logically, therefore, since only a fraction of that area is accounted for by the 3d-state electron orbits, two per atom for iron, then only of fraction of energy shed by the quantum underworld that powers the electron motion can be returned to that medium as the magnetic field subsides in strength. This has to be the case unless one is to accept the belief that there is no field reaction such as I suggested years ago and that instead there are merely lines of magnetic flux having a physical reality that somehow store energy. Such flux lines would need to be rigid in their spatial fixation in relation to the source current orbits with the degree of their numerical concentration being a measure of the energy density involved. To me, lines of magnetic flux are merely notional, a way of portraying how energy in a magnetic field spreads itself in surrounding space but not of themselves having any real physical form. So you can see how I am led to believe that a magnet might be caused to shed energy drawn from the quantum underworld of space and have no direct way for its atoms to recapture that energy. Here I am treading more familiar ground, three years of experimental Ph.D. research being concerned with magnetic hysteresis loss and associated eddy current loss. Once I had this idea of a magnetic core shedding energy that it could not recover, I asked myself what we really know about the process producing hysteresis loss. In my Ph.D. years it was something one could dismiss as being due to sudden erratic movements of magnetic domain walls as inclusions are encountered by those walls as the domains they bound grow and shrink with reorientation of magnetic direction in the ferromagnetic crystals involved. Hysteresis loss was accepted as a fact, an unavoidable phenomenon that one finds in magnetic cores, though one that is of less importance in well annealed cores of high purity that have a high magnetic permeability property. My research concerned measurement of loss aimed at studying how it changed under different conditions, including internal mechanical stress as well as stress applied externally as well, of course, with variation in frequency and superimposed states of magnetic polarization. With this new thought in mind, I enquired into the energy process involved in a cycle of magnetization around the whole of an imaginary truly-rectangular form of B-H loop, a close approximation to the actual form applicable to closed magnetic cores having no air gaps. The magnetizing solenoid inputs energy in proportion to HB, because H is a measure the current in the solenoid and the rate of change of B is a measure of the back EMF resisting current flow. That applies to the right-hand side of the loop. The left-hand side represents further input from the solenoid in proportion to (-H)(-B) and because this equals BH, the overall energy input from the solenoid is 2BH. With B in gauss and H in oersteds this, divided by 8, is a measure of hysteresis loss measured in ergs per cc. per cycle. The top side represents outflow of energy because, ignoring the small H component of B, B is effectively the notional current action of the 3d-state electron orbits in the core, and the rate of change of H, which is negative, is the effective flux density change that accounts for an induced EMF. So, in theory, for 100% flux coupling with those orbits, the
quantity B(-H) is the measure of energy change involved, suggesting that the energy BH fed in during loop passage up the right-hand side and also along the top side is transferred as input to the quantum underworld of space. Similarly the energy represented by (-B)H applies to energy transfer along the bottom line of the loop, meaning it drains away the energy supplied during the left-hand side downward step. All this amounts to the whole loss defined by the area of the hysteresis loop being supplied by the solenoid and fed into the quantum underworld of space, the very reverse of what we aim to achieve. However, though experiment confirms that loss, we know that it does, at least for its major part, stay with us in the real world by appearing as heat in the core. So here then is the proof that, as atomic theory tells us anyway, those 3d-state electron orbits are too small to capture the full measure of energy shed by the magnetization process. Now the symmetrical B-H loop is characteristic of a ferromagnetic core that is not polarized as one finds in magnets. Once a certain H value is reached by increasing magnetizing current the domain wall movement that accounts for the width of the hysteresis loop, the so-called coercive force, no longer occurs and any onward magnetization arises from those 3d-state electron orbits turning towards the direction of magnetization, virtually a loss-free process apart from eddy current effects. This takes us to a roughly linear range of magnetization where B and H increase or decrease in proportion. Over this range increase of B involves energy input from the solenoid proportional to HB, where B is the change of B over that range. However, here we now also have energy input from the quantum underworld in measure given by BH, where H is the change of H over that same range. Given that B is proportional to H over this range these energy quantities are equal. So we expect the inflow of energy from the quantum underworld to match that supplied via the solenoid. Furthermore, during the downward half of a cycle of magnetization over that limited range although energy is returned to the solenoid as expected owing to the inductance property, most of that energy tapped from space cannot, from the evidence we have of hysteresis loss phenomena, go back into the quantum underworld. Here then we see a glimmer of a possibility in our search for a free energy source. Either that energy is shed as heat or it is amenable to capture in its electrical form. So now consider why it is that it has eluded notice in laboratory experiments in university laboratories. Where is the evidence of tests on the rapid oscillatory excitation of a ferromagnetic core over a range above the territory of hysteresis loss, that being at a flux density level in the region of 70% of saturation? No one would undertake such an experiment ever expecting to gain energy especially as the obvious expectation is increased loss of energy. However, the Cambridge professor who was head of the Department of Electrical Engineering during my Ph.D. years at Cambridge did report an experiment magnetizing an iron core including a variable air gap which purported to measure leakage inductance as a function of the gap width. What his experiment proved was that as the gap width increased, for a given level of magnetic flux linking the magnetizing winding, it needed less current than expected to sustain that level of flux. In other words, either there was flux leakage, meaning flux that somehow avoided the gap, as the professor assumed, or there was more magnetic energy fed into the air gap than was supplied by the magnetizing winding. When I eventually did repeat the experiment under conditions which assured flux passage around the whole core, including air gap, I proved that the latter interpretation was
correct. The experimental data I proved that the energy in a gap of 2.25 mm width in a small 100 VA transformer core is as much as 180% of the input energy, which is supporting proof for what is suggested above. This experiment is described under the heading Mystery Energy Source: The Energy Balance Sheet in my Energy Science Report No. 1 of record on the web site www.aspden.org where I then examined the prospect of generating free energy based on motor technology which exploits the excess energy fed into magnetic pole gaps by reference to the Adams motor. You see, here I was thinking that to tap that excess energy, the free energy supplied by the aether, we would need to harness motor technology, whereas, now that I realise that the extra inductance energy cannot all by drawn back into the aether as the current drops, a new horizon appears. Solid-state aether power generation now becomes a possibility, shedding light helpful in our onward energy quest. Ferromagnetism becomes the doorway for energy inflow. Morays experiments seem to have been motivated by attempts to tap energy from the atmospheric electric field, inspired perhaps by Teslas pioneer efforts, whereas Coler might have been dabbling with efforts to sense radio signals based on coils wound around a bar magnet as an antenna and the Methernitha experiments may well have arisen from hearsay about the prior claims of both Moray and Coler. All three incorporated capacitors and certainly two, if not also Morays apparatus, had provision for two magnet systems to operate in a push-pull fashion with one generating power it its forward current half-cycle as the other resets in its reverse current half cycle. All three had some means for triggering the active state, be it Morays aerial wire, the Wimshurst machine of the Methernitha project, or, as in the case of Coler, patience in an environment active in long wave radiation, patience being needed to get the tuning right at an appropriate time of transmission, given that his coil-wound magnets were, in effect, antennae and his apparatus was known to operate at a frequency above 100 kHz. These signal triggering components could not have been the real energy source powering the apparatus once it had become operative. Now, reverting to that B-H loop theme, with permanent magnet cores in mind, the cycle of magnetization has to centre about the working point at which BH is a maximum in the upper left-hand sector of the loop. Small field oscillations of H about this point will produce variation of B and H around a thin minor hysteresis loop angled upwards from left to right and corresponding to a substantial increase of B for a small increase of H but with a very substantial base value of B. From the above discussion of energy deployment in cores that are ferromagnetic but not magnets operated over that linear range of magnetism at the B-H loop extremity one can then see how such a situation for a magnet implies the energy inflow from the quantum underworld of space. The hysteresis loss would be quite low in relation to the power gain. Such, therefore, is my verdict, my final verdict, I expect, as to how I believe the three free energy devices under discussion function. Knowing where and how the inflow energy enters the apparatus then leaves open the question as to how to extract that energy as useful electrical power output, followed by the key question as to how the process can be scaled up to prove viable as a major commercial power source. The latter question is not too difficult to answer, bearing in mind that on a large scale magnets as such are not essential as one can replicate the effects by polarizing large iron cores using superconductive excitation coils that absorb little energy. Operation at kHz frequencies may be needed and this involves eddy-current losses but the flux density
range of oscillation can be commensurately small to contain that to the normal level of loss in laminated steel cores we see in power transformers. The former question is the challenge and Colers apparatus affords guidance as to the coil connections required, though I feel sure his provision for current in the coils flowing also through the body of the bar magnets used is not necessary. A Final Note I have decided to publish this at this time because I am obliged to record that the capacitor experiments have proved abortive. I expect now to abandon the patent application mentioned in my article on that subject in Infinite Energy. Furthermore, I shall not be filing a patent application covering what I have disclosed here concerning magnetic cores as a new source of power, bearing in mind the relevance of the disclosure concerning Colers apparatus that became public when Official Secrecy on the related British Intelligence Report ended. Whether or not my onward efforts, including experiments on the subject of this Note, will bear fruit remains to be seen, but I can say that, from now on, I am concentrating on revising and consolidating my position on The Physics of Creation that features prominently on this web site www.aspden.org . For detailed information on the Coler Report just referenced see Lecture No. 7 in the Energy Science sector of this web site. H. Aspden
CAN GRAVITY BE AN ELECTROSTATIC FORCE?

H. Aspden, 2005 Introduction Unlike electromagnetic force, which acts at right angles to charge motion, gravity is a simple direct inverse-square of distance force, as is electrostatic action. Yet we struggle and fail to forge a link between gravitation and electromagnetism. Can it be that what is seemingly impossible, mutual electrostatic action between matter that is uncharged electrically, is the true answer to the mystery of gravitation? Here we see that there is a strong case in favour of this proposition. A Quantum Theory of Gravitation The Schuster-Wilson hypothesis is of relevance here, as is the related research of Nobel Laureate, Blackett [1], it being evident that the charge only reveals itself indirectly in setting up a magnetic moment and only then in a form not concentrated locally as a function of mass density of matter present. In-depth research on this topic has led the author to believe that rotation of the omnipresent space medium, our quantum underworld, can induce electric charge displacement which can set up a magnetic moment, as in the Sun or body Earth. This research indicates the existence of a charge continuum in space which is neutralized by a structured array of charges of opposite polarity and which governs quantum phenomena and determines basic physical constants. One then finds that continuum charge is displaced by the presence of a graviton population associated with matter present and here one discovers the physical basis of gravitation. The gravitons, which share with matter the Heisenberg jitter motion of quantum theory, provide the mass-related dynamic balance essential to cope with the motion imparted by the quantum underworld of space. This means that the force of gravitation really acts between those gravitons and is, via them, dynamically-coupled with matter that is itself electrically neutral. Note now a key point at issue. Electrostatic force between two like polarity charges is repulsive but here we are concerned with charge displaced by the presence of gravitons and that implies the effect of voids in a background charge continuum and so mutual attraction between the gravitons creating those voids as the enveloping charge seeks to spread by pushing the gravitons together. Another key point which needs consideration is the question of how a quantum theory of gravitation which implies a graviton form as a unit of gravitational action can account for weak gravitation forces that still depend upon G but arise from mass or its energy equivalent that is much smaller than the graviton mass. The answer to this is found by recognizing that gravitons, being leptons, can exist in charge pairs and can exchange energy as between themselves and another associated particle form. On a steady gravitational basis the taon form dominates the action according to the charge continuum volume displaced but on a transient basis minor fluctuations in volume of a heavier graviton form cater for the balance.
How then do those gravitons feature in the spectrum of particle physics? Research shows that they mainly comprise the taon - the mystery lepton particle that sits alongside the muon and the electron in the bottom line of the standard quark picture of the particle grid. As to that heavier graviton form it is somewhat elusive but has been detected at around 2.587 GeV in the particle spectrum and is best referred to as the Japanese Hquantum [2]. It exists in anti-particle pairs alongside two anti-particle taon pairs, meaning that there is one such heavy graviton for every two taon-gravitons. How is all this justified? Simply by derivation of G, the gravitation constant, in terms of the taon mass. Where is the proof of all this? Now, seriously, how can the Gravity Research Foundation expect that in an Essay of 1500 words or less? The proof is of record elsewhere [3] but, this being written solely to meet the concise requirements of the Foundations Essay competition, it can best be summarized by the following commentary and equations which show how G depends upon the taon/electron mass ratio. Step 1: Determine , the charge density of the space continuum. Do this by delving into the quantum properties of space, as evidenced by the Bohr Magneton er, e being the charge of the electron. With r having the value h/4mec we then account for the photon in terms of spin of a 3x3x3 component of that structured charge array mentioned above. This gives us the equation: hc/2e2 = 144r/d where r is the orbital radius of charge motion, h is Plancks constant, c is the speed of light and d is the cubic spacing of those charges. Accordingly: = e/d3 We now know the value of because we can eliminate h/r and deduce that: mec2 = 72e2/d me being the rest mass of the electron. Step 2: For encouragement at this stage note that we could digress to find the ratio r/d simply by analysis of electrostatic interaction energy density of the space medium and arguing that it cannot be negative, thereby accounting for charge being displaced from sites at which they would be at rest and so determining r and telling us that the quantum underworld must have that jitter motion postulated by Heisenberg. The analysis is of early record elsewhere [4]. It allows precise determination of the fine-structure constant, a quantity explained by no other theory. Step 3: We now formulate the link with G in terms of the taon and the heavier graviton form, of masses m and mg and volumes V and Vg, respectively: %G(2m + mg) = (2V + Vg) Next we need to use a formula dating back to the pre-Einstein era of J. J. Thomson: mc2 = 2e2/3a which applies to the electron and also relates the mass m of our two particles with their charge radius a and so their volume. This assumes that the charge e is distributed within the sphere of radius a so as to have uniform pressure or energy density. The volume to mass ratio of the two-taon and heavy graviton combination must match the corresponding volume to mass ratio for transient fluctuations in which a pair of heavy gravitons annihilate one another to share the volume of three such gravitons in a single charge. The same condition arises for the case where energy is exchanged between the field system of matter and the heavy graviton with, for such minor fluctuations, the preservation of gravitational potential overriding the need for perfect dynamic balance. In the latter case the slight expansion of graviton volume increases just enough to match the
mass-energy added to the system of matter, thereby keeping gravitational potential unchanged. The relevant volume to mass ratio which has to equal: (2V + Vg)/(2m + mg) is then: 3Vg/mg Since charge volume is inversely proportional to the cube of the related mass one finds from the above equality that: (mg/m)3 - 3(m/mg) -1 = 0 which, upon solution, gives: (mg/m) = 1.452627 This allows us then to write: %G = (3Vg/mg) Step 4: One can now evaluate G based on the measured value of the taon massenergy, which is 1.781 GeV or 3485 electron mass units, to find that the heavy graviton becomes 2.587 Gev or 5063 electron mass units. Note that d is 72e2/mec2 and so is 108 times the electron charge radius, the latter being 5063 times the charge radius of the heavy graviton. Given that is e/d3 we then find that: %G = 4(e/me)/(108)3(5063)4 and, e/me being 5.272 esu/gm, this tells us that G has the value 6.67x10-8 dynes.cm2.gm-2. Conclusion Physicists, and notably Weisskopf [5], have been puzzled as to the role played by both the muon and the taon, the heavy electrons of particle physics. Separately [6] the author has shown how the muon governs the creation of the proton and here we have seen that the taon governs in the field of gravitation. The case put here is that gravitation is an electrostatic phenomenon and this is deemed to justify the above use of the electrostatic units of the c.g.s system. We have derived G, the constant of gravitation, in good accord with its measured value. However, the author has gone further in this quest and is of record in showing how to derive by the same theory the masses of both the muon [3] and the taon [7] in terms of electron mass. Hopefully, therefore, this case that gravitation is an electrostatic phenomenon will come to be accepted in the future spectrum of physics. References [1] P. A. M. Blackett, Nature, 159, 658 (1947). [2] S. Hasagawa et al, Prog. Theor. Physics, 47, 126 (1971). [3] H. Aspden, The Physics of Creation, www.aspden.org (2004). [4] H. Aspden & D. M. Eagles, Physics Letters, 41A, 423 (1972). [5] V. F. Weisskopf, Physics Today, 69-85 (Nov. 1981). [6] H. Aspden, Aspden Research Papers, 4 www.aspden.org (2005) [7] H. Aspden, Hadronic Journal, 9, 153 (1986). [1489 words]
PHYSICS WITHOUT EINSTEIN A Centenary Review by Harold Aspden
Harold Aspden, 2005
Chapter I A Century Introduction The Electron In the 19th century, the pre-Einstein era, physics progressed in leaps and bounds, particularly in the field of electrodynamics, culminating in 1897with J. J. Thomsons discovery of the electron and then, in 1901, Kaufmanns discovery that its mass increased with speed. He measured how the charge/mass ratio of the electron varied with increase of speed, speeds as high as 95% of the speed of light. As a student of physics in 1945 I read about this in a book entitled Electricity and Magnetism by S. G. Starling that was presented to me as the School Physics Prize for that year. The data of Kaufmanns experiment were tabulated and his paper referenced as Phys. Zeitschr., 4, No. 1b (1902) and I mention this because the same data was quoted in several other books I later acquired, one of which quoted the earlier reference of Gottingen Nach., 2, 143 (1901). In the second edition of a student textbook Physics by S. G. Starling and A. J. Woodall dated 1957 one reads on p. 1212 by reference to the same Kaufmann data the words: Considering the difficulty of experiment these results may be considered to confirm the results obtained on the theory of relativity. Now I do believe that a student might be deceived by such wording, given that Einsteins theory did not exist at the time of Kaufmanns experiments and that it is for experiment to confirm pre-existing theory since experimental findings can only be confirmed by further experiment. I am, you see, aiming to be critical here because students of physics must not be misled and should be encouraged to question what they are taught as they themselves may have a future in scientific research. Pre-Einstein theory, the electron theory advanced by J. J. Thomson and others had already provided the necessary explanation. The fact that the mass-variation of an electron with speed is consistent with the formula E = Mc2 does not mean that we must accept the doctrines preached by those who believe in Einsteins philosophical concepts of four-
space. Physics in the years before Einstein was on-track and building on fact rather than conjecture, and we should not ignore what is on record in the preEinstein years of the 20th century (1900-1904). We shall return to this topic in chapter II of this work. So let us now look at another 19th century problem. Gravitation Newtons law of gravitation had come under scrutiny owing to effects attributable to retardation, the thought being that gravitation propagates at the speed of light rather than at infinite speed associated with Newtons concept of instantaneous action-at-a-distance. The object was to explain the observed anomalous advance of the perihelion of the orbit of planet Mercury. Whereas Newtons theory does explain an orbital perihelion advance owing to gravitational interaction between the planets, observation of the orbit of the planet nearest to the sun revealed a small and puzzling discrepancy. Several researchers attempted to solve this mystery and, still in the 19th century, but only just, a German schoolteacher named Paul Gerber in 1898 presented in Zeitschrift f. Math. u. Phys. 43 p. 93 a theoretical result giving the precise value of the anomalous advance of Mercurys perihelion as now measured by astronomical observation. He had assumed that the action of gravity propagates at the speed of light. Physicists well know that Einstein, some 17 years later, claimed this result as a consequence of his General Theory of Relativity, so we will return to this theme in Chapter III of this work. The Aether Meanwhile, still considering the physics of the 19th century, let us now examine another problem related to the speed of light. The universallyaccepted belief of the scientific community was that the speed of light c was regulated by the action of an omnipresent aether which provides a universal frame of reference relative to which the speed of light is constant. On that basis experiment should have allowed detection of the Earths motion through enveloping space, but in 1887 when an experiment to test this was performed by Michelson and Morley no such motion was indicated. It was then evident that physicists had made a false assumption. The properties of the aether were not fully understood. On this subject, dating back to Clerk Maxwells research of 1861-1864 period, the concept of electric charge displacement as a property of the aether related to its ability to store electrostatic field energy and its electromagnetic wave propagation properties had underpinned faith in the reality of the aether.
The dilemma confronting physicists on this aether issue was rooted in an unresolved question as to whether the aether, though invisible, was a fluid medium or a rather subtle solid medium in that it exhibited properties that implied a measure of rigidity. The problem had, in fact, been complicated by the theoretical findings in 1839 of Samuel Earnshaw as reported in Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 7, pp. 97-114 (1842). It was logical for the aether to be regarded as a system of electric charges of overall-neutral composition, an aether that defied detection except by its ability to store energy and regulate the speed at which light propagates through space. Note that a century before, in 1733, the Frenchman du Fay had introduced the concept that electricity was capable of flowing, as a fluid, this fluid then being deemed to be of two kinds as if in particle form, with like pairs repelling and unlike pairs attracting. Earnshaw had, it seems, recognized the need for the aether, if composed of electric charges, positive and negative, in equal numbers, to define a kind of crystal structure as a frame of reference for light propagation. However, by his famous theorem of 1839 Earnshaw proved by rigorous mathematical analysis that such a stable aether structure was impossible given our understanding of the law of force known to be operative between discrete electrical charge forms. If the aether existed, chaos had to prevail, there being no orderly form that could be possible. Sadly, just as there had been error in physicists merely assuming that the speed of light is constant and referenced on a universal frame defined by the aether, so Earnshaw had erred in his assumption that the aether is merely composed of electrically charged particles sitting in a void. There is an alternative he had not considered, but enlightenment on this all-important topic did not emerge in the pre-Einstein era. Also, although there had been a major advance of knowledge on the subject of electrodynamics during the 19th century, that field of physics, founded as it is on experiments measuring interaction between electric current in closed circuits and electric charge in motion, lacked specific experimental proof for electrodynamic interaction between two discrete electric charges in motion. Here was a field of physics intimately dependent upon the aether in interpreting the action between electric charge in motion that offered scope for measuring the earths motion through space. Yet, when an experiment involving a charged capacitor, and so two discrete spaced-apart charges deemed to share the Earths motion through space, failed to detect that motion, it was immediately inferred that here again was proof consistent with the finding of the Michelson-Morley experiment that challenged belief in the
aether. The experiment was that performed in 1903 by Trouton and Noble in Proceedings of the Royal Society, 72, 132 (1903). So the scene was set giving Einstein in 1905 his reason and opportunity for advancing the notion embraced by his Theory of Relativity, the notion that what we observe in physics takes as its true frame of reference the frame defined by the observer, even though that observer is moving through enveloping space. Now, if the reader well understands and, having checked every step in the mathematics involved, really believes what Einstein has presented by his Special and General Theory of Relativity, it is unlikely that he or she will be swayed by what is disclosed in the pages which follow. However, if the reader admits to doubt and to being just a little mystified by Einsteins teaching, there should be interest in asking oneself, in this centenary year of 2005, how physics might have developed if we had never heard of Einstein or his theory. To be sure, given, as we shall see, that E = Mc2 was self-evident from J. J. Thomsons research and given the needed modification of Newtons law of planetary motion in the light of the prior efforts of Gerber and others, all that was needed to exclude Einstein doctrine was to reinforce the work of Clerk Maxwell on the question of the aether by correcting for Samuel Earnshaws error. That error should have been so obvious, given that the aether had been seen more as a fluid than as a mere system of particles. Now I well know that few physicists are likely to be familiar with Earnshaws Theorem. I had never heard of it until, many years ago, a paper I had written was rejected on the strength of that theorem. I then traced Earnshaws original work in the records at Cambridge University and saw that what I had been working on myself had a feature that made the theorem irrelevant. Soon thereafter, in 1966 and because it included an account of Earnshaws Theorem, I purchased a textbook entitled The Mathematical Theory of Electricity and Magnetism published by Cambridge University Press in its fifth edition, its author being Sir James Jeans. On page 167 one finds that Earnshaws Theorem is: A charged body placed in an electric field of force cannot rest in stable equilibrium under the influence of the electric forces alone. The proof is then given, but I knew when I read this that there was a flaw somewhere in the argument, one which I could see depends upon use of Laplaces equation. The proof depends upon whether an energy term in the analysis can have a true maximum or minimum and Jeans argues that this is impossible from use of the Laplace equation by reference to preceding
argument on page 43 of his book. This made reference to another theorem headed Deduction from Law of Inverse Square, the theorem being: The potential cannot have a maximum or a minimum value at any point in space which is not occupied by an electric charge. Jeans had missed seeing that Earnshaws Theorem is only valid for interaction between discrete electric charges that exist within a void. Here was the flaw in Earnshaws Theorem. We can contemplate an aether comprising a continuum of uniform electric charge density permeated by discrete charges of both polarities but with a surplus of those of charge polarity opposite to that of the continuum so as to render the aether electrically neutral overall. If the aether has such a form then one can have stable equilibrium between an array of charges such as might define a frame of reference. Furthermore one can contemplate such frame-structured segments of aether latching on to a material body such as an atom or larger object and sharing the motion of that body with charges breaking away at collision boundaries between such moving segments of aether only to find their way to separation boundary regions and reform as part of the frame structure. On page 168 of his book Jeans states: One physical application of Earnshaws Theorem is of extreme importance. The theorem shows that an electron cannot rest in stable equilibrium under the forces of attraction and repulsion from other charges, so long as these forces are supposed to obey the law of the inverse square of the distance. Thus, if a molecule is to be regarded as a cluster of electrons and positive charges, then the law of force must be something different from that of the inverse square. Here the case then put by Jeans imposed limitations on the structure of matter as close-clustered compositions of elementary charge, all by appeal to Earnshaws Theorem. The advancement of particle theory as well as aether theory has accordingly been badly affected by this adherence to a theorem that has erroneous foundation. Indeed, as I stated at p. 88 in my book Modern Aether Science published in 1972: The search for quarks seems to be an effort mounted in ignorance or defiance of the great work of the Reverend Samuel Earnshaw. The modern notion that a proton comprises a stable union of three quarks seems to be forbidden by the teachings of Jeans based on Earnshaws Theorem.
The reader might now well ask why it has taken the 166 years that has elapsed so far since Earnshaw announced his theorem but yet physicists are ignoring his error and not reviving interest in the aether. All I can say is that I have done my best to draw attention to this issue but the physics community does not listen. I am, however, not the first to discover the error, because I found that W.T. Scott wrote a paper entitled Who was Earnshaw? It appeared in the American Journal of Physics 27, p. 418 in 1959. Later, in 1966, Scott wrote a book entitled The Physics of Electricity and Magnetism published by Wiley and one finds that at p. 41 he too records his discovery that there is a flaw in the derivation of Earnshaws Theorem He writes: In a region of continuous charge distribution, a maximum or minimum could exist, but a continuous distribution is an idealization. We have to consider each electron or proton as an isolated charge, so that pure electrostatic equilibrium is impossible. Whereas physicists in general have applied Earnshaws theorem to deny that the aether can exist in a form containing a structured array of electric charges and so give us insight into the aether properties pertaining to electromagnetic wave propagation, Scott, aware of the flaw in that theorem was content with his assumption that charge can exist only if pervading a true void so excluding the possibility that charge, being self-repulsive, cannot spread to fill that void! Surely we cannot just drift along by relying on our assumptions and, especially in this Einstein centenary year 2005, accepting a theory of relativity that is of no help in finding our way forward in the quest to discover a Unified Field Theory linking gravitation with our electrical underworld. The aether has to be revived, its structure formulated and the geometry of that threedimensional structure deciphered so as to evaluate theoretically the one fundamental constant that is governed by the quantum underworld, meaning the aether. That constant, known as the fine-structure constant, which links electron charge, speed of light and Plancks constant as a mere numerical quantity, is the very signature of the aether. It has been measured with high precision but where, in accepted physics, is its theoretical explanation? It cannot be explained without probing the very structure of the aether. That has been my personal quest, one which seemingly has now become that of leap-frogging 100 years, the Einstein Centenary (1905-2005), albeit taking notice of the evolution of quantum theory and discoveries in particle physics. Accordingly, this account becomes a two-fold introduction. Firstly, it introduces the reader to the state of physics of the pre-Einstein era, meaning the physics which Einstein claimed as his territory but which really had been discovered by others in earlier years. Secondly, it introduces the reader to this
authors work The Physics of Creation which does provide the long-sought Unified Field Theory that eluded those adhering to Einsteins philosophy. Apart from one final comment, this therefore concludes the introductory Chapter I of this work. Chapter II will be brief in showing how E = Mc2 and the related increase in mass of an electron with speed, the torch bearer of The Theory of Special Relativity, featured in pre-Einstein thinking. Chapter III will show how pre-Einstein thinking can resolve the mystery posed by the anomalous perihelion advance of planet Mercury, the jewel in the crown that glorifies the General Theory of Relativity. This leaves the concluding Chapter IV to herald the way forward to the discovery of the Unified Field Theory that eluded Einstein. Thereafter it is for the reader to decide whether he or she can contribute to the onward progress of physics, if only by teaching students to question and resolve doubt as they tread, step by step, along the thorny path that leads to the ultimate truth concerning the natural phenomena of our universe. The path has to lie in the real world and not the world of imagination described by Professor Paul Davies in his book The Last Three Minutes published in 1994. It was a book aimed at the educated but non-specialist reader and required no prior knowledge of science or mathematics. On page 20 of that work one is told that: Einsteins General Theory of Relativity proposes that gravity is actually a manifestation of curvature, or distortion, of space (strictly space-time). In a sense space is elastic, and can bend or stretch in a manner that depends on the gravitational properties of the matter in it. So there you have a picture of space according to Einstein, but do you understand what that means? Three pages later on page 23 Davies has introduced the notion that the universe is expanding and this is somehow illustrated in a figure which shows a curve relating size with time, followed by the question Are we justified in extrapolating the curve all the way back to the beginning? You are left to answer this yourself, guided by his statement: Remember that the expansion being graphed here is that of space itself, so zero volume does not mean merely that matter is squashed to an infinite density. It means that space is compressed to nothing. He goes on then to say that the same basic idea applies to time but I am sure the reader will share my view that this is all mere nonsense, even though addressed to the reader who has no command of mathematics. It is as if matter exists and space, whatever that is, is expanding and changing form around it. I have an adequate knowledge of mathematics to say with equal
force that the mathematics that one sees in Einsteins General Theory of Relativity as portraying space-time in four dimensions does not convey any real understanding of the nature of space or the action of gravity. Why, one must ask, is it necessary to formulate physics in a four-dimensional metric that one cannot visualize only then to transform its predictions back into the threedimensional world in order to compare its results with what we measure? That is merely telling us to wear a pair of spectacles of special formulation in order to distort what we see naturally in the hope that it will clarify our vision of things. Those who believe what they see by wearing those relativistic spectacles ought to cast them aside and, with natural eyesight, read, after Chapter II, what I have to say in Chapter III.
Chapter II E = Mc2 : Pre-Einstein Was the formula E = Mc2 part of physics in the pre-Einstein era, i.e. before 1905? If so, why does the world regard E = Mc2 as the symbol of Einsteins genius? Was the related notion that energy released by the destruction of matter and so reduction of mass of record before 1905? I will not attempt to answer the second of these questions. Concerning the first and third questions, I merely refer to and quote from the book The Recent Development of Physical Science by W. C. D. Whetham published in 1904. Whetham was a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, the venue of J. J. Thomson. Remember, as was stated in Chapter I, that J. J. Thomson discovered the electron in 1897and then, in 1901, Kaufmann discovered that its mass increased with speed. On page 283-284 of Whethams book: The property of mass is explained by electron theory as an effect of electricity in motion. The quantitative value of the effect has been calculated by Thomson, Heaviside, and Searle. Definite experimental evidence has been given by Kaufmann, who finds that the ratio e/m of the charge to the mass for the corpuscles ejected by radium diminishes as their velocity increases. The charge is almost certainly constant, and thus the mass must increase with the velocity. Theory shows that, for a slowly moving corpuscle, the electric inertia outside a small sphere of radius a, surrounding the electrified particle, does not depend on the velocity and is measured as 2e2/3a where e is the electric charge on the particle. But when the velocity of light is approached, this electric mass grows very rapidly; and, on the assumption that the whole of the mass is electrical, Thomson has calculated the ratio of the mass of a slowly moving corpuscle, and compared these values with the results of Kaufmanns experiments. In this remarkable manner has it been possible to obtain experimental confirmation of the theory that mass is an electrical or aethereal phenomenon. Included here in the space between these paragraphs was a tabulation showing Kaufmanns measurements of speed and the ratio mass at speed to mass if slowly moving, the data ranging up to 95% of the speed of light. As
10
part of the tabulation Thomsons calculated mass ratios were presented sideby-side to show the agreement. On page 280 of Whethams 1904 book, following an earlier reference to Thomsons ideas concerning radio-activity, one reads: A more fundamental suggestion has been made by J. H. Jeans, who imagines that radio-activity may result from the coalescence of positive and negative electrons. On this idea, the energy of radio-active atoms is supplied by the actual destruction of matter. So you see, if visions of the atomic bomb and nuclear power arise as commendation in support of Einsteins greatness as encapsulated by the formula E = Mc2, then just ask yourself why Jeans was not given credit for his 1904 idea. It was published in the journal Nature on June 2, 1904 at page 101 of volume 70. Jeans himself was quite modest in expressing an opinion as to who should be given credit for recognizing mass-energy transmutability. In his 1929 book EOS or the Wider Aspects of Cosmogony he states at page 36: More than twenty years ago I directed attention to the enormous store of energy made available by annihilation of matter, by positively and negatively charged protons and electrons falling into and annihilating one another, thus setting free the whole of their intrinsic radiation. On this scheme neither energy nor matter had any permanent existence, but only a sort of sum of the two; each was, theoretically at least, convertible into the other. When I put forward this hypothesis, I thought I was advocating something entirely revolutionary and unheard-of, but I have since found that Newton had anticipated something very similar exactly two centuries earlier. In his Optics (1704) we find: Query 30. Are not gross bodies and light convertible into one another; and may not bodies receive much of their activity from the particles of light which enter into their composition? The changing of bodies into light, and light into bodies, is very conformable with the course of Nature, which seems delighted with transmutations. Now, as to the formula E = Mc2, a discerning reader having a modest background knowledge of physics based on the electrical system of units familiar to scientists of the late 19th century can easily show that an electric charge e contained within a sphere of radius a will have an external electric field energy of e2/2a. Yet J. J. Thomson had reason to believe that the energy E of the electron was 2e2/3a and that this energy accounted for its mass M. No doubt he arrived at this result by assuming that the magnetic field energy
11
owing to the motion of e at speed v is (e/c)2v2/3a and regarding this as the kinetic energy Mv2/2. Do the calculation yourself. It is a very easy task for any physics student who has been introduced to the theory of electromagnetism. The speed parameter c has come into the act owing to electrostatic units being related to electromagnetic units by the ratio c. From the equality: Mv2/2 = (e/c)2v2/3a such a physics student will see that: Mc2 = 2e2/3a which is the energy E that J. J. Thomson recognized as that of an electron of charge radius a. So, although the specific formulated prescription E = Mc2 does not appear in the 1904 text by Whetham concerning the then-recent development of physical science, the physics it represents was there and had been well presented in mathematical terms. Indeed, should the reader be puzzled as to the physics implied by the energy 2e2/3a for an electron at rest, just accept that within the radius a the charge e is distributed so as to set up a uniform energy density distribution or pressure, with its internal electric field intensity being the same as that at its surface radius a. You will see that this adds e2/6a to e2/2a and so gives 2e2/3a as the energy E, which from the forgoing equation gives us E = Mc2. In my opinion, therefore, there is no reason to attribute to Einsteins genius our acceptance that E = Mc2. Nor, indeed, do I think that J. J. Thomsons formulation provides the ultimate insight into the physics governing this energy-mass relationship. So, still looking at physics of the pre-Einstein era, I draw attention to the discovery made by Larmor in 1897 as reported in Phil. Mag., xliv, p. 503. He presented a formula for the rate of loss of energy from a charge q having an acceleration f which has since been very widely applied in physics and astrophysics. The formula is: dE/dt = 2q2f2/3c3 a formula that can be used to calculate the rate of energy radiation from a radio antenna in which current oscillations are sustained by accelerating and decelerating a collective system of charge q formed by numerous electrons each of charge e. Next have regard to the fact that 1897 was the very year in which J. J. Thomson discovered the electron by an experiment which measured its charge/mass ratio and note that the Larmor formula includes the acceleration f but no term representing mass. It was derived by calculating field energy in terms of current and by assuming that electromagnetic wave radiation occurs at the speed c and conveys energy at that speed.
12
A question of interest which surely should have then been considered in the light of these 1897 events was whether each individual electron making up that charge q shares in the act of energy radiation or whether the source of the energy radiated was the interaction field set up by the numerous electrons as a collective action. In other words, does Larmors derivation of that formula, allow one to say that, q being Ne and N electrons sharing that acceleration f, the radiation energy rate is: dE/dt = 2(Ne)2f2/3c3 or should it be: dE/dt = 2N(N-1)e2f2/3c3 Quite obviously, since N, as it applies to electric currents strong enough to excite a measurable amount of energy radiation, will be truly enormous, there can be no experimental data allowing one to distinguish between these two formulations. So one is left to look at how the formula is derived. In this respect it is not sufficient to say Let there be acceleration and let f signify its rate. Instead, one must provide an electric field that acts on the charge to account for the force which produces that rate of acceleration. That must introduce an electron mass term. Given the presence of such a field at the source of any wave radiation, that field must interact with the fields of the charge accelerated and so affect the calculation. Larmors derivation overlooked this requirement. Had it been taken into account it would have been found that there was a condition by which each individual component charge contributing to current flow would not radiate energy itself. That condition is that the self-action of the electric field of each charge e has a field energy E that is equal to the mass M of the electron multiplied by the square of a speed term, the speed being that at which a field disturbance propagates within the body of charge e owing to the acceleration. In other words, if each individual electron reacts to an accelerating electric field so as to avoid radiating any of its energy then one obtains a formula of the form E = Mc2. The Principle of Conservation of Energy is surely the true basis of that formula. Larmor could have derived that formula in that year 1897 had he explored this possibility, namely the need to allow for the cause of the acceleration rather than merely assuming a state of acceleration and considering the field energy of propagated waves in regions remote from the radiating source. For readers interested in the analysis involved in correcting this omission see the section entitled The Energy-Mass Formula at pp. 80-84 in my book Physics Unified (1980) which is accessible on my website www.aspden.org
13
Just consider the consequences that would have emerged from the realization back in 1897 that the electrons property of inertia arises from the electrons energy-preserving reaction to an accelerating field. It is not just the formula E = Mc2 that would have made its debut but the relevance this would have had in supporting that hypothesis by Jeans in 1904 that there is transmutation of matter and energy, the forerunner of our insight into nuclear power. More than this, however, as the picture of the hydrogen atom emerged as a proton with a satellite electron subject to acceleration owing to its orbital motion, so it would be understood why its energy is not radiated. Quantum theory would not then have been seen as a mystery subject governed by empirical rules. The multi-electron atom would have been seen as a system of charge in which the electrons adopt orbits according to their energy level that are configured to allow them to avoid collective field interaction that generates energy radiation. I have discussed this in a paper that was published on my website in 1997. See Essay No. 6 in the technology section of www.energyscience.org.uk So do not say Quantum theory explains why an atomic electron does not radiate its energy but rather say Because E = Mc2 arises from the energy conservation property of an accelerated electron, so this explains the very basis of quantum theory, and where an atom has more that one electron the orbital configuration is restricted and must be such as to avoid radiation according to the Larmor formula, N(N-1) version. Those years from 1897 to 1904 were indeed years of enlightenment in physics, sadly darkened by the demise of belief in the aether owing to that error in Earnshaws Theorem. It is, by the way, well established by classical electron theory, thanks to J. J. Thomson, that an electromagnetic field has momentum and that the momentum of any system is equal to its energy multiplied by the velocity of the centroid of its energy and divided by the square of the velocity of light. Student textbook instruction on this, quoting a book I had in my last school year (1945), namely p. 10 of H. A. Wilsons Modern Physics: Second Edition 1944, presents the momentum M as Ev/c2 and defines the mass m of the particle as M divided by the velocity v so that m = E/c2. Then if the energy E and mass m when the particle is at rest or when v=0 are denoted by Eo and mo the kinetic energy of the particle is given by E-Eo or c2(m - mo). The argument then proceeds on the basis that, if a force F acts on such a particle along the direction in which it is moving, and we suppose that there is no loss of energy by radiation (the very basis of this authors derivation of E = Mc2), then we have: F t = M
14
and: Fvt = E = c2m so that vM = c2m, or since M = mv, M M = mc2m. Integrating this gives (M)2 = (mc)2 +const., so that, since m =mo when M = 0: (M)2 = (mc)2 - (moc)2 = (mv)2 As can be seen from the latter part of this equation, this means that we have derived the standard formula for the increase of mass as a function of v, the formula that Einstein claims to be the result of his special Theory of Relativity. Yet we have not applied any notion stemming from Einsteins theory and all we have done is to quote the findings of classical electron theory. Now the reason I have presented this analysis is to allow me to pose the question as to whether this so-called relativistic mass increase formula applies to a planet in orbital motion around the sun. Look at where v was introduced into the analysis. The argument began from the assumption that the particle was at rest with v = 0, but the word rest implies a frame of reference. So what is that frame of reference for a planet in motion around the sun? Is it the sun or is it the galaxy to which the solar system belongs or can it be the hypothetical universal frame of reference that was assumed in the 19th century? Since energy is added by motion and none is radiated, the v = 0 condition applies at the moment when the particle was first created. That is an interesting point given the notion of Big Bang creation and an expanding universe. The derivation of E = Mc2 requires c to be referenced on the charge of the accelerated particle but v would be meaningless if we took that charge as its reference frame. So physicists have a problem. We are guided to the answer from the experimental evidence that electrons here on Earth exhibit the mass increase according to their motion relative to the Earth frame which I see as an aether charge lattice structure sharing the Earths motion through space. Electrons, you see, do not have the structure needed to form their own aether lattice system. Atoms other than hydrogen do, but such atoms are electrically neutral overall and so cannot be tested experimentally to see if they increase in mass with speed, as they cannot be accelerated in a cyclotron. This suggests that our Earth cannot itself exhibit the relativistic mass increase. The answer, however, must depend upon what is the true nature of kinetic energy. Given that an accelerated charge has inertia in just the right measure to preclude radiation of energy, if it moves owing to the action of an electric field it will have to store its kinetic energy in its field system. That involves charge displacement in the enveloping aether lattice, for both the electric and the magnetic fields, energy which is stored and which is
15
recoverable on slow down. I see that local aether lattice as essential if the energy added as kinetic is to be carried along with the source particle and thereby add to the mass in motion. A further point of interest, having that time of particle creation in mind, stems from the question of whether the charged particles that constitute matter have a finite lifetime and whether, upon decay, since surplus energy in the aether system is no doubt shed in creating protons in company with electrons, the matter now constituting body Earth has actually emerged by creation within the Earths own aether lattice frame. Surplus energy in the aether surely is the energy source accounting for the creation of matter in the form of protons and electrons and it seems logical for our Earth to be subject to ongoing decay and recreation of matter. Even if the mean lifetime of a proton were 1,000,000 years that is minute compared with the age of our Earth. This may be speculation but it can explain why the kinetic energy of a planet is not subject to relativistic mass increase as a function of the planets speed in orbit around the sun or, indeed, its speed relative to a universal reference frame implied by the anisotropy of cosmic background as evidence by its temperature. E = Mc2 arises from the conservation of energy when a particle is accelerated as we have found by correcting for the error in Larmors formula. H. A. Wilson, in that book: Modern Physics, referenced above came close to seeing this error when, after deriving the Larmor radiation formula on pp. 1516, he stated: Electromagnetic radiation is obtained in practice from electrical oscillations produced by the discharge of a condenser through a wire. In such cases, in which enormous numbers of electrons are involved the radiation obtained agrees with that calculated by electromagnetic theory. Radiation from single electrons has not been observed, and according to the Quantum Theory, the electrons in atoms do not radiate when they are moving round orbits and so have an acceleration. The success of quantum theory makes it possible that the expression just obtained for the radiation from an electron is erroneous. Here, you see, was a student textbook pointing to something needing correction but implying that quantum theory was the governing factor, whereas the student really needs to correct the error and apply the law of conservation of energy and thereby show that a single electron avoids radiation by having an inertia that requires E to equal Mc2 and from that discover that E = Mc2 derived in this way gives foundation for quantum theory.
16
The reader should now begin to see that the Einstein interlude from 1905-1916, having put mathematics on a mental plane taking precedence over physical understanding, then helped to make quantum theory appear as a kind of mystique defined by a set of rules rather than something governed by true physical factors common to the roots of E = Mc2.. Such, therefore, is my verdict on Einsteins Special Theory of Relativity. It has reached its centenary and has explained nothing that was not amenable to explanation before Einstein appeared on the scene in 1905. Let us now in Chapter III take stock of Einsteins General Theory of Relativity.
17
Chapter III Concerning Gravitation and Planetary Motion Angular Momentum Here one must begin by noting that one of the greatest mysteries in science is the problem of how stars form and acquire their angular momentum. From the time of Isaac Newton we have accepted the fact that self-contained dynamic systems somehow contrive to conserve their angular momentum. The logical proposition is that, if stars form by matter condensing somehow from whatever it is that constitutes the aether, then the angular momentum is acquired by transfer from that medium which permeates all space, the aether. The illogical proposition adopted by most cosmologists is that there is no aether and that the universe emerged seemingly from nowhere at time zero and in an event they call the Big Bang with stars appearing with spins of opposite sense so as to have net zero angular momentum. Either way the prevailing principle is that angular momentum is conserved, but, as noted in Chapter IV ahead, the truths governing the process of stellar creation can only be ascertained by probing the one route that is amenable to analysis, namely the pathway that eluded Samuel Earnshaw. For the purpose of this chapter it suffices to accept without question that the angular momentum of a stellar system, such as the sun and its planets, is conserved and that there is little or no exchange of angular momentum as between planets over the course of the 100 year period 1905-2005 since Einstein introduced his theory. I well recall a meeting I had at Cambridge in an effort to put across my ideas about the aether. It was with Dr. Sciama and a few years on from the year 1954 in which we had both received our Ph.D. degrees from that university. He listened but his reaction was summed up by his words: We all believe the aether exists, but we call it space-time. Quantum theory hides by its mathematics the physical picture of how fundamental particles, electrons, protons etc., are created, meaning their source and their acquisition of angular momentum when they form into atoms and there seems to be no way that Einsteins theory with its space-time (or is it four-space?) can get into that act. Therefore, I hold firm in saying that the truth is to be found by probing Earnshaws vision of the aether based on a charge continuum permeated by the virtual particles, be they electrons, muons or taons that occasionally present themselves in a ghostly way in our particle experiments. Somehow also such aether particles are involved in the
18
storage of energy and angular momentum in what we see as empty space, be it a vacuum between the plates of a charged electrical capacitor or a vacuum region within the solenoid of a magnetic inductor. For the moment, however, we will proceed by addressing the question as to how electrostatic action or gravitational action traverses the space between two interacting particles. Propagation 35 years ago, in 1970, a book entitled Relativity Reexamined was published by Academic Press. Its author was Leon Brillouin. After discussing subjects such as the gravitational deflection of light, redshift of spectral lines in a gravitational field and the perihelion anomaly of Mercury, all derived from the same equation and purporting to be proof of Einsteins Theory of General Relativity, he concludes on page 55: There is no experimental check to support the very heavy mathematical structure of Einstein. All we find is another heavy structure of purely mathematical extensions, complements, or modifications without any more experimental evidence. To put it candidly, science fiction about cosmology - very interesting but hypothetical. Altogether we have no proof of the need for a curved universe (space plus time) and the physical meaning of the theory is very confusing. Now, of course, I could not resist drawing the readers attention to the above verdict by an eminent scientist, having expressed similar views above by reference to that book by Paul Davies. Science fiction about cosmology very interesting but hypothetical - a comment that applies equally to the notion of a Big Bang. However, before coming to that in Chapter IV, let us dispose of the General Relativity issue. That book by Brillouin had a page between the Preface and the Introduction and at the bottom of that page one reads: To form any notion at all of the flux of gravitational energy, we must first localize the energy. Heaviside - 1893 Oliver Heaviside was said by Brillouin (at page 103) to be the forgotten genius of physics, abandoned by everybody except a few friends. So, once again reverting to the physics of the 19th century and now paying tribute to Heaviside, I ask if physicists interested in the propagation of energy by gravitational action have tried their hand at the necessary calculation. It does not need the kind of mathematics that go with Einsteins theory - just the level of mathematics that I had been taught at school as a 17 year old.
19
Indeed the calculation is surprisingly easy (see the section entitled Retardation at pp. 24-25 in my book Physics Unified (1980) which is accessible on my website www.aspden.org ) if all one seeks to know is the mean range of interaction field energy deployment as referenced on either of the interacting bodies. If they are spaced apart by a distance R, there is zero net interaction energy within a sphere of radius R centred on either body. Beyond the radius R the net interaction energy decreases inversely with distance squared as does the self-interaction energy of either charge. What this means is that, if applied to sun and planet interaction, any change of kinetic energy of the planet as it describes its orbit must traverse the mean distance R in going to or from the field. So, if we now make the normal assumption that energy propagation through so-called empty space must be at the speed of light c, we define a time retardation period T that is R/c. Now, whereas that calculation is so simple, there is something of extreme importance that one has to consider but which has been overlooked for too long. We understand that a body moving under its own inertia and subject to no external force will continue moving at the same speed in a straight line. That is easy to comprehend and one might easily assume that no energy is being supplied to or shed by the moving body during such motion. The enveloping field energy shares the motion of the body and there is no interaction field energy involved. That said, now consider motion about a centre to which the body is attracted by gravity, motion at a steady speed in a perfect circular orbit. Here we do have field interaction energy. The kinetic energy of the body is not changing but somehow the distribution of that field energy is changing. There are then two ways in which that energy can redeploy. Numerous elements of it may go directly to their new location as the bodies change position or the energy involved has to traverse the distance R from the field to one or other of the bodies and thence the same amount of energy has to traverse the same distance R in going to the new field position by a different route. Without engaging in a quite extensive computer-assisted mathematical calculation it is hardly possible to estimate the retardation effect in the first of these cases. One could hope the answer might be identical to that of the second case, namely a mean retardation time of R/c but that question is left open. Alternatively we could proceed empirically and let experimental observation tell us what the time delay really is. Let us see then how retardation affects the planetary orbit. Note that we have gravitational potential energy of GMm/R as the field interaction energy. Here G is the constant of gravitation, M is the mass of the sun and m the mass of the planet. Consistent with the force of attraction this energy is a negative
20
quantity, which means that if some of that energy is deployed in transit owing to retardation effects it has to be associated with a gravitational potential of higher magnitude. In other words G will be effectively increased in proportion to the amount of energy in transit. Consider the planet moving along a linear axis x but deflected so as to progress in a direction y at right angles to x. The motion is in a circle of radius R but motion along x at speed v will be opposed by the action of a central force F resolved along x, meaning a force Fcos, where cos is equal to vt/R after a time t. The energy shed by motion in the x direction is then the time integral of vFcos or of F(v2 )t/R, which is F(v2 /R)t2/2 in time t, whereas the energy gained owing to accelerated motion in the y direction is that of the central force F acting through the distance ft2/2 and so is Fft2/2, f being the centrifugal acceleration rate. As can be seen, since f is (v2 /R), these are equal quantities, meaning that the kinetic energy of the planet is constant in its circular orbit, but that the total amount of energy in transit at any instant is F(v2 /R)T2, t having been replaced by the retardation period T. With T as R/c this energy in transit becomes FR(v/c)2 and what this means, since the force F is GMm/R2, is that the gravitational energy potential GMm/R or G, effectively, is enhanced by that factor (v/c)2. So now we are in a position, based purely on classical physics of the th 19 century, to understand how the Newtonian equation of planetary motion can be affected by retardation in the propagation of gravitational action. Taking a basic equation from a book by A. S. Ramsey entitled Dynamics, published by Cambridge University Press, another school textbook I have had since my final school year in 1945, the Newtonian differential equation of the planetary orbit is: d2u/d2 + u = /h2 when expressed in polar co-ordinates (R, ) where R becomes 1/u. Here h denotes the velocity moment vR and is proportional to G. On the same page of that book, page 175, Ramsey presents the corresponding Einstein Law of Gravitation and goes on from there to show how this leads to the value of the anomalous perihelion advance measured for planet Mercury. The Einstein version is: d2u/d2 + u = /h2 + 3u2 provided, as Ramsey notes, v is measured in units of the speed of light but, of course, this Einstein law must still apply even if the planetary orbit is not elliptical. We are still looking at a truly circular motion to consider the effect of retardation. Consider then the effect of enhancing the energy potential represented by G and so by that factor (v/c)2. Note then that (v/c)2 is proportional to (h/Rc)2 and gravitational energy potential is proportional to
21
1/R, which means that in terms of force, the basis of derivation of the equation for the planetary orbit, we find, owing to having to differentiate with respect to R the 1/R3 factor introduced by that (v/c)2 term to convert energy to force, that 3(v/c)2 is the factor needed to enhance in the Newtonian equation to allow for the retardation effect. One then can see that: (1 + 3(v/c)2)(/h2) = (1 + 3(hu/c)2)(/h2) = /h2 + 3u2 when c is taken as unity. Note that h is has been assumed to be constant, consistent with angular momentum being constant and the mass of the planet being deemed not to depend upon v for the reasons discussed in Chapter II. So there we are. We have derived the same formula as Einstein without the imaginary mathematical excursion into the mysterious dimensions of fourspace or space-time and have merely adhered to 19th century physics. If the planetary motion is not truly circular then, provided one can measure the advance of perihelion implied by the extra term, as we can for planet Mercury, then we can by the reverse argument deduce that the retardation time T is, in fact, R/c, thereby verifying that the gravitational action is subject to propagation at the speed of light. It was in 1898 that Gerber, the German school teacher mentioned in Chapter I, wrote his paper entitled: "The Space and Time Propagation of Gravitation" and derived in it a formula for the anomalous advance of the perihelion of planet Mercury that was exactly the same as the one presented by Einstein in 1916 in support of his General Theory of Relativity. This led in 1917 to a still unresolved debate between Seelinger and Oppenheim. See Ann. d. Phys., 52, 415 (1917), 53, 31 and 163 (1917), 54, 38 (1917). The debate was on whether speed-of-light retardation in gravitational action really accounts for the phenomenon observed. It is curious therefore that Einstein did not acknowledge Gerber in his writings on the same subject, as, for example, by questioning how Gerber had derived what he claimed. One surely must question the sense of accepting Einstein's notion that what we perceive so clearly as space having three mutually-orthogonal dimensions is really space distorted into four dimensions by an imaginary time factor, when a retarded force action based on classical physical concepts can provide a full account of what is observed. Gerber may have erred in his mathematical analysis of the problem, but that merely opened the challenge for someone to complete the task. Instead we have embraced Einstein's theory and now, some 90 years on from 1915 when Einstein first wrote about Mercury's perihelion anomaly, we remain defeated in our attempts to discover that Holy Grail, the Unified Field Theory. I, as author, must exclude myself from that term we' in view of what I shall disclose in Chapter IV. It will, I am sure be seen as justification for this
22
critical attack on Einsteins theory. As to that Holy Grail, the assumption has been that a Unified Field Theory will connect gravitation and electromagnetic theory, whereas the argument followed above has been based on a field energy distribution that is the same as that of the electrostatic action. Analysis of the magnetic field energy distribution in the interaction field of two moving electric charges reveals a different distribution pattern which implies less travel distance for energy in transit and so would not result in the Einstein equation for planetary motion. See my joint paper with Dr. D. M. Eagles, published in Acta Physica Polonica, A57, 473-482 (1980). Electrodynamic Retardation Physicists of the mid and latter part of the 19th century interested in the effects of speed-of-light retardation of electrodynamic action did arrive at the following formula for electrokinetic potential: P = (qe/R)(v/c)2 for the interaction of two electric charges q, e in relative motion at a separation distance R, v being their relative velocity and c the speed of light. This was used by Maxwell to derive the Neumann potential by appeal to the Fechner hypothesis and so the onward formulation of possible laws of electrodynamics based on a choice of different assumptions. These assumptions concerned action and reaction balance either in a linear sense or in a rotational sense or both as per Ampere but seemed to omit the one that matters, namely whether there is energy transfer as between other moving charges present and the charge pair under consideration. It is not surprising, therefore, that an analogous formula: P = (GMm/R2)(v/c)2 where G is the constant of gravitation and M, m are the masses of sun and planet respectively, was applied to account for the anomalous perihelion advance of planet Mercury. The formula, in effect, enhances G by the factor: 1 + (v/c)2 thereby giving the same basis for modifying Newtons law of gravitation as that derived above. Indeed, as Whittaker tells us in his classic historical work on aether theory, History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity (Part I of 1951 edition, pp. 207-208) it was back in 1872 that Tisserand (Comptes Rendus, lxxv,p. 760), basing his analysis of retardation effects at the speed of light in electrodynamic theory, derived a figure of 14 seconds of arc per century for the perihelion advance of planet Mercury. It was too small in comparison with what was observed and so there were other later attempts to solve the mystery in the years before Einstein claimed it to be the result of his General Theory of Relativity.
23
What Tisserand presumably failed to take into account was the fact, as we saw above, that this increase of G was in respect of energy potential (a function of 1/R) and that planetary motion is expressed in terms of force (a function of 1/R2). The conversion makes the factor: 1 + 3(v/c)2 and so modifies the Newtonian force equation: d2u/d2 + u = GM/h2 to give the Einstein equation: d2u/d2 + u = GM/h2 + 3GM(u2/c2) these equations, as before, being in polar coordinates u, where u is 1/R and h is vR. However, here we have not used units for v expressed as a factor of the speed of light c and has been replaced by GM, M being the mass of the sun. That 14 seconds of arc then becomes 42 seconds or arc, precisely the value of the anomalous perihelion advance of Mercury observed by astronomers. Had this simple error in analysis been noticed back in 1872 the course of science history over the past one hundred years would have been very different. In the event it was Gerber who, in 1898, as already noted, did make a case for the 42 seconds of arc figure in terms of gravitational action being retarded at the speed of light, but even this was ignored as Einsteins fourspace theme was embraced by the physics community. Yet, our conclusion here supports Gerbers case by correcting his analysis of the retardation involved in energy transfer between field and planet and thereby proving that the physics governing gravitation need not involve Einsteins four-space concept. The problem, however, that now arises from our above argument, founded as it is on deriving Einsteins equation of planetary motion by two different methods, both of which are based on purely classical pre-Einstein physics is that we now have to decide which method is correct. The second method, the one based on Maxwells electrodynamic analysis using Fechners hypothesis, would support the case for gravitation being an electromagnetic phenomenon but involves hypothesis at its roots and does not satisfy the correct retardation conditions associated with energy in transit at the speed of light besides denying gravitational action unless there is relative motion between the interacting bodies. For this reason the first method has to be favoured, meaning that a truly unified field theory will associate gravitation with electrostatic action rather than electromagnetic action. This suggestion might raise a few eyebrows amongst the scientific community but remember that, in correcting Earnshaws error, we have recognized that space contains an electrical charge continuum with no voids.
24
Atomic matter is coupled with the structured charge components of the aether that define the local electromagnetic frame of reference and when combined with coextensive charge continuum is electrically neutral overall. The only scope for gravitational action drawing that atomic matter together depends upon whether some other charge form, existing in pairs of opposite polarity and so neutral overall, has (a) freedom of motion, but (b) exists in amounts somehow related to the mass of nearby atomic matter, and (c), by its displacement of continuum charge, reduces the effect of electrostatic selfrepulsion within that charge continuum. That, as we shall see in Chapter IV, is the answer to the mystery of gravitation which we find is a quantum theory of gravitation which tells us that the taon, the third member of the charged lepton family, besides the electron and the muon, is a key actor in its role as a graviton. Suffice it here to conclude that Einsteins theory has nothing to offer so far as gravitation is concerned. Physicists who still wish to defend it must decide on that question of whether a body such as a planet is subject to increase in mass according to the teachings of Einsteins theory, meaning the relativistic formula for mass increase with speed. If not, why not? Can it be that relativistic mass increase with speed only applies to charged particles in free motion such as protons, pions, electrons, muons or taons? Surely one must see that those who adhere to Einsteins doctrine must face up to the fact that either the General Theory of Relativity is wrong or his Special Theory of Relativity is wrong in suggesting that all bodies, charged or uncharged, experience mass increase with speed. See further comment on this in Chapter IV by reference to time-dilation. I will now, in Chapter IV, outline the scope for progress as implied by the title words of this work Physics without Einstein, my preoccupation for many years, so be prepared to understand how Nature determines G, the constant of gravitation, and how Nature creates the proton and determines its mass, neither being possible if one adheres to Einsteins doctrines.
25
Chapter IV The Way Forward The Aether: A Preliminary Note The aether was pronounced dead by Doctors of Science obsessed with the belief that it provides a universal frame of reference for light propagation rather than containing such frames of reference dragged along by bulk matter. They had erred is not seeing the error in Earnshaws Theorem and erred in not being able to conceive a aether containing a multiplicity of adjacent domains containing independent charge structures that can define different electromagnetic reference frames, structures that can dissolve at collision boundaries and with the vacating aether charges reappearing at boundaries of separation. It was in 1913 that a book entitled Modern Electrical Theory by N. R. Campbell was published in its 2nd Edition by Cambridge University Press. At p. 388 and concerning the above notion about a multi-structured aether one reads: This is the simple way out of the difficulties raised by the Michelson-Morley experiment. If from the beginning we had used a plural instead of a singular word to denote the system in which radiant energy is localised (or even a word which, like sheep, might be either single or plural ), those difficulties would never have appeared. There has never been a better example of the danger of being deceived by arbitrary choice of terminology. However, physicists, not recognising the gratuitous assumption made in the use of the words the aether, adopted the second alternative; they introduced new assumptions. Campbell here meant that they turned to heed Einsteins preaching on the subject of relativity. The result, as we have seen, is that physicists have raced ahead, making assumption after assumption, only to find themselves in a world permeated with Black Holes but have lost their way in an attempt to link the phenomenon of gravitation with electrodynamics. Yet, the aether exists and is alive because it exhibits a heartbeat at the Compton electron frequency and because it is full of energy. 19th century physicists well knew that it can store energy by displacement of its intrinsic electric charge, as its positive and negative charge are held apart by setting up an electric field. Its pulse rate, that Compton electron frequency, was not discovered until some years after Einstein appeared on the scene, but Faraday
26
had shown that it can also store magnetic energy and here was the clue that should have revealed one of the aethers secrets. Whetham in that 1904 book mentioned earlier explained on p. 173 how magnetic force is produced at right angles both to the length and direction of motion of tubes of electric force carried along by a charged particle. So, if the aether consists of neutral cells of electric charge having motion, negative charge displaced from and moving around positive charge, it will react to an applied magnetic field. Whittaker in his book The History of Aether and Electricity at p. 262 tells us that Maxwell investigated this in the Cambridge Mathematical Tripos for 1869'. He pictured atoms deemed to occupy small spherical cavities in the aether, the outer shell of each atom being in contact with the aether at all points and partaking in its motion. One could from this picture how the effect of a magnet might act on aether charge describing an orbit in such an aether cavity and conclude that the motion of that aether charge would set up an opposing magnetic field which partially offsets the primary action of the applied magnetic field. For optimum energy storage one then finds that the reaction would halve the applied field. Sadly, it was not until 1908 that O. W. Richardson (Physical Review, 26, p. 248) suggested that when the magnetism in a pivotally mounted ferromagnetic rod is reversed, the rod should sustain an angular momentum change. It was predicted that the gyromagnetic ratio, the ratio of the change of angular momentum to the change of magnetic moment, should be 2mc/e, where e/m is the charge to mass ratio of the electron. Curiously it was Einstein and W. J. Haas who first observed the effect in 1915 (Verh. d. Deutsch. Phys. Ges., 17, p. 152) but it was not until 1923 that W. Sucksmith and L. F. Bates (Proc. Roy. Soc. London, 104A, p. 499) found that the effect was only one half of that predicted. Here was the clear evidence of the aether reaction but what did physicists then do? They still ignored the aether and invented yet another notion, the notion of half-spin, another arbitrary idea serving to side track genuine research into the realm of fantasy rather than reality. Bates was later to be one of the two examiners of my Cambridge Ph.D. thesis on a magnetic energy loss anomaly and it was my first step on my aether quest following those research years to see how that factor-of-2 anomaly proved the existence of the aether by showing how it optimizes that reaction to govern magnetic field energy storage. The point was that if the free conduction electrons in a ferromagnetic rod react to half-cancel the applied magnetic field then a similar action must occur for a magnetic field set up in a vacuum, which indicates that there must be free charge in motion in the aether. See the strong evidence in support in my paper Crystal
27
Symmetry and Ferromagnetism, Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, pp. 59-63 (1978). Analysis of Aether Structure During my Ph.D. years, essentially experimental, just as a matter of interest I delved into how electrons of adjacent atoms in a ferromagnetic crystal might interact electrodynamically to set up mechanical strain and satisfied myself that ferromagnetism stemmed from the 3d-state electrons and the fact that iron, for example, had sufficiently high tensile strength to tolerate the stress attributed to that strain. The analysis involved in this made it easy to contemplate an aether having a somewhat similar cubic-structured form as one sees in a ferromagnetic material, though whereas energy deployment in the crystal of a ferromagnetic material admits negative field energy density conditions, I ruled that out of consideration for the aether. The interacting charges could then not be at rest and had to be displaced in unison from centres to which they were attracted by electrostatic forces. From then on, having good reason for regarding aether structure as simple cubic in form rather than body-centred or face-centred cubic, it was a straightforward mathematical exercise to derive the parameters of the aether, charge spacing, radius of charge orbit in relation to that spacing, period of revolution of the charges in their circular orbits etc. This allowed me to picture the photon as seated in a disturbance set up by a tiny 3x3x3 cubic array of aether charges spinning and so having an angular momentum quantum proportional to the frequency of waves radiated. The numbers that emerged for the value of the fine-structure constant 2 2e /hc checked exactly with those found in precision measurement and so I knew I had the right picture of the aether. The aether charges were not electrons, as one might have hoped, but were charges having a mass a little greater than 0.04 of the electron mass. The immediate spin-off, however, revealed that the energy of each cubic cell of the aether had a mass-energy equivalent of about 413 electrons and I said Eureka to myself as here was evidence that a lepton pair, a pair of virtual muons, the heavy-electrons of particle physics, actually constitute the aether. The picture then began to form that these muons, so-called mu-mesons, being of mass intermediate the electron and the proton might account for the creation of primordial matter. So whereas I was aware of Einstein and the Special and General Theories of Relativity I was drawn into the struggle for acceptance of these findings, by having to face the attitude of a physics community that says You must be crazy to suggest revival of the aether with its three space-dimensions now that we all accept Einsteins theory and four-space.
28
Now, much of my published work on this theme is included or referenced on my web sites www.aspden.org and www.energyscience.org.uk so, before saying a little more about proton creation and gravitation, I will now just express a few thoughts concerning the more topical themes that are claiming attention. The Creation and the Death of Stars Cosmologists, lacking insight into the structure of the aether, have missed seeing the important analogy that can be drawn between the aether and the ferromagnet, namely its domain structure. Just as magnetic polarization is reversed in adjacent magnetic domains within iron, so the electric polarization is reversed in adjacent domains in space. The evidence comes from the sequence of geomagnetic reversals that have geological record in the Earths crust, evidence which tells us that periodically our Earth traverses along with the sun a space domain boundary, such boundaries being spaced at distances measured in hundreds of light years. At creation stars are born, one per domain, or possibly as twins, a binary pair, one pair per domain. Gravity in one such domain does not extend beyond the range of the domain boundaries and so it is only matter created in such a domain that coalesces to create the star or binary pair. The analogy with ferromagnetism prevails, because just as non-magnetized iron cools through its Curie temperature and the energy conditions favour onset of domain structure and the associated magnetism so the cooling of the universe and its associated space medium, the aether, assumed its domain structure with its associated gravitation. This is all explained and justified in Chapter 8 of my book Physics Unified on record on my website www.aspden.org and I see no need to repeat it here. Now, as to the death of stars, just consider the very rare event when a star, carried in a galactic orbit in which, like our sun, it makes a full revolution once every 270,000,000 years, just happens to traverse a space domain boundary with its orbital path just overlapping that boundary. The crossing would not be rapid, but could be quite prolonged with the star being partially in one domain and partially in the adjacent domain. Gravity does not act between matter in adjacent domains to hold the star together. It may even be anti-gravitational over a short range in its effect between matter in adjacent space domains. The result, I suggest, for such a rare happening is a supernova as the star blows apart. Fortunately, our sun has avoided such a traumatic event so far but it does have a slow traversal of space domain boundaries four times in its galactic cycle and so, as is of record, there is evidence in our Earths
29
geological structure of related traumatic events. J. Steiner in Geology, p. 89 (1973) writes: If Phanerozoic geological history incorporates any periodicities, they are of the order of 60 or perhaps 70 million years .... The galactic periodicity of the solar system is, however, approximately274 million years, representing the length of the cosmic year, or one revolution around the galactic centre. Apart from the pattern of geomagnetic reversals in the Earths history, what better indication can one have of a large scale cubic structure of space itself, meaning the aether? When, one must ask, will cosmologists wake up to the reality of the aether with its domain structure limiting the range of gravity? Dark Energy is now said to be one of the worlds greatest unsolved problems. It is discussed in John Vaccas book The Worlds 20 Greatest Unsolved Problems (Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 2005). Quoting from p. 134: A mysterious force called dark energy seems to be wrenching the universe apart. This is called the Big Rip .... Since 1998, dark energy has become one of the central and apparently unavoidable features of the cosmos. It has been the surprise question mark at the top of every scientists list. It undermines what physicists presumed they understood about space, time, gravity, and the future of the universe. .... Type 1a supernova serve as markers in space. New efforts by astronomers intend to harvest hundreds or thousands of supernovas, where in the past, astronomers could only base their conclusions on observing a few dozen of them. So, you see, here we are 100 years after Einstein came along and began to tell us about space, time and gravity, but having to admit that such teaching is now undermined! Nuclear Fusion Nuclear fusion is said to be the source of the suns energy. It is not! The reason is that physicists have ignored the fact that when hydrogen atoms are pushed into one another by gravity they ionize. This means that protons and electrons become separated. Then, since two protons experience a mutual attraction at a rate of gravitational acceleration that is 1836 times that which exists between two electrons, the inner ionized body of the sun must be in state of balance throughout as an excess of protons will create a repulsion exactly balancing the gravitational attraction. The sun will have about the same mass density throughout its whole form as one finds for an atomic
30
hydrogen gas in which the outer K-shell electrons of its atoms are in close contact. At 1.41 gm/cc this seems to be the case. This precludes nuclear fusion. So where does the suns energy come from? Well it comes from the process just described. Gravitation creates ionization by freeing the electrons of adjacent atoms as they crash into one another. Energy is radiated and the free electrons lose speed, but those electrons will, since only a small proportion are free at any instant, recover energy as they are recombine with a free proton to reform the hydrogen atom. The ultimate energy source is whatever it is that governs the quantum state of the electron in its motion around the hydrogen nucleus, the proton. The source of energy is the omnipresent something that regulates quantum activity. In other words the energy source is the aether, the aether that physicists say does not exist! The Big Bang Before astronomers began to probe that new notion they call the Big Rip, the universe was supposedly expanding as if everything began at a point in time and a point in space several billions of years ago. The only evidence in support of this is the red shift phenomenon, that is the observation that light from distant galaxies exhibits a lower and lower frequency the further remote the source. Where, one must ask, is the physics that explains the spectral red shift of light emitted by stars? Yes, the physics is there from that modification of Newtons law of gravity owing to retardation at the speed of light. This explains a small red shift attributable to radiation from a source of large mass such as the sun. However, the large red shift that implies an expanding universe is attributed to the Doppler effect. This involves the assumption that a light wave, in its passage through space, even after travelling for billions of years at the enormous speed of light does not really lose frequency but is only seen to alter its frequency because the frequency is referenced on a relatively-moving source. Somehow the mathematics of Maxwells equations suffices to assure physicists that electromagnetic waves travelling through interstellar space cannot suffer loss of frequency. They imagine packets of energy called photons travelling at the speed of light and talk about wave-particle duality. Yet when a photon sheds energy it sheds frequency as well. Physicists cannot say what a photon is physically - it merely has an energy quantum h, where h is Plancks constant and its frequency. So, logically, if there is nothing in space to intercept those photons, no energy can be shed and so the frequency is sustained.
31
Now just consider the alternative scenario, an aether that is trying to create matter but, having reached a state of equilibrium as between matter and aether energy, succeeds only in creating everywhere in space a very sparse transient presence of protons and electrons. We could call this missing matter or dark energy. It would obstruct electromagnetic waves by presenting a Thomson cross-section absorbing energy from the wave and then dissipating that energy by radiation so that it is absorbed back into the aether. If only we knew how the proton is created then we could estimate the rate at which energy is absorbed in its passage through space. So you see, proton creation and understanding the physics of the photon that determines the finestructure constant pose issues vital to our understanding of the universe. Such theory should explain the proton/electron mass ratio as well as the fine structure constant, both mere numerical quantities since no units are involved. My theory of the aether has delivered such results, but physicists in their wisdom regard such claims as merely the game of playing with numbers by pressing keypad on some electronic device. So they turn away and bury themselves in Einsteins theory as they dig their Black Holes and trace remnants of the Big Bang. The Hubble constant can be calculated using aether theory and without reference to the notion of an expanding universe, as I have shown elsewhere. See my paper The Steady-State Free-Electron Population of Space-Time, Lett. al Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252-256 (1984). The photon, by the way, does not travel at the speed of light. Rather it is an event in which that small 3x3x3 cubic group of aether particles spins to set up an electromagnetic wave and impart a related momentum to aether lattice structure. Where such waves are intercepted by matter that reciprocates by inducing a complementary photon spin in the aether, energy along with momentum is absorbed. The transient presence of quasi matter, the ongoing attempts by the aether to produce protons and electrons throughout space causes both energy and frequency to be shed by waves in transit. The process does not cause frequency dispersion and so explains the Hubble constant and the red shift phenomenon that has erroneously been interpreted as indicating an expanding universe.
32
The Creation of the Proton The proton is created from aether energy in the form of virtual muons and in a rather unique manner. Two muons of opposite polarity merge and, governed by the energy associated with that Thomson formula Mc2 = 2e2/3a, they come into surface contact and one of them immediately alters form (charge radius) to conserve the energy of the total pair, namely Mc2 = 4e2/3a. The charge that contracts alters its radius to a/2, half that of the virtual muon, and so doubles in mass energy, but there is then a negative electrostatic interaction energy that is exactly that of the single virtual muon and so energy is conserved overall in this process. Then, moments latter, this charge pair decides to shed energy and adjusts to a minimum energy state with the charge of radius a/2 keeping its form and the other charge expanding its radius until the energy of the combination is at a minimum value. Onward impacts of more and more muons separate these two charges by freeing the charge of smaller energy and forming a new much heavier charge form (denoted P) of even smaller charge radius in surface contact with that of radius a/2. The result is a system of three charges, which for proton creation involve two of charge +e and one of charge -e. But the governing criterion then is that P will be such that it is already paired in a minimum energy association with the charge of radius a/2 and the combined energy of the pair, allowing for their interaction energy, is less than that of P alone by exactly the amount of energy of that third charge. One then has a final state in which those three charges can merge to form a single charge version of P or revert back to the three-charge condition without loss or gain of energy. Thanks to that Thomson energy formula it so happens that this almost incredible scenario is actually possible with a uniquely valued odd integer input of virtual muons feeding into that original muon pair. The result is the form of matter we know as the proton and one can further see that it has features by which, when subject to high energy particle impact, it can exhibit a three-quark state. The authors aether theory allows the energy of the virtual muon to be calculated with high precision and consequently one can deduce the protonelectron mass ratio with the same high precision. The result is very slightly greater than 1836.152 and there can be no better testimony in support of the aether than this finding which is well within a few parts in ten million of the measured value. I note with some pride, pride I share with a colleague in advancing this theory, that when the leading experts, R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., F. L. Moore, D. L. Farnham and P. B. Schwinberg, involved in making such measurements reported in 1985 their findings in Int. J. Mass Spectrometry and Ion Processes, 66, p. 327 they stated:
33
The value that they [Aspden and Eagles] calculate is remarkably close to our experimentally measured value (i.e. within two standard deviations) This is even more curious when one notes that they published this result several years before direct precision measurements of this ratio had begun. They had measured the proton-electron mass ratio to within a precision of 41 parts in a billion and this measurement was reported some 10 years after we had presented the theoretical value derived from aether theory. Should a student of physics reading this seek to check the above claim it is a simple but interesting exercise to work out what that odd number is, but I will not make it easy by here presenting the value of the virtual muon mass indicated by my theory. Rather I leave that for the student to work out both quantities from that figure above for the proton/electron mass ratio. Then the reader can look up the full theoretical derivation by accessing, for example, my book Physics Unified that is presented in full on my web site www.aspden.org . The message is: Accept the aether is real and has structure and you can understand how matter is created - but ignore the aether and you live in ignorance! Determining G The next message is: Accept the aether is real and contains a system of electric charges that have a common circular motion which is shared by matter present and you will see the need for something that provides dynamic mass balance. That something is a system of gravitons and they are what governs G, the constant of gravitation. Ignore the aether and you have no way of understanding how G might be evaluated and so resolve the mystery of Unified Field Theory. Unlike electromagnetic force, which acts at right angles to charge motion, gravity is a simple direct inverse-square of distance force, as is electrostatic action. Yet we struggle and fail to forge a link between gravitation and electromagnetism. Can it be that what is seemingly impossible, mutual electrostatic action between matter that is uncharged electrically, is the true answer to the mystery of gravitation? Here I will show that there is a strong case in favour of this proposition. The result is a quantum theory of gravitation, a theory which requires us to recognize that there are two basic graviton forms that act in concert in setting up the gravitational action, gravitation not being a force which acts between particles of matter but a force which acts between gravitons present in the aether. By virtue of the induced association of gravitons in the presence of matter as needed to assure dynamic balance and their dynamic coupling,
34
that force of gravity acting on gravitons is effective between particles of matter. Gravity arises thanks to the existence of that charge continuum in space that eluded Samuel Earnshaw and its neutralization by a structured array of charges of opposite polarity and which governs quantum phenomena and determines basic physical constants. One then finds that continuum charge is displaced by the presence of a graviton population associated with matter present and here one discovers the physical basis of gravitation. Note now a key point at issue. Electrostatic force between two like polarity charges is repulsive but here we are concerned with charge displaced by the presence of gravitons and that implies the effect as if there were voids in a background charge continuum and so mutual attraction between the gravitons creating those voids as the enveloping charge seeks to spread by pushing the gravitons together. Another key point which needs consideration is the question of how a quantum theory of gravitation which implies a graviton form as a unit of gravitational action can account for weak gravitation forces that still depend upon G but arise from mass or its energy equivalent that is much smaller than the graviton mass. The answer to this is found by recognizing that gravitons, being leptons, can exist in charge pairs and can exchange energy as between themselves and another associated particle form. On a steady gravitational basis we find the taon dominates this action according to the charge continuum volume displaced but on a transient basis minor fluctuations in volume of a heavier graviton form cater for the balance. How then do those gravitons feature in the spectrum of particle physics? Research shows that they mainly comprise the taon - the mystery lepton particle that sits alongside the muon and the electron in the bottom line of the standard quark picture of the particle grid. As to that heavier graviton form it is somewhat elusive but has been detected at around 2.587 GeV in the particle spectrum and is best referred to as the Japanese H-quantum reported in 1971 by S. Hasagawa et al, (Prog. Theor. Physics, 47, 126). It exists in anti-particle pairs alongside two anti-particle taon pairs, meaning that there is one such heavy graviton for every two taon-gravitons. How is all this justified? Simply by derivation of G, the gravitation constant, in terms of the taon mass. Now here I cannot justify giving the full details of my aether analysis as of record elsewhere so I will simply summarize what is involved. Step 1: Determine , the charge density of the space continuum. Do this by delving into the quantum properties of space, as evidenced by the Bohr Magneton er, e being the charge of the electron. With r having the value h/4mec we then account for the photon in terms of spin of a 3x3x3
35
component of that structured charge array mentioned above. This gives us the equation: hc/2e2 = 144r/d where r is the orbital radius of charge motion, h is Plancks constant, c is the speed of light and d is the cubic spacing of those charges. Accordingly: = e/d3 We now know the value of because we can eliminate h/r and deduce that: mec2 = 72e2/d me being the rest mass of the electron. Step 2: For encouragement at this stage note that we could digress to find the ratio r/d simply by analysis of electrostatic interaction energy density of the space medium and arguing that it cannot be negative, thereby accounting for charge being displaced from sites at which they would be at rest and so determining r and telling us that the quantum underworld must have that jitter motion postulated by Heisenberg. The analysis is of early record elsewhere but first, by joint authorship with Dr. D. M. Eagles of the CSIRO National Measurement Laboratory in Australia, in a mainstream physics publication in 1972. It allows precise determination of the finestructure constant, a quantity explained by no other theory (Physics Letters, 41A, 423). Step 3: We now formulate the link with G in terms of the taon and the heavier graviton form, of masses m and mg and volumes V and Vg, respectively: %G(2m + mg) = (2V + Vg) Next we need to use again that crucial formula of J. J. Thomson that dates back to the pre-Einstein era : mc2 = 2e2/3a which applies to the electron and also relates the mass m of our two particles with their charge radius a and so their volume. This assumes that the charge e is distributed within the sphere of radius a so as to have uniform pressure or energy density. The volume to mass ratio of the two-taon and heavy graviton combination must match the corresponding volume to mass ratio for transient fluctuations in which a pair of heavy gravitons annihilate one another to share the volume of three such gravitons in a single charge. The same condition arises for the case where energy is exchanged between the field system of matter and the heavy graviton with, for such minor fluctuations, the preservation of gravitational potential overriding the need for perfect dynamic balance. In the latter case the slight expansion of graviton volume increases just enough to match the mass-energy added to the system of matter, thereby
36
keeping gravitational potential unchanged. The relevant volume to mass ratio which has to equal: (2V + Vg)/(2m + mg) is then: 3Vg/mg Since charge volume is inversely proportional to the cube of the related mass one finds from the above equality that: (mg/m)3 - 3(m/mg) -1 = 0 which, upon solution, gives: (mg/m) = 1.452627 This allows us then to write: %G = (3Vg/mg) Step 4: One can now evaluate G based on the measured value of the taon mass-energy, which is 1.781 GeV or 3485 electron mass units, to find that the heavy graviton becomes 2.587 Gev or 5063 electron mass units. Note that d is 72e2/mec2 and so is 108 times the electron charge radius, the latter being 5063 times the charge radius of the heavy graviton. Given that is e/d3 we then find that: %G = 4(e/me)/(108)3(5063)4 and, e/me being 5.272 esu/gm, this tells us that G has the value 6.67x10-8 dynes.cm2.gm-2. So-called Time Dilation One of the most puzzling aspects of conventional physics teaching concerns the notion of time dilation as introduced by Einsteins theory. The only experimental evidence in support of this theme stems from accelerating leptons, muons, to energies well in excess of their rest-mass energy. That evidence merely shows that the decay lifetime of such particles increases in proportion to energy. Now, if it were found that human beings live longer when travelling at a high speed, the medical profession would approach the problem by first establishing why it is that one dies naturally when living a life where one is not travelling at enormous speed. They might then infer a cause by extrapolating theory on the basis of that prior knowledge. So, I maintain that, until physicists can explain why a slow-moving muon, the mumeson, has a mean lifetime a little below 2.2 microseconds they should not enthuse on the subject of time itself passing more slowly, the faster one travels. If the reader thinks this muon lifetime phenomenon is proof in support of Einsteins theory, he or she needs to think again, after reading my paper explaining the phenomenon in terms of aether theory. This is to be found in
37
Lett. al Nuovo Cimento, 38, pp. 206-210 (1983) in its full text form on my website www.energyscience.org.uk . Note that the muon lifetime is limited by the virtual particle activity within the aether as muons that are part of that aether, in their random migration by creation and decay at the Compton electron frequency have a statistical chance of an encounter with the real muon as a target and this triggers its decay. The muon moving at high speed has its energy deployed statistically between different states and this makes it elusive and harder to hit as a target. My theory allows that microsecond lifetime quantity to be determined as a function of the evaluated aether constants and shows that lifetime does increase with speed in close accord with the relativistic formula, at least at very high speeds. At speeds around half the speed of light my theory gives a result that is a few per cent different from the relativistic value, so maybe one day experiments on muon lifetime at such lower values will prove me right. Conclusion Physicists, and notably V. F. Weisskopf (Physics Today, 69-85, Nov. 1981), have been puzzled as to the role played by both the muon and the taon, the heavy electrons of particle physics. As denizens of the aether their role is now quite clear. One accounts for the creation of the principal constituent of matter, the proton, whereas the other accounts for the force of gravity. So you see, we have here a Unified Field Theory, all because we have adhered to the belief in an omnipresent aether and have bothered to track back, check and correct two crucial steps taken in error in the 19th century by two physicists, Earnshaw in connection with his theorem for assuming that the aether constituted particle immersed in a void and Larmor for considering electron acceleration without an interacting electric field as its cause, thereby not seeing that an electron exhibits inertia because it seeks to avoid radiating its own energy. Here was the basis of E = Mc2 as we have seen above, all without any contribution from Einstein. As to Einsteins own insight into the physical cause of inertia, since my object in writing this text has been to challenge Einstein doctrine by showing the simple alternative physics that is based on 19th century teaching, I will add a few further comments here. It was in December 1954 that Einstein completed the 5th Edition of his book The Meaning of Relativity. Although he claimed to understand the basis of that formula E = Mc2 he did not see that the proper derivation of this famous equation is actually founded on the inertial property simply because an accelerated electrical charge will so react as to conserve its energy. In his book at page 100 one reads:
38
The theory of relativity makes it appear probable that Mach was on the right road in his thought that inertia depends upon a mutual action of matter. So even by mid-century, some 50 years after introducing a theory that is supposed to explain gravitation, the key question as to the physical nature of inertia had proved elusive. Relevant to this was the subject of Dennis Sciamas Ph.D. dissertation as recorded in the 1953-1954 Abstracts of Dissertations of the University of Cambridge. Note that Sciama was later the tutor supervising the research of the now famous Stephen Hawking. Sciamas dissertation was entitled On the Origin of Inertia and I read that a principal chapter of that work was: .. devoted to Einsteins work, which shows that inertia is connected with gravitation. However, as Einstein himself was the first to point out, general relativity does not fully account for inertia. Thus a new theory of gravitation is needed. I can quote this because, as I noted earlier, I was a contemporary with Sciama in my own Ph.D. research and my dissertation is included in that 1953-1954 set of abstracts. Surely, given that a new theory of gravitation was needed back in 1953-1954, why has the physics community chosen to ignore the overwhelming case concerning gravity, the aether and the derivation of the equation E = Mc2 as the physical foundation of inertia linked to energy conservation? My theory has the answers and is the long-awaited Unified Field Theory. Readers interested in knowing more about my research on this subject including full analysis of the aether structure and copies of, or references to, my published work should refer to my web site www.aspden.org . ****** This 38 page monograph was posted on the above web site on January 1st 2005. Hopefully it will serve as an up-dated introduction to my theory as a whole and particularly to my much longer work The Physics of Creation already of record on that web site several months ago. A few amendments to the latter are needed and so it will be revised in the months ahead.
PWECH1 COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
UP-TO-DATE REMARKS ON CHAPTER 1
[THE ELECTRON]
Copyright Harold Aspden, 2002
It is 33 years since I wrote Physics without Einstein and, not surprisingly, there are new perspectives that can now clarify some of the doubts raised by what I have written in that work. The Electron in Motion In chapter 1, as to the nature of the electron charge, it is stated that the electron has spherical form and shown on p. 12 that its inertia, in having a mass property determined by its intrinsic electric energy as divided by c2, is a physical manifestation of its reaction to conserve and not radiate that energy when accelerated. This proposition, together with its mathematical proof hold as firm as ever. The analysis is based on an electric field disturbance within the actual body of charge propagating at the speed c. That suffices to establish the derived relationship between mass and energy. The analysis does not depend upon the assumption of a finite speed of propagation in the free space region outside the charge's spherical boundary radius. Nor indeed do I see any basis for thinking that a magnetic field disturbance might be set up within that body of charge. I later came to accept that the electric field seated outside the charge of the electron is carried along with the electron as if part of a rigid whole, there being no electric field ripple set up in enveloping space by electron acceleration. It is as if the field we know as being attenuated with distance according to the inverse-square law is an instantaneous action-at-a-distance phenomemon, a feature now normally assumed in quantum theory but one which I was able to confirm once I discovered how Nature determines the Neumann Potential. See my paper [1988a]. This disposes of the dynamic electric field problem which I raised on page 6 of chapter 1. As to the question of raised on page 7 of whether magnetic field energy is a negative quantity in potential terms, this is really a question of how electric charge in motion interacts with other moving charge elsewhere. Here one needs to relate such motion to a common reference frame, the electromagnetic frame of reference set by the aether itself, meaning the crystal-like lattice array formed by the aether lattice charges, as discussed later on p. 96 in chapter 6. An isolated electron in motion is not interacting with other charge, because even though there are charges in the aether itself and an electron moving through the aether will disturb those charges by its electric field action, those aether charges in that lattice array define the electromagnetic frame of reference and so are not interacting with the electron in setting up a magnetic field. Though there are also virtual lepton charges in the fabric of the aether, the latter charges exist in oppositely-charged pairs and so the net effect of an intruding charge is zero. The mutual interaction of charges in motion is the subject of chapter 2, but, as to chapter 1 and the analysis on pages 6 and 7, since we rule out of consideration the electron having any dynamic electric field energy component and now rule out any self-excited magnetic energy component, the latter having been regarded as negative, we are left only with kinetic energy. Hence, as the onward analysis in chapter 1 shows, there being no energy radiation accompanying acceleration of the solitary electron, its intrinsic energy is conserved and energy is also conserved as between the loss of potential energy from the accelerating source and the gain of kinetic energy by the electron. It is appropriate here to explain that, though I rule out the possibility of an accelerated electron
file://C:\mp3\b\PWECH1%20COMMENTARY.htm
25.4.2005
PWECH1 COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
radiating any of its energy, I do not preclude energy radiation by a concerted in-phase oscillation of a group of electrons. If one has a formula for energy radiation as being proportional to (ne)2, where n electron charges e, move together, the lack of a contribution by (e)2 to this formula by each of those n electrons, reduces the radiation to proportionality with n(n-1)e2. I am aware of the role this has in Thomson scattering of X-rays by electrons and the experimental support for the formula, but as far as I can judge, that experimental support is not sufficiently precise to distinguish n2 from n(n-1)2, though X-ray scattering has been used in the early days of atomic theory to give a rough indication of the number of electrons in individual atoms. Superconductivity With hindsight I now wonder why I included the section dealing with superconductivity in Physics without Einstein. It was, I presume, to underline the point I had just made in chapter 1 concerning the fact that an accelerated electron does not radiate its energy. There are numerous electrons colliding together and with atoms in the normal state of a conductor, whether or not it is superconductive, so the point I had to make holds just as well without reference to the superconductive state. In the event, however, superconductivity was later to become a very telling factor in supporting my aether theory, both in regard to what I came later to say on the subject of gravitation and the role of the 'supergraviton' and also on the theme of the way in which magnetic field energy is stored in the aether. In this connection I refer the interested reader to my reference [1989a].
The reader may now wish to return to the Contents page of Physics without Einstein.
25.4.2005
PWECH2 COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[MUTUAL INTERACTION EFFECTS]
The energy of mutual charge interaction Chapter 2 has dealt with the important topic of the mutual interaction of electric charges, meaning essentially the actions that depend upon charge motion. This is a very complicated subject and I need to qualify some aspects of what I stated in this chapter, which was written before I came to realize that the Coulomb electrostatic field action is an instantaneous action-at-a-distance, as noted in the commentary on chapter 1. So far as the mutual interactions are concerned there are, therefore, no field energy components of the kind EM as suggested on page 24 of chapter 2. They do not exist because the retardation speed parameter c is no longer a factor in the analysis of the electric field system. As stated in the commentary on chapter 1, one needs to relate the motion of interacting charges to a common reference frame, the electromagnetic frame of reference set by the aether itself. An isolated electron in motion is not interacting with other charge, because even though there are charges in the aether itself and an electron moving through the aether will disturb those charges by its electric field action, those aether charges define the electromagnetic frame of reference and so are not interacting with the electron in setting up a magnetic field. As to the mutual interaction of charges in motion, since we rule out of consideration the electron having any dynamic electric field energy component and have also ruled out any self-excited magnetic energy component to leave only its kinetic energy, one may now wonder how the mutual interaction is affected. Here, common sense, tells us that there can be no such thing as 'mutual kinetic energy', if only because the aggregate sum of any such energy will, in all probability, actually determine the local inertial frame of reference, as discussed in chapter 2. This then brings us to the result formulated in equation (2.6) on page 27 of chapter 2. Equation (2.5) is no longer relevant. We are left with the proposition that, though the aether charge displaced by field action cannot, of itself, set up a magnetic energy state, that aether charge in reacting can acquire kinetic energy (KR) and this, in being dispersed by pooling with the sea of energy of the aether, will, by equation (2.6), define a negative quantity (HM). This latter quantity is the magnetic field energy and it 'signature' is recorded in the orientation and scale of the state of motion of the aether charge. The onward discussion in chapter 2 brought to bear the extensive evidence supporting this, including magnetocaloric cooling and the g-factor analysis discussed on pp. 32-36. The law of electrodynamics This section of 'Physics without Einstein' at pp. 39-47 is the most important contribution of the work. The book was written to mark the event of getting my first major paper on this controversial subject published in a mainstream scientific periodical, this being mentioned at the end of that section. It was entitled 'The Law of Electrodynamics'.[1969a]. The law in its more general form, as derived in the book, pointed to anomalies on the energy front, anomalies which aroused my interest in the possibility of tapping energy from the aether. Note, on this latter theme, that I was also intrigued by the outcome of my discussion on
25.4.2005
PWECH2 COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
magnetocaloric effects on pp. 28-30 of the book. Using intense magnetic fields one might well be able to prove that we can cool the vacuum medium, the aether, to, as it were, temperatures below absolute zero. This would be extraction of energy from the aether from which the aether would recover to an equilibrium state by draining some of its surplus energy which is otherwise deployed in the creation of protons and electrons, a process which came to understand only some four or so years after writing 'Physics without Einstein' and which I discuss further in the commentary on chapter 7.
The reader may now wish to return to the Contents page of 'Physics without Einstein'.
25.4.2005
PWECH3COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[THE NATURE OF FERROMAGNETISM]
This chapter deals exclusively with the author's interpretation of the true cause of the ferromagnetic state in iron, nickel and cobalt. Its only relevance to the 'Physics without Einstein' theme is its historical connection with the author's research which gave reason for writing that book. My Ph.D. research at Cambridge had involved me in the experimental investigation of the anomaly by which iron cores in power transformers subjected to a.c. magnetization defied theory by generating excess heat. One aspect of that research concerned the effect of mechanical stress on ferromagnetic properties, including that mysterious loss. I backed that by my own theoretical analysis as to why iron, nickel and cobalt were ferromagnetic but copper, for example, was not ferromagnetic. I was very doubtful concerning electron spin as a primary contributor to the magnetic polarization of the ferromagnet, this having become the standard belief, one rooted indirectly in theory associated with Einstein's relativity. My reason, simply, was that it gave me no handle on which to grasp in trying to relate mechanical stress with electron interactions in adjacent atoms. In the event what emerged was what you see as chapter 3 of 'Physics without Einstein'. There were two major 'spin-off' topics that came from this effort. One, the subject of my 1971 conference paper presented at a meeting of the Magnetics Group of the German Physical Society held in Salzburg on March 29, 1971, and eventually, after several years, published in Speculations in Science and Technology [1978c], is the very important confirmation of my theme in this chapter 3, by showing how the apparent non-integer atomic quantization of magnetic polarization in iron, nickel and cobalt has in fact an integer foundation. This was important in the context of a mechanical stress theory for determining the threshold separating a ferromagnet from a non-ferromagnet and equally important in providing an explanation for the low anisotropy properties associated with magnetostriction. The other was something very important in the context of 'Physics without Einstein'. It was the fact I had to become wholly committed to the belief in a real aether when I made my discovery of my revolutionary explanation of the g-factor-of-2 phenomenon as not being due to so-called electron spin but simply being an orbital electron property, this being consistent with the ferromagnetic theory I had developed. The g-factor reaction had also to involve aether charge reaction to account for magnetic fields set up in vacuo. The 'spin-off' feature was that the structured model of an iron crystal I had used, with certain similarstate electrons of atoms moving in orbits in perfect synchronism, had taxed my mathematical skills in the days when numerical analysis implied use of slide rules and six-figure logarithmic tables but given me certain data. That data was relevant to the very physical model that, subject to simplification to deal with a simple-cubic form as opposed to body-centred cubic form, I was able to use as a model for the aether itself. It was so easy then to see how the aether determined the photon energy quantum, something closely related to the Bohr magneton quantum that featured in my theory of ferromagnetism. Indeed, I was overwhelmed at the speed at which my aether theory then developed. The subjects of chapters 4, 5 and 6 were the immediate follow-on from that major step in diverting my attentions from ferromagnetism and switching my interest to more fundamental theoretical issues, which were to include that law of electrodynamics, itself a key factor in making sense of the
file://C:\mp3\b\PWECH3COMMENTARY.htm
25.4.2005
PWECH3COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
force balance in the ferromagnetic model I had been studying. Once into the realm of aether, which posed a challenge concerning Einstein's theory, and once focussed on the true version and very basis of the law of electrodynamic action, I naturally set my sights on gravitation, the theme of chapter 5.
To gain access to those chapters the reader may now wish to return to the Contents page of 'Physics without Einstein'.
25.4.2005
PWECH4COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 1
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[WAVE MECHANICS]
This chapter has shown how the aether gives basis for wave mechanics and quantum theory. In trying to interest the scientific community in aether theory I found that I was asked in a scornful tone the question as to whether I could derive the Schroedinger equation from my aether model. I was trying to get attention for my achievement in the theoretical derivation of the Planck constant h in its dimensionless composition as hc/2e2, but that achievement was brushed aside as being of no interest. So chapter 4 has concentrated on this one issue by introducing the author's interpretation of the true nature of the photon. This has led to the Schroedinger equation, the basis of wave mechanics, but it remains to complete the argument by showing how the actual value of that dimensionless constant is determined by the aether itself. That is a subject deferred to chapter 7. Chapter 4 ends with a reference to the anomalous behaviour of the electron, an anomaly concerning its g-factor, but not the g-factor-of-2 quantity discussed in chapter 2. Here I refer to the anomaly that is recognized by physicists as governed by Q.E.D., quantum electrodynamics. This latter anomaly was not well understood at the time 'Physics without Einstein' was written, but I had faced criticism also on this account. In trying to get a hearing for my theoretical evaluation of that dimensionless constant, I was told I could not hope to compete with the achievements of the QED method, which would prevail against any aether-based notions. Hence, I did try in 'Physics without Einstein' to set the stage for an attack on that problem. In the event I derived equation (4.21) on p. 77 of the book and used this later in chapter 7 to argue my account of the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron. However, I was destined to improve on this method some years later [1981c] and [1982b] and so advise the reader to be prepared to skip over the sections of chapter 7 that make reference to the quantity calculated in equation (4.21). I note that one of my problems in developing this aether theory over the years has been that of becoming ensnared by a theoretical feature that offers promise by giving good quaititative and quantitative results, only to find that as the years pass something far superior appears. This is disconcerting as it implies two possible explanations for the same problem, whereas one should be sufficient. In retrospect I am tempted to wonder in some such instances if both explanations are true and if Nature has evolved by adopting the physics of both because that gives the universe a more stable pattern. I will draw attention to an interesting example of this when I comment on the subject of the next chapter, chapter 5.
To gain access to chapter 5 the reader may now wish to return to the Contents page of 'Physics without Einstein'.
25.4.2005
PWECH5COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[GRAVITATION]
This chapter has shown how we can formulate a value of G, the constant of gravitation, in terms of a fundamental charge component of the aether, the graviton, as being that something in the aether that provides dynamic balance for the Heisenberg jitter motion of the quantum underworld. That is a step of paramount importance, but my commentary here is directed to that 'example' I mentioned in my chapter 4 commentary, concerning Nature's duality in regard to certain phenomena. It would hardly be possible to write a book having the title 'Physics without Einstein' and address the subject of gravity without at least including a non-relativistic explanation for the anomalous perihelion motion of the planet Mercury. Deriving an equation which explained that anomaly was, after all, the mainstay of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. Such an account has been included at pages 83 to 88. It was an explanation I had developed in the late 1950s and, indeed, it had already been presented in my booklet 'The Theory of Gravitation' which I published in 1960. It was a strong factor in support of my aether theory and it gave my confidence in presenting the 1969 effort under the title 'Physics without Einstein'. Now, if the reader were to compare this account with the one presented in my later book 'Physics Unified' (1980), it would be evident that I have discovered a different explanation for the perihelion anomaly, one which, by three-dimensional aether theory, gives precisely the same planetary orbit as can be derived by transposing Einstein's four-space result into three-dimensional form. Indeed, it was the trigger of getting that discovery published by the U.K. Institute of Physics [1980b] that caused me to publish 'Physics Unified'. The earlier theory concerned aether angular momentum as affected by planetary motion and the later theory concerned retardation of energy transfer as between sun and planet in causing the radial oscillation period of the planet to be very slightly different from the orbital period, thereby causing a slow but progressive advance of perihelion. Can it be that both theories are correct? If so, what would that tell us? We would, in fact, then find that the term R in equation (5.9) of 'Physics without Einstein', the 'radius of space-time lattice of the planet', meaning the extent of its aether system which shares the motion of the planet, is a parameter that is determined by the duality condition. If this is so then we have a physical reason which determines the boundary radius of an aether sphere nucleated by a planet. Note the discussion on p. 86 of 'Physics without Einstein'. We saw that to get the theory to fit with observation R for planet Mercury would need to be 10% greater than the physical radius of the planet. What determines that difference? Unlike the situation for body Earth there seems to be no data as to an ionosphere that I assumed might fix such a boundary for the Earth. So, logic says, in retrospect, that both theories hold and R is thereby determined as the value which gives the same perihelion advance on both theories. Needless to say, I am tempted to see how such an argument can be applied to determine the Earth's aether radius. Something must fix that radius and though one might say it is the boundary of solid matter, one has to keep in mind that stars have a gaseous form, and if we then wonder how the Earth's atmosphere determines the boundary, one is left to speculate with little or no foundation on which to build. Lacking better data I can but draw attention to the section on 'perihelion motions' in the later chapter 8 and also to p. 38 of my 1960 booklet where I endeavored to resolve this issue.
25.4.2005
PWECH5COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
Certainly, in the light of what I said there I can see no reason why the argument I put forward here cannot stand as a valid account. As it is I do not regard the anomalous planetary perihelion motion issue as one warranting the attention it has received from those who adhere to Einstein's beliefs. For my part I have set the stage for those who wish to take the argument further. All I say is that those who choose to research this topic should take note of what I said in my 1960 booklet 'The Theory of Gravitation' and merge that with the case I presented in the above-referenced 1980 Institute of physics paper. I hold firm to my belief that the role of the aether can in no way be ignored if cosmologists are to make sense of what they really can see as our universe.
25.4.2005
PWECH6COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[SPACE-TIME ANALYSIS]
This is the chapter which has introduced the aether in its full context as something we can decipher as to its structure and its quantitative properties. I have three points that, in retrospect, I need to comment on in view of the later development of this theory. Space polarization energy It is on page 111 that I refer to space polarization energy, knowing that the aether cannot adopt the state at which its electrostatic interaction energy density is at its absolute minimum, but positive, value. It simply has to involve some displacement from that truly level of energy and so it must possess what has now come to be termed 'zero-point' energy. The question is: "What determines that level of energy density?" I tried to answer this in 1969 in 'Physics without Einstein' by the analysis presented on pages 122-123. It was not until some years on that I discovered the true controlling factor. My book 'Physics without Einstein' had interested Dr. D. M. Eagles and from his base at the National Measurement Laboratory he set out to check my aether analysis leading to the theoretical evaluation of the fine-structure constant. I will not dwell here on the outcome of that exercise, save to say that by 1972 he and I had collaborated in publishing a paper [1972a] which resolved the energy priming problem. The least energy state had to be consistent with a resonance as beteen the electron and the aether particle that defined the aether lattice structure. It meant that there was a very slight displacement from the true zero-energy state and that displacement not only determined the zero-point energy density that can sustain electromagnetic oscillations but it determined the fine-structure constant with great precision. Derivation of Planck's constant On page 115 of 'Physics without Einstein' one finds that my best estimate of hc/2e2 in terms of my theory as it stood in 1969 was 137.038. I had no more to say on this at the time, given that the data I had available told me that this was precisely the measured value of that quantity. I was, of course, well satisfied and only became concerned when a specialist referee at the National Physical Laboratory in U.K. who had been requested to review my book for the Institution of Electrical Engineers, of which I was a Fellow, declared that the most recent precision measurement had changed the value of that constant to 137.036. There was nothing I could do. I was still holding faith with my theory. Some factor was at work which affected that priming energy, or 'space polarization energy', to use the term in my book, and I could but hope that the passage of time would bring the needed inspiration. As it was Dr. Eagles came onto the scene and a very rigorous evaluation of that energy and its bearing on the determination of the fine-structure constant was possible. It proved to be 137.0359148 but was then at the level where minor experimental factors could affect measurements anywhere but in free space well remote from any material object. Any onward challenge was then extremely unlikely. The theory was secure, but it has still to become accepted. The muon
25.4.2005
PWECH6COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
It was in this chapter 6 that I brought the muon or mu-meson into the aether picture. I had not intended that the aether theory I was developing should involve electrically charged energy quanta other than perhaps the electron, the aether lattice particle and something that imparted a mass property to what I called the 'contuuum', the G-frame medium and the electrical system that neutralized the aether from polarization by the charges of the lattice particles. The muon emerged on its own by virtue of a number 5062 derived from equation (6.67) on page 118. I had already by equation (6.63) on page 116 shown that the lattice charge had a mass that was less than that of the electron by a factor of 24.52 and I jumped to attention when I saw that that number 5062 divided by 24.52 gave a value between 206 and 207 electron mass units. This, I knew, was a pointer to the muon, an exotic mystery particle known from cosmic rays and a particle that has been dubbed 'the heavy electron', but a particle which physicists could not see had a role to play in the make-up of matter or the universe. So here, in this chapter 6, I saw my theory was leading me into the realm of particle physics, my stimulus being the fact that my theoretical derivation of G, the constant of gravitation, had given a formula (6.73) on page 121 of 'Physics without Einstein' that depended on the graviton being heavier than the electron by a factor of 5063. That compounded the mystery for a while, but it caused me to search for evidence in particle data tables in the hope of finding some clues that could help in this quest. The inescapable outcome from that 1969 period was that my interest had been aroused in the world of particle physics and, quite naturally, it caused me to develop a theme I had begun in my 1960 booklet 'The Theory of Gravitation', namely the quest to bring the proton somehow into the aether picture. Note here that, once I had decided that the Heisenberg jitter shared by matter and by the aether lattice charges had to be balanced dynamically by something in what I called the G-frame, I had to contemplate a heavy particle form in that G-frame, so as not to affect the result of my formal analysis of the fine-structure constant. The obvious choice was a particle having a mass of the order of the proton mass and, even in 1959, I thought I was making progress on that track, as is evident from page 27 of that 1960 work. However, I will say more about that in my commentary on chapter 7, but I give warning here that the reader should either skip over or just glance through what is said in pages 139-145 of that chapter in 'Physics without Einstein', because by 1975 I was destined to discover something that far outweighs what is there proposed, making it necessary to eliminate that analysis from further consideration. At best it presents an interesting example of how theory in physics can develop in a way which is so deceptive and misleading. For all I know it may have some significance in the context of another version of that duality issue I mentioned above as a quirk of Nature but I will not dwell further on that possibility.
25.4.2005
PWECH7COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 1
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[NUCLEAR THEORY]
This chapter 7 has brought Nuclear Theory into the aether picture by envisaging that the atomic nucleus of the higher order atoms has a structure conforming with the cubic form of the aether itself. This plus the relationship between the proton, neutron and deuteron are the primary contributions of this chapter. I need, however, to explain an important development since 'Physics without Einstein' was published. This, as is seen below, concerns the creation of the proton. I do not wish the reader to judge my theory on the basis of the account of proton creation presented in this chapter 7. It was remarkable at the time it was written that, for some 10 or more years to that time, I had felt certain that the radiation of the Bohr quantum of angular momentum played a role in determining the primordial combination of an electron (mass m) and a heavy particle (mass M). The mathematical analysis on p. 142-143 of 'Physics without Einstein' and Appendix II of that book, as well as the corresponding analysis at pp. 27-30 of my 1960 book 'The Theory of Gravitation' very clearly implied a value of M/m of 1,817.8. This is 1% below the proton/electron mass ratio and it seemed that a factor of the order of the fine-structure constant might be brought into play to account for the difference. In the event, however, with the passage of time I came to see that the proton had to be created from the muon field and that discovery is so remarkable it has to replace the theory offered in 'Physics without Einstein'. See my papers [1975a] and [1988c]. I note also that what is said in chapter 7 about proton spin, neutron spin, deuteron spin and electron spin is all replaced by the theory that accompanied and followed on from the above breakthrough. The key papers I later wrote on these topics are [1986a], [1986d] and [1988b].
25.4.2005
PWECH8COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 1
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[COSMIC THEORY]
Given that the aether has been introduced to explain phenomena at the atomic and microscopic level the question of its role on a large scale comes into issue. Here, from the very early stage of development of this theory, I could see that one had only to ask the question of how a large sphere of aether set in rotation would respond given that sychronized co-ordination of its aether lattice particle motion to reveal a feature that proved its very existence. Hence this chapter 8 is important. A large sphere of aether, typically of the size of Earth, if rotating will develop a radial electric displacement about its spin axis. Conversely a radial electric field set up by a large spherical body of matter will induce spin in co-extensive aether. Thus one could explain how the Sun is created in a state of spin and why Earth has a magnetic field. In particular, without making further assumptions, the data already derived for the aether properties from analysis of the topics dealt with in previous chapters, notably chapter 6, could be applied here in chapter 8 to estimate the value of the geomagnetic moment. This result was a very convincing outcome of the theory. It had been the subject of chapter 5 in the 1960 booklet 'The Theory of Gravitation' and it meant that the theory could prevail over non-aetherial physical models. It has no rival in Einstein's theory and little more need be said.
This ends these chapter commentaries. The reader may now wish to return to the Contents page of 'Physics without Einstein'.
25.4.2005
ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2
POWER FROM ICE: THERMOELECTRICS: PART I
by
HAROLD ASPDEN
Sabberton Publications P.O. Box. 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England Fax: Int+44-2380-769-830 ISBN 0 85056 023 3
8 HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents Section Title Introduction Concerning the Patent Rights Development Status: May 1994 APPENDIX I: Schedule of Patents APPENDIX II: 'Solid-State Thermoelectric Refrigeration,' IECEC paper: Atlanta, Georgia: August 1993 APPENDIX III: The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Operating Principles: October 1989 Report APPENDIX IV: The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Test Results: October 1989 Report APPENDIX V: The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Paper on Thermoelectric Power Anomaly: October 1989 Report page 1 2 3 13 17
26 41
55
APPENDIX VI: Thermoelectric Experimental Device Construction: Strachan: February 1994 62-71 8 HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2
POWER FROM ICE Introduction This Energy Science Report summarizes the development status of the StrachanAspden thermoelectric energy conversion technology as of May 1994. Onward research from that date is the subject of Energy Science Report No. 3. The basic invention is the brainchild of its coinventors Dr. Harold Aspden of Southampton, England and John Scott Strachan of Edinburgh, Scotland and it dates from their first meeting in Canada on the occasion of a New Energy Technology Symposium held in 1988 under the auspices of the Planetary Association for Clean Energy. In its conception, the invention merges the technical disciplines of magnetism (Aspden) and piezoelectricity (Strachan) in a structure which exploits, first and foremost, the thermoelectric properties of metal. In its onward development and promotion, the respective professional skills of the two inventors were brought to bear in laboratory assembly (Strachan) and patenting (Aspden). Geographic separation by 420 miles has precluded a close working relationship in pursuing this project in a normal technological development sense, it being a private venture by two individuals, each having other unrelated technical interests. In the event, what is an extremely important inventive contribution, that potentially can provide the non-pulluting refrigeration technology of the future, has remained undeveloped, notwithstanding some small external R&D funding that has been of assistance to Strachan. There are not, of record and suitable for issuance, any detailed experimental tests or results provided by Strachan. Almost all the documentary material that has been made available until now has been generated by this author (Aspden), mainly in a patent attorney or promotional capacity. Much of this latter information is the basis of this Report. One appended item that is new at this time is the account which Strachan prepared in February 1994 describing the polymer PVDF structure and fabrication of the first and third demonstration prototypes which he built. The issuance of this Report at this time follows the recent grant of the relevant U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336 dated February 22, 1994. The object of this Report, therefore, is to arouse interest in the Strachan-Aspden invention in those corporations having the necessary R&D resources or ability to fund such
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2
2 R&D in academic establishment laboratories with a view to the disposition of the patents involved. Concerning the Patent Rights [Note added June 2003 when this Report is made available on the authors websites www.energyscience.co.uk and www.aspden.org . The comments about patent rights which follow no longer apply as the patents involved were not kept alive, owing to lack of interest by prospective developers having the necessary disposition to fund the onward research needed. However, for the record, the text below remains unamended from its initial form as published in 1994.] The schedule of patents relating to the Strachan-Aspden technology forms APPENDIX I. The author, in his Attorney capacity representing the proprietor interest in these patents, is empowered to negotiate options or outright assignment. Based on the introductory technical briefing offered by this Energy Science Report, and the information now being incorporated in further reports, the author also makes himself available for some limited consultation on onward development by those parties who enter into the necessary Agreements. The abstract and title page of the principal U.S. Patent, 5,288,336 is included in APPENDIX I and those interested in the detailed disclosure and claim cover will no doubt wish to acquire and inspect a copy of that published patent specification. Essentially, the details of the operation and technology underlying the invention can be understood from the descriptive material provided later in this report, but there has been a shift in emphasis as to this author's technical appreciation underlying physical functioning of the invention and this features in certain additional patent applications which have been filed and which, though listed in APPENDIX I, will form the subject of Energy Science Report No. 3. In order, however, to assist the reader who does inspect the primary U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336 and also U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 and seeks a simple insight into how this author now views the underlying physics, the diagram in Fig. 1 below may serve.
Fig. 1 Nernst EMFs induced in nickel by heat flow When a temperature differential exists in a thin film of nickel sandwiched between dielectric insulation in a parallel plate capacitor, the heat flow carried by electrons is
3 deflected by the strong polarization fields in the oppositely polarized single magnetic domains that bridge the film thickness. This, by the thermoelectric phenomenon known as the Nernst Effect develops an electric field polarization as shown by the arrows. It is orthogonal with respect to the direction of heat flow and the magnetic polarization. It may then be understood how a lateral oscillation of current flow through the capacitor can choose a flow path on successive half cycles so as always to transfer charge across the metal plate electrodes to draw power from an assisting EMF by avoiding the path obstructed by an opposing EMF. Cooling must then result as that power transfers into the external circuit. The dielectric insulation obliges the heat flow in the nickel to remain orthogonal with the current flow direction and also with the magnetic polarization which is necessarily in-plane in the nickel. Development Status: May 1994 [The figure references in this section apply to the patent specification drawings included at pages 7 and 8 of this Report] There were three techniques in the original conception of the invention. The common feature was the idea of using a capacitative coupling to block heat transfer between the hot and cold heat sinks whilst contriving thermoelectric energy conversion. Strachan advised that all three had been tested experimentally and were viable. The one ready for demonstration (the capacitor stack) was given preference for onward development. The strategy adopted was to file a first patent application showing capacitor use in the heat blocking sense (Figs. 1 to 4 of the 18 November 1988 patent filing same as those in U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085) and a brief disclosure of the stack (Fig. 4) but not disclose the detailed assembly of the stack. A second U.K. application filed 5 December 1988 added Figs. 5 to 8 and covered that detail and described the prototype version of the stack as I understood it at the time. In the event the capacitor heat blocking proved not to be of particular merit but we had a basic invention in the disclosure in that the confinement of heat flow to the bimetallic capacitor plates with transverse current oscillations gave remarkable results. The subjects of Figs. 1 to 3 were not developed further, even though they have merit. I persisted in securing patent cover in U.K. and U.S.A., the latter, as just indicated, being granted as US Patent No. 5,065,085. The patent cover which followed from the capacitor stack was adjusted and tailored to the diagnostic findings that emerged from the research on the second prototype and the international patent filing including US filing did not replicate the features of Fig. 7 or Fig. 8 or include the acoustic oscillation feature that was incorporated in the first prototype.
4 The First Prototype: September 1988 This was a capacitative polymer dielectric stack with bimetallic Al:Ni coatings and provision for acoustic oscillation of interleaved premagnetized magnetic recording strips (see Fig. 8). Strachan has, only in February 1994, and in preparation for a visit from overseas by interested corporate project engineers, documented the detailed constructional techniques of that first (and later third) prototype. This forms APPENDIX VI. Fabrication is very complicated and it is not suggested that the resulting devices did any more than prove that we have discovered an energy conversion principle that has very outstanding merit. The task ahead is to develop on the test findings of the much simplified second prototype. The Basic Principles and the Second Prototype: October 1989 This was the technology on which the multi-national patent filing was based, claiming the priorities of the 18th November and 5th December 1988. The principle is evident from the following diagram:
(a) Thermoelectric current flow: no transverse excitation
(b) Junction cooling on left with transverse up-current
(c) Junction heating on right with transverse down-current We are using a.c. with negligible I2R loss. The circulating current is that carried by heat flow (Thomson Effect - metals of opposite electrical polarity). (3) The dynamic a.c. current interruption increases the thermoelectric power enormously (avoids junction cold spot formation). At that time (October 1989), though the Nernst Effect was in mind and had been mentioned in connection with the disclosure in U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 and though nickel, a ferromagnetic substance, was one of the two metals in the test device, it was not then Note: (1) (2)
5 realised that the Nernst Effect might also play the key role in the functioning of that second prototype device. The October 1989 status is evident from the Test Report (APPENDIX IV). APPENDIX V provides a scientific analysis of the cold spot problem). The questions outstanding from those tests were: (1) What frequency could we reduce to and still get the high thermoelectric EMF? The cold spot theory implied that we could operate even below 1 kHz, but the capacitor coupling limited the transverse current and that suggested building a direct metal conductor coupling following contours of constant temperature - so as not to divert heat from the junctions. What thickness of metal film could we increase to whilst not losing efficiency? Note that the Thomson Effect circulation fixed the current that could flow transversely owing to the half-cycle cut-off. Which metal combination was optimum? What fabrication technique was best to ease manufacture and assure reliability? Why was it that we seemed to be getting more transverse current flow than the design capacitance of the stack implied from the voltages we measured?
(2) (3) (4) (5)
In the event, early in 1990, Strachan was obliged to abandon all work on the project and the development fell dormant. This was owing to business failure of the sponsors on an independent manufacturing venture but Strachan was then unable to demonstrate a working prototype and we were, in effect, then in a worse position than at our late-1988 start point. The 1991/1992 Scenario Not having the resources to set up an experimental programme myself, and especially as I had to sustain the costs of the patents I decided to publish in the hope of attracting interest from corporations. I had nothing to demonstrate. My effort to publish in the Journal of Applied Physics caused a referee to say 'publish but provided more detail is given as to actual construction of the device', but the Editor felt my amended paper did not go far enough in that respect and so that initiative failed. By year end 1991 I had an acceptance from a U.K. electronics magazine (the July 1992 article in Electronics and Wireless World) and had a paper scheduled for the 1992 International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference in San Diego. The publicity in U.K. attracted corporate interest, and Strachan then took the initiative and assembled the third prototype. The showing of that impressed a major U.K. company interested in new energy development and they provided new funding for Strachan for a period of 8 months.
6 I made sure that the demonstration was recorded on video and this has proved helpful in talks with interested parties. My personal objective concerning onward development has been to see the test device operate without reliance on the capacitor fabrication, either by an alternative conductive coupling between the bimetallic laminations or by magnetic inductive energy transfer, i.e. by intercepting the thermoelectric current by an inductive back EMF. By year-end 1992, after 4 months of the new funding, Strachan reported on a test whereby, given a temperature differential in the bimetallic lamination, the magnetic flux could be controlled at 20 kHz by an electric grid control. However, that research did not progress to his satisfaction and I have insufficient data for me to make sense of the outcome of the experiment. The funding for Strachan's research ceased at the end of April 1993.
9 The Aspden Experiment In September 1993 I decided to initiate my own small experiments, based on the approach I had been advocating, namely to build a magnetically inductive core system and feed in eddy-current heating to set up a temperature gradient in bimetallic laminations. The idea of this, regardless of application to refrigeration or power generation, was simply to have electrical control throughout the test and determine the relevance of the ferromagnetic property, metal thickness and excitation frequency. The outcome of the first experiment has been described in Energy Science Report No. 1 and further onward experiments will be described in Energy Science Report No. 3. However, some interesting problems have been encountered in the latter pursuit and the quest to operate in an all-metal high current mode with no dielectric laminations and capacitor drive, which is aimed mainly at solid-state electric power generation from input of heat at higher temperature than is normal where polymer dielectrics are used, may prove too demanding for this author's private research facilities. Accordingly, as a guide to readers interested in pursuing the alternative capacitor construction based on that simple Nernst Effect principle as mentioned on page 2, the following analysis is included. Capacitor Stack: Design Considerations Consider nickel film to have a thickness cm and the form of a 1 cm by 1 cm square. Assume a temperature difference of 1o C from one edge to the opposite edge and denote the specific thermal conductivity of nickel as K watt-cm2/oC which implies a throughput heat flow of K. This heat flow is heat input loss if we do not intercept the heat and deploy it into electrical output. The Nernst Effect has a coefficient for nickel which depends upon whether we use nickel I or nickel II, the latter being larger by a factor of nearly three. On the basis of the data of record from experiments by Zahn reported in Ann. der Phys. 14, 886 (1904) and 16, 149 (1905) on nickel we can reasonably assume that a 10 V per cm Nernst EMF is set up at right angles to the heat flow for each degree C temperature drop per cm. It follows that the heat flow can be intercepted and deployed into output electrical power if we can provide for a transverse flow of current I amps without there being heat flow in that same transverse direction, with I given by the equality of 10I and K. We see that the thickness makes no contribution to the heat to electricity conversion efficiency. This thickness of the nickel merely has to be small enough to assure the single
10 domain condition, say no greater than 50 to 200 microns depending upon the crystal size in the nickel. The task is to secure the equality of K and 10I, meaning that with the 1 degree C per cm gradient and K of the order of unity, I has to be 100 mA per sq. cm of capacitor area to get optimum operation. A higher temperature gradient requires a proportionally larger current flow. The design consideration then centres on the a.c. operating frequency and capacitance of the structure. If the dielectric thickness is of the order of 10 microns and the dielectric constant is 10, both of which are demanding design parameters, then a capacitance of the order of 1 nanofarad applies to the 1 cm. square nickel plate electrodes used and operation at about 16 kHz will give a current of 0.1 mA per volt. It would need 1,000 V across that 10 micron dielectric to give the 100 mA current requirement. This is voltage stress requirement is too high and, also, there is another problem governing the combination of design parameters. This is that, if the thickness of the nickel is so much greater than the thickness of the dielectric, then the current 'sees' more a flow through the main surface of a ferromagnetic film and less the transfer of distributed charge on the surfaces of a dielectric. This can make the current bunch up by a pinch action in that 'negative' resistance flow path through the metal and, to avoid this, the dielectric has to be thicker than the nickel. The design therefore proceeds by first deciding the operating limits on the voltage of a resonant capacitor stack using the inductance of the flow through the nickel in combination with the capacitance of the stack to determine that frequency. This sets the thickness of the dielectric. The nickel, if deposited on a substrate dielectric can be quite thin, say 5 microns, and it is this requirement for thin dielectric larger in thickness than the nickel, rather than the domain size factor, that obliges use of even thinner nickel films. Note that the target of a 100% energy conversion efficiency then will depend primarily upon the scope for increasing the electric breakdown strength of the dielectric used, assuming simple metal parallel plate capacitance. Alternatively, in order then to bring to bear a suitable combination of parameters that allow moderate voltage gradients in a dielectric whilst allowing the current throughput to be adequate at a reasonable frequency, the way forward is to incorporate in the design the technology of electrolytic capacitors. This, as this author sees the situation, is what Strachan did in building his prototype device using a PVDF polymer dielectric and it follows from this preamble discussion that those best able to develop the subject technology are those corporations who are already manufacturers of electrolytic capacitors. Given then that the Strachan device did perform as a cooling device and as a heat pump able to convert heat into electricity one sees the prospect of developing a thermal
11 electrolytic capacitor that will convert heat to electricity or serve as a Nernst Effect heat pump with no Carnot limitation on performance. The reason for this non-Carnot limitation is discussed in Energy Science Report No. 3, but it amounts to the observation that, with heat carried by electrons, the deflection of those electrons by a magnetic field occurs to bring them to thermal rest (effectively zero temperature K) as they transfer energy to the capacitor, followed by their recovery of heat by cooling the substance of their metal host. Carnot efficiency referenced on zero Kelvin is 100% as far as heat/electricity conversion is concerned. It then needs little imagination for any enterprising research organization to see that such technology, if proven in this particular respect, can provide a complete answer to the world's future energy needs in that, by arranging a conventional Carnot-limited heat pump in back-to-back operation with the Strachan-Aspden non-Carnot-limited heat pump, and deploying atmospheric sources of heat one can generate electricity. Hitherto the non-Carnot-limited conversion of heat into electricity has been elusive but it is possible in that it already occurs in practice in one half of a thermocouple circuit but there is there the concomitant requirement that the electricity has to close the circuit through the other thermocouple junction which makes the reverse conversion. All that this Report is suggesting here is that the evidence from the transverse-toheat-flow current excitation of a heated nickel-electrode capacitor shows how we can intercept the energy and make the non-Carnot-limited conversion without paying the full price of the reverse conversion at ambient temperature. The 'lower' temperature conversion occurs inside the metal as electrons are deprived transiently of their thermal energy. It occurs at positions in the metal where there is only one prevailing temperature. There is no way that Carnot criteria can apply unless there are two temperatures associated with that event and the only temperature that can differ from that prevailing in the metal is the temperature resulting when the electrons give up their thermal energy by being deflected into the charged condition at the interface surface of the nickel and the dielectric. That temperature has to be lower than the ambient temperature of the metal and the electron can only recover equilibrium and carry heat forward if it then takes heat away from the crystal body of the nickel. Given that the ferromagnetic plate electrode is the seat of the action associated with the Nernst Effect it may seem that there is no need to provide the bimetallic structure of the Strachan-Aspden embodiments. However, it is important to see that there is a two-fold benefit from the use of bimetallic laminations. Firstly, the second metal helps to spread the charge trapped at the interface between the metal and the dielectric and this allows it to participate more fully in the two-way oscillation of current flow. Secondly, the second metal brings to bear the Peltier Effect and this can help to sustain temperature gradients which activate the cooling. Note here that the first and third Strachan-built prototypes had an intrinsic design symmetry and an input current oscillation developed the cooling action with no input temperature gradient.
12 In other words, the use of bimetallic plate electrodes meant that the back-to-back action described above was at work in those devices. This Report, therefore, highlights the importance of the Strachan-Aspden invention and hopefully will serve to excite the interest of those corporations having the resources needed for its onward development. Energy Science Report No. 3 will be issued when this author has completed some further experiments and, in the meantime, some of the findings will be available in confidence to sponsors. The APPENDIX sequence which follows comprises items written at different times as this project evolved and there are a few published articles and papers that are not included owing to the length of this Report. It is believed, however, that what is described or identified in this Report will serve as a guide to would-be researchers who wish to become involved in this subject and should suffice as full information about the invention. The prospective importance of this technology is so great, having regard to the need to avoid the pollution problems of existing refrigeration and energy generation technology, that it is hoped that others will take this project forward on their own initiative. Should any such researcher make progress in this regard, leading to demonstrable devices confirming the viability of the technology, then, so long as this author has control of the patent rights involved there is scope for merging interests in a joint venture. So far as the availability of rights under the patents is concerned, enquiries from corporations are invited but no licence deals can be entered at this time as the object is to sell the patents outright as a total package, which means that licence dealings will be for the purchaser to determine. This does not preclude an immediate undertaking in the nature of an option by which some nominal funding will secure a would-be developer, who already commands the necessary research facilities, an interest in the rights whilst evaluating the invention based on prototype building and testing. Enquiries concerning the patent rights should be directed to me and enquiries concerning availability of Energy Science Reports should be directed to Sabberton Publications (see address below). 18th July 1994 DR. HAROLD ASPDEN c/o SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS, P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB, ENGLAND. FAX: Int+44-23-8076-9830. TEL: Int+44-23-8076-9361.
13 APPENDIX I Schedule of Patents Patent applications listed as 1-10 below all have the title: "Thermoelectric Energy Conversion" and all were filed naming H. Aspden and J. S. Strachan as co-inventors. Dr. Harold Aspden purchased from Strachan-Aspden Limited all rights in these applications on 12th January 1992. This company, registered in Scotland, was dissolved in July 1992, as it had become more expedient to operate from a company, Thermodynamics Limited, registered in England at Dr. Aspden's address. 1. U.K. Patent Application No.:8,826,952 Date of Filing: 18th November 1988 Grant as U.K. Patent No:2,225,161 2. U.K. Patent Application No.:8,828,307 Date of Filing:5th December 1988 [This served only as an international priority document for listed applications 3-4 & 6-10 below.] 3. U.K. Patent Application No.:8,920,580 Date of Filing:12th September 1989 Grant as U.K. Patent No:2,227,881 4. European Patent Appln. No.:89,311,559.2 Date of Filing:8th November 1989 Published Specification No:0369670 Countries designated: Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Spain, France United Kingdom, Italy, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Sweden [Presently pending] 5. U.S. Patent Application No.:07/429608 Date of Filing: 31st October 1989 Grant as U.S. Patent No:5,065,085 Date of Grant:12th November 1991 6. U.S. Patent Application No.:07/439,829 Date of Filing: 20th November 1989 Grant as U.S. Patent No:5,288,336 Date of Grant:22 February 1994
14 7. Japanese Patent Appln. No.:1-299481 Date of Filing: 17th November 1989 [Presently pending] 8. Canadian Patent Appln. No.:2,003,318-5 Date of Filing: 17th November 1989 [Presently pending] 9. Australian Pat. Appln. No.:44771/89 Date of Filing: 17th November 1989 Grant as Australian Pat. No:622,239 10. Eire Patent Appln. No.: 3677/89 Date of Filing: 17th November 1989 [Presently pending] ************ The following patent rights are currently in process. With the exception of the application identifying Thermodynamics Limited as applicant (sole inventor J. S. Strachan) all these are registered in the name of Dr. Harold Aspden as applicant and sole inventor. Dr. Aspden is empowered to negotiate rights under patents owned by Thermodynamics Limited. 11. U.K. Patent Application No:9,212,818 Date of Filing:17th June 1992 Published Specification No:2,267,995 [Presently pending] 12. U.K. Patent Application No:9,302,354 Date of Filing:6th February 1993 Applicant: Thermodynamics Ltd. [Presently pending] 13. U.S. Patent Application No:08/018281 Date of Filing:16th February 1993 [Presently pending] 14. U.K. Patent Application No:9,321,036 Date of Filing:12th October 1993 [Presently pending] The above is the status as at 18th July 1994.
17 APPENDIX II 'Solid-State Thermoelectric Refrigeration' [This is the text of a paper submitted to IECEC by H. Aspden and J. S. Strachan, a summary version of which was presented in person by Dr. H. Aspden at their 28th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference held in Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.A., August 8-13, 1993.]
This paper reports progress on the development of a new solid-state refrigeration technique using base metal combinations in a thermopile. Thermoelectric EMFs of 300 V per degree C are obtained from metal combinations such as Al:Ni, assembled in a thermopile of novel structure. By providing for thermally driven Thomson Effect current circulation in loop circuit paths parallel with the temperature gradient between two heat sinks and also for superimposed transverse current flow driven through a very low resistance path by Peltier Effect EMF, an extremely efficient refrigeration process results. With low temperature differentials, one implementation of the device operates at better than 70% of Carnot efficiency. It has the form of a small panel unit which operates in reversible mode, converting ice in a room temperature environment into an electrical power output and, conversely, with electrical input producing ice on one face of the panel while ejecting heat on the other face. An extremely beneficial feature from a design viewpoint is the fact that the transverse excitation is an A.C. excitation, which suits the high current and low voltage features of the thermopile assembled as a stack within the panel. A prototype demonstration device shows the extremely rapid speed at which ice forms, even when powered by a small electric battery, and, with the battery disconnected and replaced by an electric motor, how the ice thus formed melts to generate power driving the motor. The subject is one of the two innovative concepts which were the subject of the paper No. 929474 entitled "Electronic Heat Engine" included in volume 4 of the Proceedings of the 1992 27th IECEC. The technology to be described is seen as providing the needed answer to the CFC gas problem confronting refrigerator designers. From a conversion efficiency viewpoint this
18 device, which uses a solid-state panel containing no electronic components and a separate solid-state control unit which does contain electronic switch and transformer circuitry, outperforms conventional domestic refrigerators. Since it has no moving parts and contains no fluid, its fabrication and operational reliability promise to make this the dominant refrigeration technology of the future. However, the scientific research and development of the underlying principles have a compelling interest and pose an immediate challenge inasmuch as recent diagnostic testing has pointed to a feature inherent in the prototype implementation that has even greater promise for future energy conversion technology. This paper will address the subject in two parts. Firstly, the prototype will be described together with its performance data. Then, the ongoing development arising from the new discovery will be outlined. General Operating Principle The research was based on the use of a commercially available dielectric sheet substrate which had a surface layer of aluminium bonded to a PVDF polymer film by an intermediate layer of nickel. This gave basis for the idea of applying a temperature differential edge-to-edge to promote thermoelectric current circulation by differences in the Peltier EMFs at the opposite edges of the film. However, the nature of this material, which was intended for use in a piezoelectric application and so had a metal surface film on both faces, gave scope for crosswise A.C. excitation, as if it was a parallel plate capacitator. Of interest to our research was the question of how the transverse A.C. flow of current through the bimetallic plates would interact with the thermoelectric current circulation. Our finding was that the underlying D.C. current circulation which tapped into the heat source thermoelectrically was affected to an astounding degree once the A.C. excitation was applied. Whether we used frequencies of 500 kHz or 10 kHz, the thermoelectric Peltier EMF generated by the Al:Ni thermocouple was of the order of 300 V/oC, which was 20 times the value normally expected from D.C. current activation. It may be noted that, with the thermoelectric aspect in mind, the PVDF substrate film used was made to order, being specially coated with layers of nickel and aluminium to thicknesses of the order of 400 and 200 angstroms, respectively. This was intended to provide a better conductance matching for D.C. current flow in opposite directions in the two metals, it being optimum to design the test so that heat flow from the hot to the cold edges of the film would, by virtue of the Thomson Effect in these respectively electropositive and electronegative metals, suffice to convey equal currents in the two closed path sections without necessarily drawing on the tranversely-directed Peltier EMF action.
19 It was hoped that the latter would contribute to the A.C. power circuit by a push-pull oscillatory current effect whereby heat energy and A.C. electric energy would become mutually convertible. A full explanation of the commutating effect obtained by combining matched current flow of the transverse A.C. and the in-film circulating D.C. is given elsewhere (Aspden and Strachan, 1990 and, Aspden, 1992). However, Fig. 1 may suffice to represent schematically the functional operation. Fig. 1(a) shows how bimetallic capacitor plates separated by dielectric substrates are located between hot (T') and cold (T) panel surfaces with electrical connections at the sides of the panel. Some of the plates are floating electrically, being coupled capacitatively in series, whereas the connections linking an external circuit through an SCR oscillator switch circuit form a parallel-connected capacitor system.
Fig. 1. Thermoelectric Circuit Fig. 1(b) shows how D.C. current circulates in two bimetallic plates with a matching superimposed transverse A.C. current.
20 Fig. 1(c) applies when the A.C. current flow is in the upward direction. The point is that, in alternate half cycles of the A.C., the current flow operates to block the D.C. flow at one or other of the thermocouple junctions whilst segrating the Peltier heating and cooling on their respective sides of the panel. This has several very interesting consequences. Firstly, it is found that the Peltier EMF is directed into the A.C. circuit, which being transverse to the thin metal film, is a low resistance circuit with high but virtually loss-free capacitative impedance. Secondly, by diverting the electric power generated thermo-electrically, the D.C. current flow in the planes of the metal films was virtually exclusively that of heat-driven charge carriers. The current was sustained by the normal heat conduction loss through the metal and so did not detract from thermoelectric conversion efficiency by drawing upon the generated electric power. Thirdly, and most unexpectedly, it was found that the current interruption precluded the formation of what we termed 'cold spots' at the Peltier cooled junctions. These latter spots arise in any normal thermocouple owing to concentrations of cold by Peltier cooling in a way which escalates so that the junction crossing temperature of a current is very much lower than that of the external heat sink condition. This stifles the thermoelectric power in the D.C. thermocouple and it was our discovery that the cyclic interruption of the flow by the transverse excitation technique accounts for the transition to the very high 300 V/oC thermoelectric power. The latter has been observed consistently in all three prototypes built to date and in diagnostic test rigs using the Al:Ni metal combination. Fourthly, however, the eventual testing of operative devices, though performing overall within Carnot efficiency limitations, awakened special interest because there had to be something most unusual about the temperature profile through the device if the best performance measured was to be bounded by the Carnot condition. Our research is now casting light upon that latter aspect and may herald a major breakthrough in energy conversion technology generally. However, even without the latter, the technology as developed to date does already justify commercial application in refrigeration systems and that is the primary focus of this paper. Development History The project has been slow to progress from its inception. One of us, Edinburgh scientist, J. S. Strachan (formerly with Pennwalt Corporation) assembled the device as a small flat module with 500 layers of bimetallic coated PVDF film. It was formed in a 20 by 25 series-parallel connection array which was a design compromise to enhance the capacitor
21 plate area, whilst matching the A.C. excitation voltage and the current rating to the switching circuitry and dielectric properties of the PVDF. The device performed remarkably well when first tested, without requiring transitional stage-by-stage development to overcome problems. This had the effect of putting in our hands an invention which worked better than we had a right to expect but left us at the outset not knowing precisely how the different elements of the device were really contributing to the overall function. More important, however, though the thermoelectric operational section of the device was at the heart of the action, the implementation which used the PVDF dielectric and a capacitative circuit posed problems that were seen as formidable but yet were only peripheral to the real invention. There was also some doubt as to whether the properties of the PVDF had a direct role in the energy conversion. There was difficulty in planning in cost terms the onward scaling-up development, owing to the perceived problems of switching high currents at the necessary voltage level and frequency. Commercial pressures and the limited resources involved in what became a privately sponsored venture to develop the invention, combined with the barrier posed by the switch versus thermoelectric design conflict, halted R & D and led, sadly, to the project falling into a limbo state. This was until interest was aroused by the publication in the latter part of 1992 of the above-referenced 27th IECEC paper (Aspden, 1992) and by the article in Electronics World (Aspden 1992). Sponsorship interest in the R & D concerning heat-to-electricity power conversion has now revived, led also by a demonstration made possible by the building of a third prototype which incorporates 1,000 PVDF substrate thermocouple capacitor plates and which provides the following test data. Refrigeration Performance Data All three prototype devices built to date exhibited a remarkable energy conversion efficiency. They all operated with different switching techniques and different design frequencies. The first prototype was dual in operation in that it was bonded to a supporting roomtemperature heat sink block and the application of ice to its upper face resulted in the generation of electricity sufficient to spin an electric motor. Conversely, the connection of a low voltage battery supply to the device resulted in water on the upper surface freezing very rapidly. Had this first prototype been assembled the other way up it would have been easy to use calorimeter techniques and measure heat-electricity conversion in both operational modes. As it was, an attempt to chemically unbond the device from the heat sink resulted in corrosion damage which destroyed the device.
22 The second prototype was built, not for self-standing dual mode operation, but expressly to test the heat to electricity power generation efficiency with variable frequency. It was not self-oscillating and, as it did not function in refrigeration mode, it offered no test of refrigeration efficiency. It gave up to 73% of Carnot conversion efficiency in electric power generation with room temperature differentials of the order of 20o C. The recently constructed third prototype is superior in its electronic switching design and works well in both electric power generation and refrigeration modes. There is, however, a circumstance about its operation which means that, for this particular demonstration prototype, according to its intrinsic magnetic polarization state, it works more efficiently in one or other of its conversion functions. This particular third prototype operated with higher Carnot-related efficiency in the electric power generation mode than in the refrigeration mode. Also, for the same reasons, and an additional factor concerning the power drawn by the electronics and impedance matching internal load circuitry, the overall external efficiencies are very much lower than can be expected in a fully engineered product implementation. The refrigeration performance data presented below is, therefore, a worst-case situation and will, without question, be improved upon in the months following the date when this text is prepared. The device included an SCR switching circuit which was self-tuning and ran as an oscillator powered from electricity generated from melting ice in power generation mode or drawing on a battery supply in the refrigeration mode. However, the power taken up by this circuitry was factored into the overall performance, meaning that the thermoelectric core of the device had to be functioning at higher efficiency. Because the electric demands of the circuit were high in relation to the small demonstration thermoelectric core unit to which it was coupled. The active heat sink area of the device was about 20 sq. cm and a typical test involved a frozen block of 6 ml of water. A test performed after the lower heat sink had settled to a temperature of 25.6o C involved pressing the block of ice in a slightly melting state onto the upper heat sink with a polystyrene foam pad. The output voltage generated was fed to a 3 ohm load. It took 9 minutes for the ice to melt, during which time the measured output was a steady 0.67 V. These data show that a heat throughput of 3.7 watts generates electric power of 0.15 watts with temperatures for which Carnot efficiency is 8.6% This indicates performance overall of 47% of the Carnot value. It is noted that the 73% value obtained with the second prototype applies to a device which did not incorporate an oscillator demanding power but had simple electronic switching controlled by, and drawing negligible power from, an external function generator. To test the refrigeration mode, 3 ml of water was poured into a container on the upper surface of the device and a battery supply of 7.2 V fed to the SCR resonator with a limiting
23 resistor now switched into circuit to protect the SCR during its turn-off. This resistor reduced the efficiency further. The circuit drew 6.3 watts and the water froze in 73 seconds. Since convection was minimal the water closest to the surface froze first and this immediately formed an insulating barrier which would mean operation thereafter at a significant subzero temperature at that heat sink during most of those 73 seconds. However, the overall temperature difference ignoring that temperature drop in the ice was 26o C, associated with a cooling power of 13.7 watts for an electric power input of 6.3 watts. This represents a coefficient of performance of 2.17 or 21% of Carnot efficiency. Cooling action at below minus 40oC has been demonstrated. Based on such worst-case data, which neverthless applies to a simple solid-state device and compares well with the coefficient of performance data of domestic refrigerators, it can be assumed that the technology is capable of meeting production requirements of nonCFC refrigerators and domestic air conditioning equipment. Outlook following Breakthrough Discovery Diagnostic test work has proved that the device operation is independent from the piezoelectric or pyroelectric properties of the PVDF substrate used. Given that the action is truly that of the Peltier Effect, there should be current circulation in the bimetallic thin film productive of magnetic polarization. By detecting such polarization as a function of the applied temperature differential one can verify this situation. It is to be noted that our early research had shown that the thermoelectric EMF could, under certain circumstances, be greatly affected by the application of a magnetic field to the thermocouple junctions. Accordingly, the tests aimed at sensing thermoelectricallygenerated magnetic field effects had a particular significance. Furthermore, we had some interest in the Nernst Effect by which a temperature gradient in a metal in the x direction, with a magnetic polarizing field applied in the y direction can develop electric field action in the mutually orthogonal z direction. It has become, therefore, a subject of research interest to examine how a bimetallic interface subjected to a transverse magnetic field and a temperature gradient in the interface direction affects the circulation of thermoelectric current between the metals. What we have discovered that is of great importance to the development of the solidstate thermoelectric refrigerator is that the setting up of a temperature gradient in the bimetallic interface plane between two contiguous metal films will produce a magnetizing field which readily saturates the metal if ferromagnetic. Thus the nickel film in the prototypes tested becomes strongly magnetized in one or other direction according to the direction of the temperature gradient. When this magnetic field is considered in the context of the Nernst Effect it is seen that it can lead to a transversely directed EMF governed by the product of the temperature
24 gradient and the strength of the magnetic polarizing field. This tranversely directed EMF then contributes a bias active in the individual metal and, being in the same transverse direction, supplements or offsets the Peltier EMF in the prototype implementations. Remembering then that the heating and cooling actions in the operation of the prototype devices are governed by current flow in metal which is, adjacent the respective heat sinks, in line with or opposed to the action of an EMF, one can see how something new has appeared on the technology scene of thermoelectricity. By using heat to generate current circulation, which in turn generates a magnetic field to provide ferromagnetic polarization, a powerful Nernst EMF set up in the metal can act as a catalyst in supplementing the junction Peltier heat transfer action associated with EMF across a metal interface. This may well be the action which accounts for the very high thermoelectric conversion efficiency we have measured. In order to quantify this as it may apply to the prototypes we have built, note that a 400 angstrom thickness of well-magnetized nickel subjected to a temperature drop of 20oC across a metal length of 2.5 mm, implies a Nernst EMF of the order of 6 mV across the 0.04 micron nickel thickness. Though small, this is significant alongside the Peltier EMF across a junction, but the really important point is that this Nernst EMF is set up in the metal and not across a metal junction interface. In that metal, owing to the free-electron diamagnetic reaction currents within the nickel and around its boundary, which offset in some measure the atomic spinpolarization of the ferromagnet, there is then scope for some very unusual thermodynamic feedback effects. Those diamagnetic reaction currents which are themselves powered by the thermal energy of the electrons have a strength related to the magnetic polarization and so exceed, by far, the thermoelectric current flowing across junction interfaces. The heating and cooling processes transfer power between the heat sinks in proportion to current times voltage and the in-metal action within the nickel could therefore generate very significant thermal feedback, thereby greatly enhancing the efficiency well beyond that of the normal thermoelectric bimetallic junctions. This action only results where one of the metals is ferromagnetic and the configuration of the device is such that an applied temperature gradient promotes internal circulation of thermoelectric current around a closed circuit able to develop a magnetic field in the nickel directed transversely with respect to the temperature gradient. Conclusions The exciting prospect for future development of refrigeration techniques centres on the possibility that the feedback process can be greatly enhanced by using thicker metal films. It is hoped, therefore, that the research reported here will soon advance to probe the limits of efficiency that are possible with this new solid-state refrigeration technology.
25 In this connection the truly exciting prospect arises from the possibility that the efficiency barrier set by the Carnot criterion can be penetrated. To understand this, note that the Peltier EMF on the hot side of a thermocouple is proportional to the higher temperature T' and that at the cooler side is proportional to the lower temperature T. For a given current circulation the heat energy extracted is proportional to T and the net input of electrical power is proportional to T'-T. This is the reason why the coefficient of performance has a Carnot limit of T/(T'-T). Now, if there is a thermal feedback action that is regulated by a Nernst EMF and we can contrive to assure that the forward transfer of heat arises from a uniform temperature gradient in the ferromagnetic metal, then the Nernst EMF is the same on both sides and the amount of heating on the hot side is, in theory, exactly equal to the amount of cooling on the other side. There is conservation of energy with negligible net energy input but heat transfer from the cold to hot heat sinks and this implies a very high coefficient of performance not temperature-limited according to the Carnot requirement. This, therefore, is the challenging possibility that looms in sight and is heralded by the rather fortuitous discovery of the surprisingly high performance characteristics of the Strachan-Aspden base metal thermoelectric power converter. The Strachan-Aspden device uses what the inventors see as conventional physics, albeit with the innovation of combining transverse A.C. excitation with D.C. thermocouple excitation. However, it does seem that in some curious way the device happens to have features which bring some new physics to bear. By producing a thermally-driven current crossing a strong magnetic field in metal the Lorentz forces on that current develop a transverse reaction EMF in that metal. The combination of that transverse Nernst EMF with a circulating current confined within the metal can, it seems, operate to transfer heat thermodynamically, working through the underlying ferromagnetic induction coupling in the metal. This is somewhat analogous to the way heat energy is somehow diverted into electricity in being routed between the hot and cold heat sinks in a conventional Peltier thermocouple circuit. It does, however, introduce new physics to the technology of refrigeration and offers great promise. References Aspden, H.; Strachan, J. S., European Patent Application No. 0369670, 1990. Aspden, H., SAE Technical Paper Series No. 929474 1992. Aspden, H., Electronics World, July 1992, pp. 540-542.
26 APPENDIX III The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Operating Principles [October 1989 Report] The object of this Report is to merge a review of the status of the project at the time the primary research was abandoned in 1990 with an evaluation of the design options for taking the project forward. Appendix III, together with IV and V, comprise extracts taken from an earlier Report dated 23rd October 1989 and prepared when the project was most active. These provide background information. ********** INTRODUCTION Imagine a panel fitted like a sheet of glass into a window frame but serving as a silent solid-state heat engine which uses electricity to cool the room in summer and heat the room in winter with the high efficiency of a heat pump. Imagine the same panel fitted into a glazed enclosure designed to trap atmospheric radiation to develop a temperature difference across the inner and outer surfaces of the panel and using the trapped heat to produce electricity. The Strachan-Aspden invention provides the technology needed to fabricate such a panel and brings with it a quite interesting challenge. This challenge is a design problem. The task is that of deciding between a mode of construction that has been tested in prototype form or one that needs some research in advance of development but should prove superior from a commercial viewpoint. The task is to scale down an internal operating voltage and increase internal current flow coupled with conversion to a pulsed d.c. mode of operation rather than having a resonant circuit sustaining a.c. oscillations through the dielectric of a capacitor. The R & D activity had just begun to address this problem when the Scottish smallbusiness entrepreneurs who undertook initial development deserted the project as their other business ventures failed. This has meant that an invention which could make a major contribution in the effort to free the world from polluting energy technology became virtually dormant. The merit of the invention can be judged from one simple technical fact. Operating from a room temperature source of heat and melting ice the tested prototype device was able
27 to generate electricity at close to the Carnot efficiency limit by a technology utilizing the thermoelectric power of base metals at a rating equivalent to 20 kw electrical power output per kg of metal in circuit. In a non-developed hand-fabricated form, the device performed at 73% of Carnot efficiency. This is not optimum performance and is far from exploiting the full design potential. The invention opens up a wholly new field of technological opportunity. It arises from a major scientific breakthrough which involves a totally unexpected discovery. In original conception the invention aimed to use the properties of a dielectric film as a barrier to heat loss by thermal conduction and the bimetallic coating on the film as a thermocouple circuit to convert heat into electricity. In reality it was discovered that the transverse oscillatory current excitation of a thermoelectric circuit produced an astounding effect on the thermoelectric power of the base metal combination. 1989 RESEARCH PROGRESS REPORT [This section is copied from the 23rd October 1989 report] "The plan during 1989 was for Strachan to engage in detailed research and onward development of the technology involved with a view to consolidating the patent position by year end. The research phase has not been without its traumas, essentially for two reasons. Firstly, there was a set-back in that to perform certain tests on the prototype device aimed at measuring efficiency at an elevated temperature it had to be detached from its heat base. Secondly, in attempting this using a chemical solvent to separate two parts, the chemical found its way into the main structure which, lacking in foresight on this possibility, had not been sealed against such contamination. This upset its operation; it was a lesson learned, but at that stage a set-back to the development plan. It was not then possible, without rebuilding, to really get the full measure of the performance properties needed to comply with the initial programme. The question at issue was one of controlling temperature differential on a sustained basis with measured heat throughput rather than monitoring a small piece of ice as it melted by sucking heat from the environment, some of which was being intercepted to produce electricity in transit through the device. Even before this set-back many experiments on components were performed to test operative features in isolation, with the early recognition that something totally unexpected was involved. A very substantial increase in thermoelectric EMF per junction, far in excess of reference data indication, had been achieved thanks to the particular operating technique adopted in the prototype. However, in spite of these progressive steps, the onward development necessitated a firm measure of the minimal operating efficiency of the basic
28 device and, though the eventual products will be far easier to assemble, a small panel was made which closely conformed in design with the original but included certain modifications excluding what by then had come to be regarded as possibly non-essential features. This was a gamble, especially as the construction was very intricate and time-consuming when done by hand, with ongoing circuit tests during assembly to assure proper current distribution and unifomity of response. However, in the event, the device, once completed, did perform with equal or better results than the original version. Happily, in confirming the new design assumptions made during the first months of 1989, the tests on this second device proved to be a major step forward and justified the filing of a third patent application in September 1989. The second set-back proved how wise it was to have held back on early publication. The onward research investigations showed that what had been a primary design feature intended to block heat loss and so improve efficiency was not directly effective in that role, at least in the way we intended. Indeed, a fortuitous discovery had been made by proceeding on that assumption and the phenomenon involved had had the same effect, but not for the reason first believed. Instead of physically obstructing heat flow through the device, as had been intended, the operative technique actually converted almost all the heat into electricity before it reached the point of no return and so allowed very little to cross by thermal conduction and so escape as waste. It was only after this discovery was made and an understanding reached concerning the process involved that it became possible to begin to consider disclosing to the scientific community, not just what had been achieved, but why it works so well. This disclosure is being made now that the initial applications for foreign patent rights have been registered and the purpose is expressly to attract interest from those who have the resources to help in the development of this new energy technology. It is only by such shared action on an equitable commercial basis that the benefits of the Strachan-Aspden invention can make their full contribution in helping to reduce the world's energy pollution, whilst conserving the chemical qualities of fossil fuel resources for future generations." The above text, quoted from the 23rd October 1989 report was prepared as a confidential document. The sponsors used the report to try to attract investment in their overall business interests and shortly thereafter ceased to fund R & D on this invention. Apart from initial costs of overseas patent applications, the funding that had been provided had been mainly that needed as salary by Scott Strachan whilst involving him as a consultant on other projects. As yet, therefore, this important energy invention has not had the benefit of serious development funding.
29 The research effort up to October 1989 had concentrated on simplifying the assembly of a prototype test device using the bimetallic coated film which could also serve as a capacitor dielectric. The immediate objective was to measure the heat-to-electricity energy conversion efficiency and explore the design criteria involved. The inventors were, however, mindful that the principles of operation of the device did not really depend upon capacitative operation and the current limitation which that implied. It was deemed possible to extend the technology to structures which involved an all-metal through-circuit for electrical power and some plans were made for building such all-metal structures for bench testing. Had the research been active in 1990 this alternative would have been thoroughly tested so that a choice could have been made as to the best mode of implementation in a production assembly. It is noted that no formal product design proposal, with costing that could be used in a business plan, was drawn up in the 1989 period. Strachan was engaged on the preliminary functional testing to assess the performance and determine the optimum techniques and choice of materials. Without this information, one could not price either the market value of a product or its manufacturing cost. Even now, product costing is not really possible until the through-metal-circuit R & D investigations have been completed. The fact that a 20 kw rate of electrical power generation can be delivered by 1 kg of metal, drawing on a temperature differential of 20o C, is the best indicator that it must be possible to build an operational unit that can be costed low enough to justify a very large sales volume. The real question now concerns the best configuration of the metal used and the best choice of metals.
THE STRACHAN-ASPDEN INVENTION

[The section in quotes is copied from the 23rd October 1989 report]
The following is a technical description of the principles underlying the StrachanAspden invention written on the assumption that it would form the basis of a lecture by Harold Aspden to an audience who would later witness a demonstration of the operational device by Scott Strachan. "Before outlining the technical nature of our invention there is one very significant point that I think is worth registering at the outset. The test device on which our company was founded used the thermoelectric properties of contact between two base metals, aluminium and nickel, to produce electrical power from a low grade heat source. A temperature difference of 20 degrees relative to room temperature was sufficient to produce a steady power output of one fifth of a watt per cubic millimeter of metal in the thermocouple circuit. Scaled up, that is 20 kw per kg of metal. It did this with an efficiency that was well
30 above 50% of Carnot efficiency for this temperature range. This is as good as internal combustion engine performance where the fuel burns at more than 2,000 degrees. This is an invention which should have been made 50 years ago as part of the solution of the electronic age. As to the patentable merits of the invention, it has been said that even a simple invention can be judged highly if 'a long felt want' is satisfied. No one can deny that we need a breakthrough in the pollution-free energy field and what I have to disclose is not quite so simple. The device is essentially a flat panel that can be fitted like a window or used as a heat exchange interface in an engineered installation to convert heat energy into electricity or to use electricity to cool one face of the panel and heat the other face. It is simply a panel with an electric supply lead. All that there is between the two faces of the panel is a laminar structure of metal with some insulation, together with a small electrical transformer and an electronic control unit connected to the supply lead via a switch. What is special, however, and what causes this device to be a revolutionary breakthrough in energy technology, is governed by a combination of two special features. These we have called: (1) DYNAMIC EXCITATION FEATURE (2) TRANSVERSE COMMUTATION FEATURE There is also a third feature which has been used in the prototypes to enhance efficiency even further, but which will only be used in very special products. This is termed: (3) THIN FILM ENHANCEMENT Basically, we are talking about a thermoelectric system using either the Seebeck Effect or its converse, the Peltier Effect. By connecting different metals in an electrical circuit and positioning the respective junctions on the hot or cold side of the panel, the passage of D.C. current is related to the thermodynamic effects. Energy can be converted in this way, as is well known, but not, until now, with an efficiency that has such overwhelming implications in the field of energy technology. The thermocouple working in Seebeck mode operates to extract heat from one junction and inject heat at the other junction. The balance of energy is electrical in the sense that an EMF or voltage is set up at the cooled junction and this can deliver output power in the electrical circuit, provided it is smaller than the back EMF or reverse voltage at the heated junction.
31 In efficiency terms, the operation is governed by the fact that the heat absorbed or produced at a junction is proportional to the junction temperature measured on the absolute scale, that is referenced on -273 degrees centigrade. Therefore, if one junction is at -3 degrees centigrade (270 K) and the other at 27 degrees centigrade (300 K), we can produce 300 units of electricity from the cooling effect at the hot junction but have to give back 270 units of electricity by heating the cold junction. The net gain is electricity, in theory, could be 30 units of electricity for the price of a 270 unit thoughput or 300 unit input of heat energy for these low temperature conditions. These high numbers of heat energy units should not be regarded as energy waste. They relate to what is called 'enthalpy', which is a measure of heat content referenced on 273 degrees centigrade below zero and even ice has an enormous heat content on this basis of reference. What has just been described is the so-called Carnot efficiency. It is 10% for the 30 degree temperature differential considered. It works either way, in the sense that if electricity is supplied rather than produced, the input of 30 units of electricity can cause a transfer of 270 units of heat from the outside temperature source at -3 degrees and heat a room to 27 degrees. This is the Peltier mode of operation and it provides a tenfold gain on the use of the electricity in an electric heater, assuming full Carnot efficiency. Operating at 50% of Carnot efficiency, a 10 degree heating can be achieved with only 7% of the power needed by an electric convector or radiator. The reason we do not see such Peltier heat pumps used on a large scale for domestic heating or power generation purposes is, very simply, that it has not been possible to achieve an adequate level of performance relative to the Carnot limit. Technically, the obstacle has been the need to find materials which can be used to form thermoelectric junctions having a high Peltier coefficient. This is the factor relating the power conversion at a junction with the amount of current passing through. It is measured in millivolts at room temperature. The dilemma facing this technology is that if base metals such as copper, iron, aluminium etc are used to form junctions, the EMFs involved are very small. However, the electrical conductivity is good and this helps to reduce losses. Unfortunately, in such metals good electrical conductivity goes hand in hand with good thermal conductivity and then we lose heat by leakage through the metal circuit between the hot and cold junctions. For base metals this has been seen as a 'no win' situation, because efficiencies of the order of 1% of Carnot efficiency are representative of practical performance. For these reasons, the attentions of the last half-century have concentrated on special metals, alloys, and semi-metals or semi-conductors. The price paid for accepting poor electrical conductivity of perhaps one thousandth that of copper has been rewarded by a much reduced thermal conductivity and a very much increased thermoelectric power. The EMF involved is typically in excess of 200 microvolts per degree with a Peltier coefficient
32 of 60 millivolts at room temperature. Such devices are useful for special applications, where small current throughput and low efficiency are of no consequence, but their general use as Peltier heat pumps or electric power generators has been limited. A typical state-of-the-art power generator using junction materials formed from alloys of bismuth, tellurium, selenium and antimony has a design specification that recognizes a maximum operating efficiency of 22% of Carnot when opeating with a high temperature differential of 300 degrees using a source at 600 K. The electric power produced, assuming perfect accord with the design specification, is of the order of 0.1 kw per kg of metal used to form the thermoelectric junctions. Practical applications depend upon the energy throughput rate as well as efficiency and what is being offered by the Strachan-Aspden technique is so far ahead of state-of-art technology on both these counts that one must wonder how the technology could have gone so far adrift in missing the real potential of the Seebeck effect. Some words from the book 'Direct Energy Conversion' by Professor Stanley Angrist bear upon this: "At the time of Seebeck's work, the only devices available for producing electric current were extremely weak electrostatic generators. Fifty years passed before steam engines drove electromagnetic generators. It was, undoubtedly, electromagnetism that caused succeeding generations of physicists and engineers to lose interest in the curious effects of thermo-electricity. The only widespread use of the effect was in the measurement of temperatures by means of thermocouples. It is difficult to say how the history of electrical engineering and electronics would have developed had Seebeck's discovery been widely employed." Those researching this field today seem to have been attracted by the empirical discovery of new materials and have gone astray in not researching the basic question why metal junctions have such low thermoelectric power. This is very curious, bearing in mind that classical thermodynamics theory tells us that the theoretical power of base metal combinations is of the same order as that of these special materials. I must admit, however, that though, with hindsight, we can bring this problem into focus, we did discover the solution only when we were performing diagnostic tests on our principal prototype. In short, we had built something that worked too well and we were wondering why. The point rests on the question of whether the metal used increases in electrical conductivity or decreases in conductivity as temperature increases over the operating range. In base metals conductivity decreases with increase in temperature. This means that at the
33 cooled junction the decrease in temperature improves conductivity. Now, if the electric current flowing through the junction is uniformly distributed this will simply mean that the junction has a uniform cooling across its interface. However, if, as occurs in electrical discharges in gases, the flow tends to be in short-lived filamentary surges, there is the real possibility that a current could develop a non-unifom pattern of cooling. A current flow concentrated at one position would form a 'cold spot' in the junction interface. The electrical conductivity there would increase and so the current would favour that path of least resistance and become locked on the cold spot. This could drive the temperature so low that the effective temperature governing Carnot efficiency is not what we see from the external actions. In other words, owing to the increase in electrical conductivity with drop in temperature, the thermoelectric power falls far below the theoretical potential of the metal junction. There is therefore an enormous loss of efficiency when base metals are used in thermocouples in what has been conventional technology. Why does this not affect the special materials as well? The answer is tha such materials do not have the same temperature characteristics. The p-type alloy bismuthtelluride (25%) with antimony-telluride (75%), and n-type alloy bismuth-telluride (75%) with bismuth selenide (25%) have, for example, electrical conductivities which reduce the temperature if operated above 300oC. Such a temperature characteristic means that cold spots cannot form. Therefore, if we want to use base metals, with high energy throughput, the only way we can hope to get high efficiency is by somehow preventing the cold spots from forming in these materials. This is exactly what we achieve by the DYNAMIC EXCITATION FEATURE. Its effect is to increase the thermoelectric power of an aluminium-nickel couple from 17 microvolts per degree to a value well in excess of 300 microvolts per degree. Since this factor operates as a squared effect, because it drives proportionally more current and puts proportionally more voltage behind it, the electric power becomes hundreds of times greater than expected on conventional design criteria. This, therefore, is a major advance because it allows us to use basic metals with high capacity for delivering current, rather than expensive compositions with very limited energy throughput capacity. What is the DYNAMIC EXCITATION FEATURE? In simple terms, this is a technique by which, instead of causing a steady D.C. current flow through the junctions, we interrupt the flow several thousand times per second in such a way that the current flow through the cooled junction relocates rapidly and before the non-uniform temperature or cold spot condition can develop. The advantage is that we get the kind of thermoelectric power (i.e. voltage) from aluminium-nickel junctions that is available from bismuth-telluride, but, for comparable dimensions, the higher electrical conductivity of the base metal device allows more than one
34 hundred times as much active power (wattage) to pass through. This takes us well forward technologically, but the TRANSVERSE COMMUTATION FEATURE which will now be described advances performance even further, so far in fact that we can trim back our design objectives on efficiency to simplify the manufacture and so reduce the cost of this technology. The conventional design of a thermoelectric device involves having two distinct junctions between the two metals, one junction being at a higher temperature than the other. The metal between the junctions merely serves as a conduit for electric current and, unfortunately, provides a channel for heat loss by thermal conduction from the hot to the cold junction. Rather than trying to develop special materials which facilitate flow of electric current but obstruct heat flow, we followed another route. We also had in mind that a really good commercial device could hardly take in heat and produce electricity if the materials were not good conductors of heat. After all, the heat has to get into the device before it can be deployed into electrical form. Our device uses two metal layers which interface over the whole distance from the hot side to the cold side. We then set up a thermoelectric current which it drives around the closed circuit formed by the interfacing metal layers. We accept the full measure of heat conduction through the metal by allowing it to travel through the full length of the metal layers. However, note that the route taken by the heat is never further away from a junction interface than the thickness of a metal layer. This means that the heat has repeated opportunity to be effective in generating electric power as it progresses along the junction interface. This is a feature vital to success. Unlike the conventional themopile where, once clear of the hot junction, the heat travels to the cold junction to be dissipated, we ensure that it has repeated 'bites of the cherry', as it were, en route to that destination, with the effect that very little even reaches the point midway where the current flow reverses. By 'reversal' is meant flow from metal B to metal A, whereas initially it was flowing from metal A to metal B. This feature has a remarkable effect on efficiency because virtually all the heat supplied is converted into electricity. The $64,000 question, however, is how we intercept the electrical energy flow around the closed loop circuit formed by the two contacting metal layers and so gain access to that electricity before it is all dumped back into heat over the interface area where the thermoelectric current flow reverses. This is where the 'transverse' excitation aspect of our invention holds the key to a successful energy converter. As can be seen from Fig. 1, we stack bimetallic layer upon bimetallic layer to build a stack between a hot surface and a cold surface and the external current flow involves a transverse current flow through the whole stack.
35
Fig. 1 The point then to keep in mind is that at the interface between the two metals forming each layer there is a thermodynamic effect causing a voltage to act from metal A towards metal B and this voltage varies across the layer according to the local temperature. It is greater, the higher the temperature. Because of this there is an imbalance of voltage from point to point in the heat flow direction across the contact interface in each layer when a temperature differential exists between the side faces of the stack. This imbalance causes current circulation in the sense shown in Fig. 2, where one layer is presented in enlarged form.
Fig. 2 All this does is to cool one side and heat the other, with the result that the metal conducts heat from the hot side to the cold side. However, now suppose that we provide a channel for transverse current flow up or down the stack. This means current flows transverse to heat flow but, in this layered arrangement, it augments or opposes the thermoelectric current as it traverses a junction, depending upon the direction of flow of the transverse current. The channel for this transverse current is assured if there is good interface contact between all metal layers in a stack formed by metals A, B, A, B, A, B etc in sequence. Owing to the symmetry of the system a current travelling right in metal B will have to overcome the same potential barrier or back EMF at the cold junction whether it goes up or down the stack. However, we cannot have some contributing to tranverse current flow by going up the stack in one part and elsewhere having some going down the stack. Either the current all goes up or all goes down or there is no transverse current flow at all and the thermoelectric current flow is everywhere confined to its own bimetallic layer. The current will take the path of least resistance, or will it? If there is an external resistive load connected in the transverse current flow path, then the easier route for current will be the closed circuital track shown in Fig. 2. Some small amount of current should flow either up or down the stack, because the external circuit offers a supplementary route for
36 current. However, this will not give us scope for causing cyclic interruption of the primary junction current, nor will it give access to any real power output. Indeed, without the dynamic excitation, the voltage driving the circuital current in Fig. 2 is very low. Nevertheless, the circuit is a bistable system and how it behaves when relying solely on the thermoelectric voltage produced by the heat input is not the same as its response when a voltage surge up or down the stack governs the action. Given a trigger effect which causes a transverse current surge up or down the stack, the junction current can be interrupted by a fast cycling switch in the external circuit and, once this happens, the full high powered thermoelectric action comes into effect, but this is a condition only effective if the transverse current is strong enough to exceed the normal steady state junction current. Given some intrinsic inductance or capacitance to sustain transverse voltages which carry the action through the zero current transient states, the device can become locked into the dynamic excitation mode to deliver an electrical current powered by the full thermoelectric action. In this mode the current flow is represented by the snaking flow shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3 The device actually works and exhibits extremely high efficiency in converting heat energy into electrical power output. Indeed, the capacitative versions of the device which have been constructed use bimetallic layers less than 0.1 micron in thickness (one micron is a millionth of a meter) and 300 such layers of one square cm area interleaved with 28 micron thick dielectric could generate 300 milliwatts of electrical power using just over one calorie per second of heat input at 40 degrees Centigrade and output at 20 degrees. This is quite remarkable, bearing in mind that even these temperatures and their differentials are so low. It is even more remarkable when one realises that the power generated is at a rate in excess of 20 kilowatts per kilogram of metal used to form the thermoelectric circuits. This capacitative device does, however, make use of the enhanced electrical conductivity of thin films, which accounts for the very high efficiency obtained. To bring the design parameters into perspective it is useful to consider a formula for the figure of merit Z normally applied to thermoelectric systems. This is presented in Fig. 4.
37 Z ' 2/K
FIGURE OF MERIT Z TRANSVERSE COMMUTATION FACTOR THERMOELECTRIC POWER (VOLTS/DEGREE) SPECIFIC ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY (MHO-CM) THIN FILM ENHANCEMENT FACTOR THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY (WATT-CM) K
Fig. 4 This formula, when multiplied by the operating temperature, in absolute degrees Kelvin (say, 300 at room temperature) is a measure of the potential electric power generated as a ratio of the heat conducted from the hot junction to the cold junction and so wasted. This assumes operation with a low temperature differential and allowance has to be made for the duality of the metal paths, which are in parallel for heat flow and in series for electrical current flow. This tends to reduce the ratio by a factor of 4. Also, the potential electric power output depends upon the load resistance as related to the intenal resistance of the device. All in all, therefore, to build a viable thermoelectric power converter the Seebeck coefficient has to be as high as possible. The Strachan-Aspden devices tested so far are offering values in excess of 300 microvolts per degree centigrade using base metals for which the bulk specific electrical conductivity is in excess of 100,000 mho-cm and the specific thermal conductivity about 2 watt-cm. On these figures, at the temperature of 300K, the formula gives near unity ratio of electrical power to thermal power lost. However, the Strachan-Aspden technique earns its qualities by virtue of the factor and also the factor . These are the coefficients representing the effects of the transverse commutation feature and the thin film feature, respectively. Each of these factors is a unit of magnitude giving ten-fold benefit. The electrical conductivity of a thin film of a few hundredths of a micron thickness can be more than 10 times greater than the bulk value. Such film was used in the main prototypes tested. We did not measure the factor , because the bimetallic thin film material was available commercially with a rated electrical resistivity of 0.1 ohm per square. It comprised thin film layers of aluminium of 0.02 micron thickness and nickel of 0.04 micron thickness. Knowing the bulk values of as given by reference books, the value of was estimated as being about 10 from these data. Concerning the factor , this represents the repeated 'bites at the cherry' effect as heat gets repeated opportunity to convert into electricity as it is conducted into the device. For conventional thermocouples where the temperature drop between junctions is linear, is
38 unity. However, we had a system in which the temperature was changing much as depicted in Fig. 5.
Fig. 5 The dotted line represents the linear temperature profile and the curve the profile we are exploiting. is a measure of the conventional temperature gradient of the dotted line as a ratio to the minimal temperature gradient midway between the junctions. The latter is a measure of the heat energy going to waste and the much larger gradient of the full curve at the hot junction is a measure of the heat energy entering the device before conversion into electricity. Because the midway gradient is much lower than the linear case, we have a high factor and because it is very much lower than the input temperature gradient we have a very efficient device capable of taking in far more heat than a conventional device. I believe that I have said enough to outline why the Strachan-Aspden thermoelectric power converter works so well. The ongoing research relates to how far we can compromise on the thin film factor with a view to using thick metal layers and relying exclusively on the factor of the transverse commutation feature. Unquestionably, our primary products will use the dynamic excitation feature to get the advantages of power from base metals, but we foresee also the use of special metals as well, coupled with designs based on the factor. I should like to end by describing how, even before we filed our first patent application or got involved commercially, we got a measure of the factor applicable to our first demonstration device. Very simply, we had built a small panel having metal faces and layers of thin metal film rnning from face to face but embedded in an insulating dielectric. Looked at in the direction of heat flow, the metal and dielectric were side-by-side, with the metal presenting a cross-section amounting to about one five hundredth of that of the insulator. Such a device, therefore, was not, in thermal conductivity terms, a through-metal conductor. To get a measure of its properties, we put an ice cube of standard size on the upper metal face and attached the lower face to a commercial heat sink base at room temperature. The ice melted, partly by heat absorbed by air convection from above, partly by heat loss by thermal conduction through the intervening insulation and partly by heat conduction through the metal. It took in excess of 20 minutes to melt completely. This was with the output leads from the device unconnected, that is, on open circuit. I knew from a test at home that such an ice cube on a metal work surface took about 5 minutes to melt and took 30 minutes on a Formica-topped kitchen table. The point of interest then was that when the
39 same sized ice cube was used on the device with the output leads connected to an electric motor or a resistor load, the time of melting reduced to between 3 and 5 minutes. The motor stopped running, of course, soon after the ice had completely melted, but the message from these very simple measurements was clear testimony of a very high internal efficiency in the generation of electricity from heat. There being no independent electrical power supplied to the device and the ice being the only perturbing influence, the connection of the electrical load had diverted more than 80% of the heat energy around the wired load circuit and this was via a capacitance. That 80% and more of power was electrical power and most of the other 20% of heat conduction was seemingly unnecessary loss because much of it was due to extraneous convection or heat conduction through what was unnecessarily thick dielectric insulation. It was from such a very simple test that we knew the factor had to be 10 or more, but we were carried along by that empirical performance and, may I say, that was so high that, for a time until we could make more precise measurements, mainly of temperature, we thought we had achieved the impossible, by going above 100% of Carnot efficiency. As it is today, in our best performing thin film prototypes we still have difficulty measuring just how close we are to the ultimate Carnot efficiency. Concerning thick film designs, which do not have the high thin film conductivity feature, our research is progressing in sustaining the themoelectric voltages achieved by the DYNAMIC EXCITATION FEATURE and exploiting the gain by the use of the TRANSVERSE COMMUTATION FEATURE." ********** Concerning the latter comment about thick films, this was a theme which this author (H. Aspden) urged at the time (October 1989), but this was shortly before the R & D funding ceased and the test facilities closed when the other business interests of the sponsors failed. This author did, independently, seek to experiment with a small test unit in which thin nickel plates plated on both sides with copper were bonded into an integral assembly for resistance testing. It did not function as hoped when subjected to a small temperature differential. However, this was a first attempt at a time when thoughts were on the collapsing sponsorship and it later became evident that the test external circuit facility used lacked the necessary current capacity to cope with current oscillations at the requisite frequency and strength.
40 The test apparatus used was also unable to sustain a significant temperature gradient in the metal owing to metal thickness being too large and it had, at the time not occurred to this author that it would have been better to drive a moderate current oscillation through the structure and look for a cooling effect attributable to the Nernst action. Evenso, in this latter regard, the nickel sheet material used in these experiments would, with its copper plating, have posed the same problem that has now (1994) been encountered in a much larger test device, namely the fact that a multiple bimetallic interface in a series circuit can, without an initial temperature gradient to prime the action, avoid the Thomson Effect current diversion and thereby generate junction heating that is not segregated from the Peltier cooling. The author's current research which will be described in Energy Science Report No. 3 is now directed along a track which aims to overcome these particular problems in an effort to avoid transverse current excitation through a dielectric medium whilst constraining heat flow to be transverse to the current and EMF attributable to the Nernst Effect.
41 APPENDIX IV
The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Test Results [October 1989 Report] This report is a copy of the TEST REPORT presenting the status of the Strachan-Aspden Energy Converter project on 19th October 1989, as included in the 23rd October 1989 document. Introduction The device tested was built expressly to verify design criteria, essentially to check that we were right in eliminating certain design features present in the first demonstration device. The tests confirm our theoretical assumptions. In order not to alter too much in this stage of development, the same commercial bimetallic coated dielectric was used and the same physical dimensions of the thermocouple junction interfaces. These are not optimum, particularly concerning thickness of metal layers and possibly concerning choice of the actual metal combination as well as the length dimension between the thermal surfaces. However, whereas the operating frequency was 500 kHz with the first device, the present device runs at 18 - 25 kHz, depending upon load and voltage output rating. Such frequencies impose design constraints, which will not be a problem if we can build a noncapacitative device now predicted as a possibility using the verified design principles. The primary objective of the tests reported here is not to see whether the efficiency of the device assures its commercial viability as it stands, because we can certainly design to achieve a far better power rating and a simplified technique of fabrication. The objective is to measure the efficiency of the device for operation over a moderate range of ambient temperature, with atmospheric, geothermal and waste heat in mind as energy sources. The measure of efficiency and study of factors affecting efficiency are vital to projecting commercial applications and designing products for manufacture, especially concerning the Peltier mode for refrigeration and cooling and also for conjecturing products which store electrical energy as heat and regenerate electricity. The use of plastic film as a substrate for the bimetallic layers has limited the temperature range of the particular device
42 tested. Also, owing to the specific form of the electronic switch system built for the device, tests in the refrigeration (Peltier) mode did not prove viable for reasons in no way related to the device structure and measurements of efficiency of Peltier mode operation have been deferred. An overall performance figure, allowing for all circuit losses and output voltage transformation, which can be relied upon for conversion of heat to electricity with temperature differentials as low as 10 to 30 degrees Centigrade is 70% of Carnot efficiency. The Structure of the Test Device The device is constructed from 300 layers of 28 micron thick high dielectric constant plastic film as a substrate for sputtered junctions of two layers of metal, nickel and aluminium. Each layer had a width of 3 cm and a length of 0.25 cm, the width dimension and edge forming the surface interfacing with the heat exchange surfaces. The aluminium film was 0.02 micron thick and the nickel film 0.04 micron thick. These 300 layers therefore defined 300 junctions each having exposure to a hot and a cold face of the panel form of the assembled device. These were divided into 20 groups of 15, each group comprising 3 sub-groups of 5 layers. Each such sub-group is bounded by a layer of copper as an electrode for wiring the device into the chosen series/parallel configuration. Thus, in effect, there were 15 layers stacked to form a series capacitor unit and 20 such units were wired together to form a parallel connection of the capacitor units, ultimately having connection to an external circuit by two supply wires. The copper electrodes were narrower than the junction length to reduce their thermal conduction contribution to the heat path. The entire stack of 300 junction layers was bonded on to a ceramic powder composition base to give good heat coupling but to ensure electrical insulation from the heat sink base an upper aluminium sheet was bonded by an electrical insulating heat sink compound to the upper surface of the stack to form the other external heat surface. When a temperature differential is set up between these external heat surfaces there is a thermoelectric charging of each junction which contributes to the energy storage in the capacitor stack. Indeed, as a function of the temperature differential, the capacitor so formed has a greater effective capacitance than would be expected purely from calculation based on the dielectric constant and dimensions of the assembly. Typically, the capacitance can be of the order of 1.5 microfarad for this very compact assembly. The thermoelectric current acts to sustain the recharging of the stack as it is systematically charged and discharged by a fast operating switch unit. For the test to be
43 described this unit comprised five electronically controlled switches operating in parallel expressly to ensure that there is a minimal loss of electric potential, inasmuch as the EMF of a mere 15 junctions was being switched. The control of this switch bank involved a frequency generator input of negligible power. Note that it was a specific feature of the first prototype test device that it included a self-activated oscillator for switch control powered by the electric signal generated by the device. The action involved, therefore, can be seen as one involving deploying thermoelectric power into the charging of the capacitor stack and then, as fast as possible having regard to the recharging speed, transferring the stored energy to an output circuit by a cyclic switching operation. Subject to the capacitative delays and charge storage aspects, the action can also be seen as one involving circulating thermoelectric currents in the bimetallic layers with a superimposed transverse current flow through the capacitor. A high Q transformer winding is intermittently connected to the stack via the switches. This presents a low impedance into which the capacitor stack drops its thermoelectrically acquired charge. The secondary winding of the transformer then transforms the resulting voltage to a value which matches well with the load, both to give suitable measurement voltages and also to ensure that the load seen by the stack has a sufficiently low impedance to draw out the charge quickly. Note that the device has its own internal resistance and the load resistance has to draw most of the power. Measurement Criteria The device tested is a flat square metal-faced unit which has a pair of electrical input/output leads. Given a temperature differential across its metal faces an electrical power output is available. In terms of the heat input, this electrical output depends (a) upon the internal design structure of the device (which cannot be varied as part of the test) and (b) upon the manner in which the load circuit is electronically controlled. The latter control, though as just described working successively to charge and discharge the capacitor form of the device, also implements what we term 'dynamic current excitation' and this greatly enhances the power output. The A.C. power supplied is converted to D.C. and smoothed for measurement. The performance depends upon matching the load with the device to secure optimum output. Basically the test to be reported is very simple. By feeding in a sustained amount of heat, controlled by electrically powering a small resistor in a liquid heat bath, the task is to reconvert some of that heat back into electricity as D.C. in an output load at a steady voltage and current. This will give basis for precision tests on power in and power out, but to assess the result obtained it is important to have a very good measure of the temperatures of the two metal faces. The temperature measurement poses problems, because, firstly, we must beware
44 of any non-uniformity of temperature across the operative surfaces and, secondly, we must know the extent, if any, of any interference caused by the measuring device or probe. Earlier test results had been clouded by the problem that the bounding 1 mm thick aluminium plate was not able to buffer the heat distribution to assure a uniform temperature, given a concentrated heat source (electrically energized carbon resistors) on the external face. For this reason the initial measurements on the device described, which were unreliable in ranging from 50% to 100% of Carnot efficiency, according to test conditions, have been repeated using a stainless steel can containing water heated internally by a chain of four 10 ohm resistors. This can was specially built with a flat lower surface able to interface well with the heat surface of the device and was mounted thereon using heat conducting paste. Also, the whole structure was housed in a close fitting heat insulating container. The temperature measurements involved calibrated platinum resistance probes registered by a digital voltmeter and were from time to time confirmed with an alcohol thermometer. Peripheral Test Information It was not part of the test reported here to repeat certain experiments that were made in the earlier development stages. Nor could we measure directly the thermoelectric EMFs in the sections of the stack built into the device. During construction it was part of the discipline of the assembly procedure to test each part-assembly of five junction layers to verify insulation and be sure that it was performing with the power of 2 millivolts per degree Centigrade when subjected to dynamic excitation. Any that did not match the uniformity requirements were rejected. However, as will be seen, the test data do tell us that this thermoelectric EMF is at work in the operating device because the output EMF from a stack is measured and the voltage at the output terminals is roughly equal to the internally produced thermoelectric EMF times the measured efficiency relative to the Carnot limit. This also means that the current output as a measure of junction current relates by this total thermal power to the potentials active at the junctions and so gives a measure of the thermoelectric power in the device. This thermoelectric power is the crucial factor in our onward design of any products. It was 400 microvolts per degree Centigrade per junction pair in the above device and this applied to the thin film (0.02 micron aluminium on 0.04 micron nickel) assembly. The two metals had no intervening metal; they were vapour deposited. In contrast, earlier tests had shown that a stack of metal plates of iron and nickel of sub-millimeter thickness with
45 soldered junctions gave a thermoelectric power per junction of 118 microvolts per degree centigrade with dynamic current excitation. Given that we can reasonably expect iron and aluminium to present similar thermoelectric action when forming junctions with nickel, the question we need to resolve is whether that gap between 118 microvolts and 400 microvolts is due to the thin film aspect in the vapour deposited case or the adverse effect of the intermediate solder in the thick film test case. The most important test data of interest, therefore, at this time and before products are designed and manufacture evaluated, are (a) the actual efficiency for limited ambient temperature use of the device already constructed, and (b) the thermoelectric power of a thick metal junction assembly with no solder connections. This report addresses the first of these issues and the next report will deal with our findings on the other question. The onward test programme must relate to the factors such as optimum film thickness and dielectric thickness in the vapour-deposited/capacitor system or thickness of a thick film version, optimum electronic design and excitation frequency as well as waveform profiles, choice of metals, structural dimensions (panel thickness) and electrical insulation/heat conducting spacing material at the interface of the external metal surfaces and the junction assembly. The Test Data These tests were performed independently by Scott Strachan and Harold Aspden during different periods in October 1989. The Strachan tests were performed between 10th October and 12th October. The test results obtained by Aspden on 17th and 18th are those listed in Tables II and IV. The test apparatus is as shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1
46 Application of heat energy is via the medium of heated (or cooled) water in a container on the upper heat exchange surface and use of a commercial heat sink base at room temperature replicated conditions which would apply to production devices. The cold underside can be considered to be at an even temperature because it is mounted on a massive heat sink with a recognized high heat dissipation capacity. The water heat sink provided a uniform temperature interface and this temperature was measured by a commercial platinum resistance temperature probe calibrated to give a measure of temperature via a digital voltmeter. A similar and separate heat probe was used to measure the temperature on the surface of the base heat sink. Owing to heat transfer through the device, albeit mainly via the electrical conversion route, as Peltier cooling occurs at one face and Peltier heating at the other, it is inevitable that the actual temperatures at the working interfaces of the device will be slightly lower than the hot temperature measured and slightly hotter than the cold temperature measured. This means that the true efficiency relative to Carnot will be just a little greater than that calculated using the measured temperatures. No allowance is made for this in the test data, because the temperature drops involved would be present in an engineered installation and so the test results give an overall measure of effective efficiency which can be regarded as representative of commercial conditions. Preliminary Tests The following tests were conducted under steady-state conditions, that is, the rate of heat input was pre-set and temperature readings as well as electrical power output readings were made only after the system had stabilized. TABLE I
TEST No. 1 2 3 4 5 HEAT INPUT Volts Amps Watts 6.64 9.16 0.179 0.244 OUTPUT TO 1 OHM Volts Watts TEMPERATURE EFF. T' 33.8 40.4 47.5 53.4 62.2 T 20.0 20.6 20.8 21.0 23.0 % 30 56 73 64 44
1.19 0.125 0.016 2.23 0.280 0.079 3.34 0.450 0.202 4.25 0.520 0.270
11.22 0.298 12.60 0.337
19.00 0.530 10.07 0.720 0.518
**************
The above readings were the first set of readings to be made on the device under proper laboratory test conditions using electronic test circuitry that was designed to operate
47 essentially with power output voltage above 0.3 volts, which is a nominal threshold for effective operation of the germanium diodes used to rectify an A.C. output. For this reason, attention centres on tests No. 3 and 4. Concerning test No. 5, this fell short in measuring true efficiency for reasons to be discussed below, owing to a heat dissipation problem which set in above 55 degrees Centigrade and upset the measurement on the input side. Immediately, however, one can verify the design assumptions by considering the ideal 100% of Carnot condition if applied to test No. 3. This would require all the heat energy input at the hot side to convert to electric power given by Ni, Where N is the number of junctions (300), is the Peltier coefficient and is the temperature of the hot junction in Kelvin (320). With as 400 microvolts per degree, this gives an input power of (38.4)i watts. Now, i is the junction current and we regard this also as external current, subject to allowance for the series/parallel junction combination and the transformer ratio. In effect, therefore, the 100% of Carnot situation can only occur if the heat power supplied at 320K is precisely such that it is 3.34 watts, which corresponds to a junction current of 87 milliamps. This flows in each of 20 parallel circuits to suggest a total current of 1.74 amps would suffice to carry all the heat input through as electricity. This checks with the measured current of 0.450 amps if allowance is made for the 5:1 transformer ratio. In fact, this measure is 2.25 amps compared with 1.74 amps needed for 100% efficiency and this is 77% agreement (cf. the 73% of Carnot efficiency measured). This is very good agreement, also bearing in mind that the 400 V/K thermoelectric power can be effectively diminished by parasitic current flow owing to the 20 parallel-connected circuits in the device and may need some offset for the partial action of the component added by the Thomson effect. The latter does not contribute to the Peltier heating and cooling at the junction proper, but does drive current as part of the thermoelectric power. The measurements of current output in relation to heat input fit remarkably well and confirm the high thermoelectric power, of 400 V/K, that had been measured on a test basis as each five-junction part-assembly was built into the device. It had been foreseen from theory that about 260 V/K would be true thermoelectric power and about 170 V/K could be due to Thomson effect. Therefore, a 60-70% effciency factor might imply a measured output voltage of the order of 250 V/K. In test No. 3 the 0.450 volts came from a 26.7 degree differential and 15 junctions in series with a 5:1 transformer ratio. This works out as a junction EMF of 225 V/K. Concerning the drop of efficiency as more heat is fed into the device (test No. 5) it is found that the apparatus begins to lose heat from evaporation as bubbles form around the heater. This loss of heat is such that the apparent performance drops appreciably with increasing temperature. However, this is an artefact of the way in which the heat input is measured by the electrical heating of water. Evaporation on the input side of the device
48 cannot be a fair factor in the test, which is only viable provided bubbles are not formed in the test heat input source or the latent heat carried away by those bubbles is somehow accounted for. Load resistance versus internal resistance The value of the load resistance, given a variable heat input rate, is an important consideration. The heat input determines the operating temperature and this, in its turn, determines the output EMF. The load resistor and this EMF determine the current output, but for optimum operation it is necessary for this current output to be the full junction current. It is possible for some junction current to be internally diverted by closed loop circulation between the metals forming a bimetallic layer. Such circulation would transfer energy from the hot to the cold junctions without the Carnot component being diverted for use in the external load circuit. However, the test bears out an assumption which emerged in the development of the 'cold spot' theory of the device. The expectation from this was that, at least when operating in the Seebeck mode under test, the dynamic current excitation developing the enhanced thermoelectric power would drive the junction current exclusively through the external circuit. On this basis, the only load matching consideration is how the internal resistance of the device relates to the load resistance in contributing to ohmic losses. For the 1 ohm load condition of test No. 3 we can interpret the output of 0.450 volts as a measure of 0.090 volts on the input side of the 5:1 transformer. This is the output of 15 junction pairs and, for the temperature differential of 26.7 degrees, it implies that a thermoelectric power of 225 V/K has reached the load circuit. Bearing in mind that a 400 V/K thermoelectric power is known to be potentially active and that the 1 ohm load is a 0.04 ohm load on the input side of the transformer (owing to the squared effect of the 5:1 transformer ratio), this suggests that the internal load resistance is 0.03 ohms if there is no loss of potential. A value of 0.02 ohms is calculated from knowledge of the resistance of the commercial material used to build the device (see comment on this which follows) and this is probably the true value. Such resistance applies if virtually all the external current is flowing by snaking action through the thermoelectric junctions with very little internal closed loop flow detracting from that performance. These considerations tend to confirm the design assumptions used. The internal ohmic heat loss is then estimated from the measured external current 0.450 amps, which scales to 2.25 amps for the input side of the transformer and this current in 0.02 ohms implies an ohmic heat loss of 0.10 watts. This can be reconciled with the 0.202 watt output with an estimated 70% of Carnot efficiency, much as is deduced for test No. 3, especially as some of the ohmic heating at 0.10 watts is available for regeneration of electricity.
49 This discussion really aims to assess the scope for increasing efficiency further by future design which reduces internal resistance, it being important to understand the factors affecting performance in the design under test. It now remains to reconcile the relatively low efficiency of test No. 1, for example, with that of test No. 3. This is easily explained simply because the germanium diodes used in the bridge rectifier connected to the transformer output absorb energy, becoming good conductors only as the forward voltage across them rises above 0.3 volts. This will present no problem in production thermo-electric devices because many more junctions than 15 will be connected in series and this will result in high performance relative to the Carnot limit, even with the low temperature differentials represented by test No. 1. However, in the verifying tests to be reported below, this will be checked in view of the importance of applications working with quite low temperature differentials. Calculation of internal resistance The efficiency necessarily depends upon the internal resistance of the device. This may be calculated approximately using the fact that the 0.1 ohm per square specification of the bimetallic layer arises from parallel flow through 0.2 ohm per square of nickel and 0.2 ohm per square of aluminium. The device involves series flow through 300 bimetallic layers of width 3 cm and length 0.25 cm, but the current will not follow the longest route. This is somewhat less than 0.03 ohms per layer. The layers were connected 15 in series and 20 in parallel and this implies a total internal resistance somewhat less than 0.75 times 0.03 ohms or, say, 0.02 ohms. This is the value estimated from the measurement data reported above. Verification Tests These tests were performed by H. Aspden on 17th and 18th October. The first set of tests reported in Table II concentrated on the peak range of efficiency indicated by Table I. It was found that even a small change of heat input rate meant waiting for between 20 and 30 minutes to secure temperature equilibrium. The latter is vital to proper measurement of temperature. The temperature readings are believed to be correct to within 0.05 degrees Centigrade and, as far as can be judged, any error from making measurement at a surface point slightly offset from the actual operative thermal interfaces would mean that the efficency values obtained are 'worst case'. It is, therefore, felt that the efficiencies now registered are reliable in indicating what can be achieved in a commercial installation. TABLE II
TEST No. HEAT INPUT Volts Amps Watts OUTPUT TO 1 OHM Volts Watts TEMPERATURE EFF. T' T %
50
6 7 8 9 10 11 9.50 0.253 2.40 10.00 0.266 2.66 10.50 0.279 2.93 12.00 0.318 3.82 13.00 0.345 4.48 14.00 0.371 5.19 0.300 0.090 0.340 0.116 0.375 0.141 0.490 0.240 0.545 0.297 0.565 0.320 41.9 42.8 45.1 49.4 54.0 55.0 18.6 18.8 19.3 20.2 20.6 20.9 51 57 59 69 65 59
These tests reported in Tables I and II are characterized by the use of electrically heated water as the thermal input source, as opposed to an electrically heated metal interface. The object was to get more uniformity of temperature and so a precise indication of the true temperature. However, above 55 degrees Centigrade the water loses heat rapidly owing to vaporization and then the measure of heat input rate fails to indicate true efficiency. The tests certainly reveal that efficiency of heat to electricity conversion of 70% of the Carnot level is a reasonable expectation with temperature differentials in the 30-40 degree range close to ambient conditions, but this is further supported by the tests in Table IV. Based on test No. 10 a check was made of the effect of changing the dynamic excitation frequency. The operating frequency for the data in Tables I and II was 18 kHz. This had been chosen for optimum tuning of the circuits. As might be expected, there was a drop off in efficiency with reduction of frequency. The data given in Table III apply. TABLE III
TEST FREQ. THERMAL INPUT No. kHz 10 11 12 18 14 10 Watts 4.48 4.48 4.48 POWER OUTPUT Volts Watts 0.545 0.297 0.530 0.281 0.495 0.245 ************ TEMPERATURES T' 54.0 54.0 54.0 T 20.6 20.6 20.6 EFF. % 65 61 53
This test does not mean that the frequency has to be of the order of 18 kHz to obtain the highest efficiencies from the dynamic excitation. It is just that the capacitor structure of the particular test device with its transformer inductance and self-inductance has an optimum switching frequency. A problem ahead is to assess the best frequency for dynamic excitation giving the highest thermoelectric EMFs and then design the device so that the capacitance and inductance match this operating frequency.
51 The next set of experiments involved a change in the transformer from the one used in the above tests which had a 5:1 ratio to a new one with an 8.5:1 ratio. This required a 25 kHz excitation frequency for best response, owing to the change in inductance on the primary side. The object of this change was to explore the loss of output power for very low temperature differentials, which loss resulted from a threshold cut-off in the germanium diode bridge rectifier circuit used to produce smoothed D.C. from the transformer output. The problem faced was due to the A.C. output waveform being of the form shown in Fig. 2. As the signal amplitude increases, more and more of the signal rises above the operating threshold of the diodes and, to get a realistic efficiency measure, substantially all of the signal has to lie above the threshold.
Fig. 2 The sole purpose of the following tests in Table IV was to check to be 100% sure that we still have an efficient converter using the temperature differentials of Test No. 1. This test has given 30% of Carnot efficiency with a 13.8 degree differential but the output voltage was below the diode threshold for a significant part of the dynamic excitation cycle. By stepping TABLE IV
TEST No. 13 14 HEAT INPUT Volts Amps Watts 8.48 6.20 0.226 1.92 0.168 1.04 OUTPUT TO 2 OHM Volts Watts 0.400 0.080 0.255 0.032 ************* TEMPERATURE T' 38.3 32.8 T 18.8 18.8 EFF. % 66 67
the voltage output up by the greater transformer ratio, a greater portion of the signal becomes effective in overcoming the bias in the diodes. These data clearly show that the comparable results for tests Nos. 1 and 2 suffer from the diode cut-off, that the problem has been easily overcome by output circuit redesign and
that efficiencies of 66% plus relative to the Carnot level are to be expected as the operating norm of the Strachan-Aspden converter, even when the temperature differential is only a few degrees. Tests using iced water It was possible to cool the heat sink base by immersion in a tray of iced water and hold the upper heat surface of the device at ambient temperature. The results (power output for a given temperature differential) were fully in accord with the performance just reported for similar small temperature differentials. The ice test of the first prototype device holds up in that electricity can be produced by melting ice. Such tests, however, do not give a measure of efficiency because the rate at which the ice is melting is difficult to measure. However, the efficiency must be as indicated in the tests of this report, because the device and its circuit only 'see' temperatures at the working heat surfaces. Conclusions The tests reported above are definitive tests on a Strachan-Aspden device using thin film thermoelectric techniques with dynamic excitation and transverse commutation in a capacitative assembly. The tests aimed at determining efficiency. The efficiency results were typically 6570% of Carnot level for differentials of temperature in the ambient range. The power rating measured in heat throughput rate was 2 kilowatts per square meter for a 20 degree temperature differential. The corresponding electric power generation with this very low temperature differential is 80 watts per square meter. However, efficiency, rather than throughput power, was the purpose of these tests and it is important to remember that the working metal involved in the test device is interfacing over only one part in 1000 of the total area of the heat input surface. As we adjust the metal film thickness relative to the dielectric and conceivably eliminate the dielectric, the full design potential can be exploited. It is such that the technology of the device can cope with any practical level of heat input per unit area that available heat sources (or heat transfer materials) can supply at the operating temperatures specified. Concerning tests in Peltier mode, meaning input of electricity to cause heat transfer between the heat surfaces, this was not possible with the specific design of excitation control circuitry of the device just tested. The first prototype incorporated a self-tuning circuit which could adjust to give the best dynamic switching rate. Such tests will be performed but until they have been performed either on the subject device or other implementations we cannot pronounce on the efficiency for Peltier mode operation. Our feeling is that it will be high, but perhaps not as high as for electrical power generation in Seebeck mode. However, high efficiency is more important for electrical
53 power generation applications and an outlook of 70% of Carnot with more expected from production designs is very good indeed. Footnote Much of the research effort between February 1989 and July 1989 involved efforts to fully understand the relative roles of the factors which contributed to the working of the first prototype. It was a set back that an attempt at partial reassembly of that device to test efficiency had caused its destruction by internal shorting owing to chemical penetration. However, the new device, built in July-August 1989 period and modified according to the results of that research, now verify the design assumptions and have yielded the efficiency data. Thick-metal-film test converters are now under construction and once the tests on these are complete we will be in a position to project how best to proceed to a product stage. Our patent position has been brought into line with these recent findings so that our main international cover will relate directly to design variations centred on the structure incorporated in the test device discussed in this report. Such cover also caters for what is expected to be a successful outcome on the thick-film embodiments. H. Aspden: 22nd October 1989 ************ The above test report describes the status of a research test at a time when the interest centred on measurement of efficiency. In the diagnostic research phase which followed it was realised that there was a gain in performance that came from the Thomson effect driving current along the thin film by heat action. One did not need to generate electricity to sustain the full measure of current flowing and thereby eat into some of the useful power generated. The problem, however, with the capacitative device was that the transverse current carried through the capacitor stack which was powered directly by the Peltier EMF was no doubt a distributed current across the section of the stack. In this case the capacitor implementation must involve joule heating owing to some current flow in the thin section of the metal film, as allowed for in the above analysis. However, then the current traversing the junctions in the transverse direction is not concentrated at the edges of the bimetallic layers, as it could be in a modified noncapacitative implementation. The actual efficiency of the capacitor device found under these circumstances is quite remarkable and is at the limit of the what is conceivable from Peltier action owing to the temperature profile across the junction interface. Bear in mind that the temperature governing the Peltier action is not exclusively that at the
54 edges. This suggests that there is some other action involved in the device which contributes to enhancing the efficiency. Research into this question points to a thermal feedback effect connected either with the Nernst Effect or with free electron diamagnetism, meaning a thermodynamically powered gyromagnetic reaction set up in conduction electrons in metals in opposition to the magnetizing effect arising from the Thomson effect circulating currents in the metal films. The updating of this research report will therefore need to examine the theoretical factors involved and the very different design considerations which apply if one makes connection between the bimetallic films by metal conductive edge contact only, without the circuit path being through charge oscillations in a capacitor dielectric. Such a report update also may need to include an examination of the research implications if one designs the converter to over-excite the thermal feedback action, assuming that such an action is really adding to that efficiency. In principle these later developments point to a very much greater performance potential, having regard to the fact that we are exploiting temperature gradients in metal with transverse current excitation and not a power current flow through metal directly between junctions at different temperatures.
55 APPENDIX V The Stachan-Aspden Invention: Thermodynamic Power Anomaly [October 1989 Report]
D.C. THERMOELECTRIC POWER ANOMALY The Strachan-Aspden invention shows that thermoelectric EMFs far greater than are expected from conventional textbook data are effective with A.C. operation. The reason for this needs to be understood in order to give one a measure of confidence in advancing the R & D effort needed to exploit this newly-discovered phenomenon. The following scientific paper, which has not been published elsewhere, deals with this question. ABSTRACT The discrepancy between the theoretical and measured thermoelectric power of bimetallic thermocouples is explained on the assumption that current flow across the junction occurs in filamentary surges which concentrate the heating and cooling effects and so distort the effective temperature differential. The basic theory used conforms with that of more classical treatments, inasmuch as modern theory has adapted to cope with semiconductor materials which exhibit temperature effects quite different from those found in base metals. ****** The theoretical thermodynamic value of the Peltier coefficient is shown by Ehrenberg [1] to be: ( kT n) )log( ) e n (2)
where k is Boltzmann's constant, T is the junction temperature, e is the electron charge and n', n are the population densities of the free electrons in the two metals forming the junction.
56 The thermoelectric power of an individual junction is the same expression without the T term, being an EMF per degree of temperature. In Table III of this Ehrenberg text [1] a tabulation shows the measured values of the thermoelectric power for various base metals referenced on the metal sodium. The data show that the discrepancy between the caluculated and measured values is a factor of 15 for Ag and Au, a factor of 21 for Cu, 51 for Al and 6 for Ni. Ehrenberg also deduces theoretical values for the Thomson coefficient, which makes an additional contribution to the thermoelectric effect and is a function of the rate of change of free electron density with temperature. Ehrenberg does not compare theory and experiment in this case. In view of the potential benefits of efficient thermocouple devices in refrigeration avoiding the use of polluting CFC chemicals, there is now a pressing need to understand the fundamental reason for this discrepancy. The following investigation is part of an ongoing commercial research study into this problem, which has already revealed techniques by which to close the gap between the calculated and measured thermoelectric power, particularly for an Al-Ni thermocouple. Equation (4) is derived on the thermodynamic assumption of a thermal pressure balance as between electrons in both metals. If, as with certain semiconductor thermocouple junctions, there are positive (p) and negative (n) charge carriers in the different conductors, the Peltier coefficient need not depend upon the ratio of carrier densities. If p-n annihilation occurs at one junction and p-n creation at the other, the current-related thermodynamic energy exchange is more consistent with a thermoelectric power corresponding to a Peltier coefficient of 3kT/e. Upon annihilation, for example, two carriers merge, each transferring its individual thermal energy 3kT/2 into electrical power, and so developing a net EMF E related to an energy Ee equated to 3kT. For the Al-Ni combination, using equation (4), Ehrenberg [1] assumed a carrier density ratio of 21, which gives a logarithmic factor of 3.04. This implied a thermoelectric power of 265 microvolts per degree centigrade. Since then, however, carrier polarity data for the Hall effect, as revised, suggests that the Al-Ni thermocouple may have a thermoelectric power related to the p-n condition, which coincidentally gives virtually the same value. Thus, the very substantial discrepancies between observation and theory noted by Ehrenberg still apply, even for this Al-Ni metal combination. It is possible that, though a predominant free electron population exists in a metal conductor, the electrical conduction properties are not, at every instant, related to the shared action of all the electrons. Imagine, for example, that the charges carrying current tend to concentrate their ordered motion collectively into a transiently relocating filamentary in-line flow through the conductor. This filament, which may comprise short and transiently discontinuous current elements, corresponding to charge concentrations, breaks up to be
57 replaced by another such filament elsewhere so that, on average over a period of time, the flow appears uniformly distributed across the section of the conductor. In a sense, this physical picture is easy to justify because the electrons following at speed in the same direction along a common line, one behind the other, are less likely to be scattered by collisions. Of course, such speculation has little value unless supported by tangible evidence. Force-free vortex filaments which appear on a nanosecond time scale feature in plasma research [2] and have led to analysis of the density and velocity distribution profiles of electrons and positrons in filaments [3]. However, so far as solid conductors are concerned, this filamentary action is not something that can easily be established. It may emerge from research into the properties of 'warm' superconductors or from research on the thermoelectric anomalies under discussion. Firstly, with the plasma aspect in mind, it is known that the arc discharge in mercury arc rectifiers develops discrete cathode spots on the surface of the mercury pool. This means that the current divides into separate flows. These spots meander around but there is some mechanism by which the discharge breaks into discrete filaments of the order of 15-20 A in strength, as if this represents some critical current factor defining a single current filament. Secondly, extensive researches by Hildebrandt [4,5] have shown that current as high as 30-40 A will divide between two separate anode-cathode discharge paths, with anti-phase modulation at a period of 15 ns, and that this effect is not caused by resonant circuit properties but is an inherent property of the conductive medium. Thus, in a plasma at least, this is consistent with a preferred filamentary current state in which the carrier flow is involved in what may be termed an 'inverse avalanche effect' as the conduction action concentrates into fewer carriers in a filament with a 15-20 A critical maximum current for continuous in-line flow. It is now noted, without particular elaboration, that if a train of electrons form in line at equal spacing and move together to convey current along that line, then, if each one steps forward to the position of the electron ahead at the Compton electron frequency, the current carried is 19.79 A. This is simply ec/c, where e is electron charge in coulombs, c is the speed of light and c is the Compton wavelength. This is such a basic physical quantity that we must indeed by very attentive to any scientific phenomenon which happens to point to a 20 A current threshold. It suggests a limiting value for the amount of current which can flow in a single filament. It suggests that current may be conveyed even through metal conductors in a burst mode in which it involves short filamentary current elements having a 20 A intensity over lengths reduced as necessary in proportion to the average current flowing through the metal.
58 More important, however, is the fact that such a current with electrons really in line at spacings as close as their classical diameters would imply a velocity of electron motion in the current direction of the order of the Fermi velocity of an electron gas. We assume this is possible, notwithstanding the classical Coulomb repulsion effects, embracing to some extent the idea that what is involved is electron displacement from electrically-neutral sites, as if electrons alternate with positive holes or as if electrons and positrons moving in opposite direction somehow carry the current. This proposition then suggests that a Fermi velocity, which is not a function of temperature, in some way powers the action. For a given metal this means that the electron speed along a filament is constant and that filaments of lower current strength than 20 A either comprise electrons or holes at proportionally greater spacing or what are, effectively, short discontinuous filamentary components. Possibly, filamentary vortex loops of circuital current may form, occasionally opening up to carry current forward through the conductor before reforming as closed loops. Conceivably, therefore, even in a metal containing a high free electron density, the current flow might, at any instant, be carried by but a few of these electrons and even, given a relatively few mobile carriers, allow the positive 'holes' to make a current contribution by favouring a flow route which causes some ordering and displacement of the holes to set up current filaments nucleated by positive charge carriers. Now consider such a current filament as traversing a bimetallic junction interface in a thermocouple. The Peltier heating or cooling will be concentrated in an extremely small spot defined by the zone taken up by the filament. Thus the temperature of that spot, which determines the Peltier coefficient cannot be the mean temperature we measure for the junction interface as a whole. Depending upon the relaxation time needed to cause the filament to relocate, the effective temperature active in determining thermoelectric power can be very different from that assumed. A concentrated cooling effect at a spot in a junction interface must increase the electrical conductivity in the region of the spot and this alone could develop a crossing point of least resistance, which would tend to keep the current trapped in that position. An exception to this can be expected in certain semiconductors and alloys over temperature ranges for which resistivity may decrease with increase in temperature. Indeed, such materials tend to be those used in advanced thermocouple research, which itself implies that here lies the weakness of normal metals from the viewpoint of their application to thermocouples. The Peltier coefficient is measured by supplying a controlled amount of heat to a junction cooled by the Peltier effect, based on a technique developed by Calendar [6]. For Peltier cooling the governing equation is easily formulated as:
59 )i ' x 4Kx 2 (3)
This merely represents the gradient of temperature with spherical symmetry with respect to distance x from the point of action, given that K is the heat conductivity (assumed the same for both metals). is the thermoelectric power (volts/oC), ' is the absolute temperature and i is the mean current. When solved this gives: ' o & )i/4Kx (4)
The minus sign would be replaced by a plus sign if the current direction corresponded to Peltier heating. We define a mean least value of x as xo and, for ease of rough calculation, estimate this as the distance from the centre to the side of a square area of a cross section of filament. Thus, assuming N electrons per unit length of filament with n as the electron density: n ' N/(2xo)2 (5)
We further equate the energy of self inductance of the filament with the kinetic energy of the electrons, so that: 1 2 1 Li ' (N)( mv 2) 2 2 (6)
where L is the standard calculable inductance 0.5x10-7 henries per metre, m is electron mass 9.1x10-31 kg and v is electron speed. From (7) and (8): i/xo ' v (2nm/L) (7)
60 The temperature difference between the mean junction temperature o and the temperature ' is then 'i/4Kxo and, putting this in (5) gives: /x ' (xo/x 2)(o&)) (8)
The actual temperature effective at the junction, and the mean junction temperature, change and so scale in proportion. indeed, from (6): )(1 % i/4Kxo) ' o (9)
From (9) this becomes: o/) ' 1 % (v/4K) 2nm/L (10)
This means that this expression represents the factor by which the measured thermoelectric power or Peltier coefficient will underestimate the true value which really governs the thermodynamic action. It is believed that v is independent of temperature, as already stated, and that it is also independent of current strength, inasmuch as N is the variable corresponding to effective current. We may use Fermi-Dirac statistics to estimate v, but the result is much the same if we appeal intuitively to the threshold current condition I = ec/c and estimate v as given by equation (8) when N is 2.66 1014 per metre. This corresponds to a line of electrons spaced by their classical diameter, as calculated using the formula of J. J. Thomson, a saturation condition that is relevant because the diameter was calculated by J. J. Thomson by equating kinetic energy with electromagnetic energy in the magnetic field. It is found from this that v is 284 km/s. To estimate the factor (6) insert typical values for copper, eg. n = 1.3 1029/m3 and K = 400 watts-m/oC to find that the factor becomes: 1 % 0.12 (11)
if is expressed in microvolts per degree C.

61 Writing now the measured thermoelectric power as , we know that the factor just deduced is /, so that if is 144, as calculated by Ehrenberg for copper at 17o C, the measured value of which we 'think' is a measured value of does, from (13), work out at 7.9. Somewhat similar results apply to Ag and Au, which have smaller n value and so a similar theoretical value, but much the same K value. Note that equation (13) based on n being 60% that of copper and being 100, say, gives as 9.7. Ehrenberg gives, for Ag, Cu and Au, experimental values of that range from 6.9 to 7.2 microvolts per degree C, whereas the theoretical values range from 99 to 144 per degree C. This, therefore, is fairly well in line with the interpretation offered here. Considering aluminium, for which referenced on sodium, in theory, is 183, n is greater than for copper by the factor 1.6, K is measured as 210, and as measured is 3.6 in the same units. The same argument leads, via equation (12)) to an equation (10) factor 1 + 0.29 or a theoretical value of 3.4. Thus, even for aluminium, for which the thermoelectric power discrepancy between textbook theory and experiment is a factor of 51, we see that the interpretation provided here reduces the discrepancy to a point where theory and experiment are virtually in full accord. It is submitted that the filamentary current proposition discussed is highly relevant to thermoelectric action. As intimated above, commercial research aimed at reducing and, indeed, virtually eliminating the discrepancy in practical thermocouple circuits is proving successful. The secret is to use a.c. to prevent cold spots from forming and so choking off the thermoelectric power, this being a d.c. current symptom peculiar to metal thermocouples as opposed to semiconductors. REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] W. Ehrenberg, 'Electric Conduction in Semiconductors and Metals' (Clarendon Press, Oxford), pp. 21-23 (1956). D. R. Wells, IEEE Trans. Plasma Science, 17, 270 (1989). V. Nardi, Phys. Rev. Lett., 25, 718 (1970). J. Hildebrandt, Physics Letters, 95A, 365 (1983). J. Hildebrandt, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 16, 1023 (1983). H. L. Callendar, Proc. Phys, Soc. Lond., 23, 1 (1910).
APPENDIX VI
62 THERMOELECTRIC EXPERIMENTAL DEVICE CONSTRUCTION The following is a copy of a text written by John Scott Strachan dated February 9, 1994 transmitted to U.S. researchers and project engineers as briefing material for non-confidential discussions held in Edinburgh, Scotland later that month. It contains details concerning Strachan's fabricaton of the original test device of which this author had no prior knowledge and it is evident from this information that there is no easy and immediate route to developing this technology using the methods adopted by Strachan. This will therefore explain why Strachan has switched his attentions to other projects, leaving this author to pursue this thermoelectric research along lines closer to his own original perceptions of the invention which avoid use of PVDF substrate film. ****** Strachan's account dated February 9, 1994: The original device discovery happened accidentally and was the result of the construction of an ultrasonic lithotriptor. At the time Dr. Aspden and I were discussing the concepts of thermoelectricity and were trying to conceive methods of reducing the thermal wastage in such devices. I had constructed a few experimental samples but with little success. At the same time I was working on an idea for a sonic 'laser', a device to progressively amplify a travelling wavefront in a transducer with a view to creating a high intensity ultrasonic pulse from a low acoustic impedance. The goal was to produce an intense compression pulse from a low acoustic impedance source for the delivery of a focused shatter pulse in kidney stones. The resultant 'sonic laser' units were to be placed in an array which would allow phase steering of the wavefront and the changing intensity in three dimensions to produce a versatile triptic pattern. This would allow the destruction of stones down to 1 mm in size with very little heating of the surrounding tissue. The further advantage of the low impedance of the source would be the ability of the array to 'listen' to the shattering of the stones and intelligently follow the crack growth with the peak intensity of the wave. Had the project been successful it would have reduced the treatment time for gall and kidney stones by a factor of ten or more and the lithotriptor itself would have had a market value of more that $100,000. The device consisted of several stacks of high k PVF2 in a column, with an electronic circuit set to trigger a compressive pulse in phase with a pulse travelling through the stack, in order to synchronise the circuit and cope with the variations in acoustic impedance of the
63 adhesives. I interleaved the PVDF layers with layers of recording tape. Thus, as the compressive wave passed through the stack, the motion of the recording tape could be detected in the next layer as a fluctuating voltage. As such, it could be used to trigger the next pulse in perfect phase, since the speed of the electromagnetic signal allowed advanced warning to the trigger circuit of the approaching acoustic wave. It was a really neat idea and I was very proud of it! The device worked well for brief instants but kept blowing the drive circuit. This seemed to occur when the stack was touched on one side. Since I had been thinking about thermoelectric devices and the stack resembled vaguely some of the ideas I had of trying to create a capacitatively-coupled thermopile (later it was proved that such a thing is inherently impossible)*, I wondered if there might be a thermoelectric explanation for the stack's strange behaviour. The construction of the stack was as follows. Materials: (a) (b) (c) (d) 28 M PVF2, (D33 = 27, k = 18) having bimetallic coating of Ni and Al (Ni = 2200 angstrom, Al = 800 angstrom) and a resistivity less than 0.1 ohm per square. BASF metal recording tape poled manually in line with the long axis. ZAP ethyl cyanoacrylate adhesive (formula unknown).
One strip 2.5 mm x 2.5 mm x thickness resonance 2MHz PZT 5a lead zirconate ceramic with silver electrodes. __________________________________________________________________ * This statement with its brackets is made in the February 9 1994 account by Strachan but the 'impossibility' relates to a thermopile involving only the Peltier Effect because the 'proof' amounts to saying that as much electric charge flows in one direction as in the other and so must cause at least as much heating at either junction as cooling. This has now to be viewed in a different context because the Thomson Effect introduces bias as between the junctions of each thermocouple pair and once the Nernst-Ettinghausen Effect becomes operative, particularly where one or both metals are ferromagnetic. [This footnote by H. Aspden]. 10 layers of super-hard acrylic machined to a thickness such that the acoustic delay is equal to a half wavelength at the resonant frequency of the ceramic strip. A suitable material is available from Aerotech Laboratories in California.
(e)
64 Unfortunately, I do not have a detailed specification on this as the material I used was part of a free sample sent to Dick Ferren of Pennwalt Corporation. The sound velocity in PVF2 is 2.2 mm per s. The BASF tape and the PVF2 were then treated with a 2% solution of tetra butyl titanate in petroleum ether to improve bonding. This process must be carried out in an arid atmosphere and then the surfaces should be exposed to a humidity of 100% or greater at a temperature of 40oC. The process is extremely tricky since, if moisture is present before the evaporation of the petroleum ether, the titanium will not bind through the metal layer on to the PVF2 or mylar. This can be diagnosed by the white powdery appearance of the surface. If successful the surface will exbibit a slight iridescence. Once the petroleum ether evaporates and the iridescence is present the exposure to humid atmosphere takes place. This will sometimes produce a slight trace of the powdery surface but this may be washed off in petroleum ether or toluene. DO NOT USE ISOPROYL ALCOHOL!!! Cyanoacrylate will not polymerise in the presence of protons, i.e. at any pH below 7 the surface of PVDF will release free protons in the presence of isopropyl alcohol and thus prevent secure bonding. The titanate layer helps to maintain a surface pH above 7 in a moderately dry atmosphere but can not fight the catalysis of the propyl groups in the alcohol.
Fig. 1 Layered composition of laminate formed The greater the care taken at this stage, the more chance of success later. Every single strip should be examined before lamination for any signs of wear on the surface or any trace of white titanate. Failure to do this will virtually guarantee delamination the instant any voltage is applied. This process is time consuming and the several thousand strips will take several weeks to laminate, even working ten to twelve hours a day. But skimping the preparation means that there is no chance of creating any percentage of intact stacks and the entire effort will be entirely wasted. The lamination jig surfaces should be positively charged PTFE. The layers may be added one by one for a period of time equal to one quarter of the
65 anaerobic cure time of the ethyl cyanocrylate. Then a press is applied at a pressure of between 1 and 6 tonnes whilst an ammonia atmosphere is blown past the stack to catalyse curing. Then the process is continued. Time is the main enemy. Since each layer must be examined and the quarter cure time is typically 30 seconds, this is a very intensely stressful process. I managed to complete only one stack on the first day and had scrapped nearly a thousand layers in the process. Practice improved the situation. The PVF2 and the BASF tape were laminated together layer by layer to reach a thickness of 0.55 mm, i.e. half at 2MHz. This process was repeated until a large number of stacks were produced. Next a 5,000 volt supply was connected across each stack and those that vaporised were discarded. A suitable breathing apparatus should be worn during this process since the fluorine gas emitted as the PVDF breaks down is highly poisonous. It is also corrosive and so the entire process should be carried out at a suitable location and well away from glass, since the hydrofluoric acid will cloud the glass, making you unpopular with your colleagues! The percentage of stacks that break down depends on the defect density of the original PVF2. That percentage depends on whether a gel colloid or suspension process was used during polymerisation. The use of gel tends to leave micro bubbles of gel in the PVF2, reducing the breakdown voltage. The surface chemistry of a poled polymer is a constant problem since the creation of compound acetates with various metals can occur with very little encouragement. The passing of a current through the cyanocrylate often starts a cascade catalysis which, once started is unstoppable. This is worst with copper where even a few seconds of current will produce a sufficient 'seed' to result in the total acetisation of the metal within a month or so. With nickel the process is less easily turned on since a sulphate must exist before the process starts. The initial test voiltage does not usually initiate a corrosion and so the elements may be stored anaerobically and aridly for an indefinite period. Once the elements are subjected to operational voltages or are even accidentally squeezed, which produces enormous voltages in local areas, a gradual decay of metal begins. This will begin in spots surrounding any nonpolymerised cyanocrylate. Such spots exist since, even with all the precautions described, certain free H+ ions will be present preventing polymerisation. This is why such care MUST be taken. The metal layers can disappear in just a few hours if the defect density in the bonding layers exceeds 2 per cm2. The reduction in decay time is exponentially proportional to defect density. The remaining stacks were now measured for electrical conductivity and those that showed a resistance of greater than 0.001 ohm from side to side were discarded. The apparatus for measurement of the resistance is designed to cancel the apparatus resistance. The electrodes of the apparatus were a pair of steel slip gauges. This is needed in the ultrasonic device to prevent the waveform from distorting. In the thermoelectric application this stage-by-stage testing is even more critical since it defines both the electrical and thermal conductivity of the stack.*
66 Those elements discarded for resisitivity reasons were reground on the edges with a fine diamond wheel in liquid nitrogen to improve flatness and were set aside for an attempt at a slightly thinner stack. (As it happened these discards were lost and only found again at the end of last year [1993] when they were used to construct the third thermoelectric demonstration device.) The original batch was divided into several sets of 50 elements. Each element was coated with Emmerson and Cumming silver loaded epoxy and bonded to a thin copper or silver strip, top and bottom. Silver is preferable to prevent the production of copper acetate from the cyanoacrylate but I did not have a large quantity of this and by this time was pretty impatient to see if the device would produce the high power ultrasonic pulse I hoped. Each element was then laminated to a layer of hard acrylic half thick as shown in Fig. 2 below.
Fig. 2 Composition of bonded element ___________________________________________________________________ * Emphasis here added by H. Aspden, this being the first reference to the thermoelectric properties and much of the foregoing description having concerned the fabrication of a structure intended to withstand mechanical oscillations at acoustic frequencies. The thermoelectric application requires the nickel and aluminium layers to remain intact and in mutual interface contact and does not require those metals to be as thin and fragile as they were in the process described by Strachan. [This footnote by H. Aspden]. These elements were then assembled as shown in Fig. 3, with the ceramic driver at one end. Each element was then connected by its electrodes to a drive circuit. The ceramic transducer bonded to the end of the stack was connected to be pulsed by a conventional driver. As the wave passed
67 through the stack an electromagnetic signal from the moving magnets triggered the pulses through the stack in a cascade. By adjusting the
Fig. 3. Final stack assembly threshold of the trigger circuit, the frequency could be tuned to match the oncoming wave. Thus, even though the delay through the stack was inconsistent due to the variation in the bonding thickness, the cascade of pulses could always be kept in phase with the advance of the compression wave. A straightforward sequential delay could not do this, which was why other attempts at 'sonic lasers' had failed to produce the expected amplification. Everything worked fine except that as soon as the stack was moved, almost as soon as it was touched, the drive circuit would blow. This was surprising since this was no wimpy drive and had the capacity to deliver more than a joule per pulse. But closer examination revealed that the circuit was not blowing in the 'ON' cycle but in the 'OFF' cycle. A sector of the stack was connected across an oscilloscope and the waveform in Fig. 4 was observed when a thermal gradient was across the stack while only noise was visible in the absence of the gradient.* At first I naturally assumed that this pulse was a high impedance phenomenon, but I had to wait for a couple of days to investigate since it had blown the oscilloscope. ____________________________________________________________________ * Emphasis added by H. Aspden.
68
Fig. 4. Spike voltage waveform produced by thermal gradient A charge amplifier arrangement with a virtual dead short was now attached to the sector of the stack and the waveform had the shape shown in Fig. 5. Note that both of these measurements are of a sector of the stack not connected to the drive circuit.
Fig. 5. Thermally developed spike voltage with circuit protection This was very surprising. Clearly the spikes carried a lot of current and in fact even the impedance of the charge amplifier was too high to discharge the spike before it was driven off. As lower and lower impedances were tried it was eventually possible to discharge the spike in the 200 ns of its duration and get a measure of the number of joules involved. This turned out to be broadly proportional to the temperature differential across the stack and reached a peak at about 0.05 of a micro joule at about 70o C temperature differential. The lithotriptor circuit was redesigned to short out the stacks behind the wavefront but even the VMOS kept blowing in the 'OFF' state now, as the voltages were just too high. This was bitterly disappointing since the acoustic energy in the pulse from a single full
69 25mm stack was truly immense and the full array would have been capable of pulverising a 10 mm stone to dust in a few seconds without the sharp edges in the remnant rubble that cause much trouble in laser lithotriptors. By this time, however, high power lasers were already beginning to fall in price and it seemed as though the window of opprtunity for the device was closing. I had reported the thermoelectric effect to Dr. Aspden at this stage and I had suggested that perhaps the pyroelectric and thermoelectric effects were interacting in some way. Dr. Aspden was sceptical and proposed a number of alternatives. I built some devices using diode arrays as disclosed in an early patent* but my experimental technique was appalling and so I cannot rely on the measurements made on the device. The exact number of layers in each stack in the device tested to obtain the above signal waveforms is not known, since the acoustic thickness was all that mattered, but a fair estimate would be about 20 - 30 layers. Thus the assembly would represent 20 series stacks connected in parallel when connected as a finished assembly. For the thermoelectric application I rewired the stack to produce a standing wave rather than a travelling wave and set up the circuit with a combination tuning transformer, thus creating a stack consisting of a combination of serial and parallel connections in a series resonant circuit with the stack and with an omnitron SCR. The circuit configuration is as shown in Fig. 6.
Fig. 6 Series-parallel connections of laminar stack
* This is the subject of U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085, whereas the later prototype laminar stack thermoelectric devices became the subject of U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336.
70 [Footnote by H. Aspden] ________________________________________________________________ Off voltage was now less of a problem since the actual rising edge of the spike would turn on the CRS before the junction blew, but even so the resonant circuit meant that flyback voltages were still dangerous in the OFF condition. Keeping the output of the transformer coupled to low impedance prevented this from being terminal. The amount of energy in each pulse is difficult to explain since the capacitance of the stack as measured by a bridge was far too low to account for the energy magnitude of the pulse. The combination of pyroelectric behaviour and thermoelectric behaviour seems to combine with either a sudden increase in the effective capacitance or perhaps a brief conductive phase through the PVF2. The resulting stack was connected to an input circuit and to an output path via a transformer and then through a rectifier circuit. The rectifier circuit should use very low voltage drop diodes to reduce voltage drop losses. The rest of the story is well known* but a few points are worth making. The first and third prototype devices produced a reversible effect, ie. the provision of high energy electrical pulses to the stack resulted in the appearance of a dramatic temperature differential across the stack. The second device, built without the magnetic interface strips, did not do this and also was incapable of self-driving through an SCR. The electrical efficiency was measured accurately in terms of the transfer of heat and the electrical output of the device but the amount of breakthrough from the external drive circuit was ignored. Were the measurements valid?** As I recall several results were surprising but were explained away by some fancy footwork from Dr. Aspden. The third device did indeed produce a reasonably impressive thermoelectric efficiency as a generator but detailed analysis of the measurements of the device as a heat pump show that its performance is nowhere near as efficient as would be expected. While this is explainable to some extent from the predicted behaviour of the protection circuitry, the fact remains that as a heat pump the device performs no better and perhaps worse than several commercially available heat pumps. What if the discrepancy between the thermoelectric generator effect and the heat pump effect is the result of a transient electrochemical effect? The chemical interaction of cyanoacrylate and metal is already known to be charge sensitive and is very temperature sensitive. This is a __________________________________________________________________ This is a reference to the information which has been published by articles, conferences and patent specifications in endeavouring to promote interest in the Strachan-Aspden invention. ** Underlining by H. Aspden. This is a surprising statement. The tests in question are the subject of Appendix IV already presented. As stated on page 42 we used a function generator to provide an input signal to regulate electrical power delivery in pulsations at the control frequency. The signal input of a few volts was fed through a high-valued resistor so that minimal input current could 'break through' to feed power into the output circuit from the function generator. It would seem therefore that Strachan here is registering his own
71 personal reservations about the high operational efficiency of that now-defunct tested device. [Footnotes by H. Aspden] major nightmare for me. What if, in fact, all we have is an endothermic electochemical reaction? Several gels exist that freeze when subjected to an electrical current. And a lot of those are acetates! The electrical generation effect is even more common. The current device is now inert but it is likely that not all elements will have decayed. I am now dismantling the device and will attempt to recover as many elements as possible. I would propose the best use that could be made of these is to distribute them to various laboratories that propose to attempt to construct a device.
[End of Strachan's February 2, 1994 Communication]
*******************************************
Concluding Comment
It has become clear, and especially in the light of the above-stated position taken by Strachan, that ongoing experimental research on the phenomenon underlying the Strachan-Aspden invention will need to be undertaken by Strachan's coinventor, myself, as author of this Report, in following my own different convictions concerning base metal properties when activated thermoelectrically using a.c. However, I can but hope that research interests of those having the appropriate academic or corporate affiliations who come to read this Report will see the merit in the Nernst Effect interpretation of the tranverse a.c. action, as described in the initial commentary of this Energy science Report No. 2, and will undertake their own investigations in pursuit of this new technology. The outcome of my own efforts will be reported in Energy Science Report No. 3.
POWER FROM ICE: THE THERMOELECTRIC REGENERATOR

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1997
Contents Section Title PART I: Introduction The Impossible Dream? Review of the Nernst Effect The First Strachan-Aspden Invention Conclusion PART II: Introduction Preliminary Observations Solid-State Magneto-Hydrodynamic Power Skin Effect Segregation The Magnetic Inductively-Coupled Device Nernst Effect in Relation to Eddy-Currents Experimental Invesigations Discussion Appendix I ***** page 1 3 7 13 15 16 16 21 25 26 30 33 36 38

Introduction This Energy Science Report is one of a series concerned with new energy technology and the fundamental energy science that is involved. In this series of ten such reports this is listed as No. 3. Its first version was dated June 4th 1994 but made available in confidence only to sponsors interested in funding development. It concerns onward progress on the project of the StrachanAspden invention, the subject of Report No. 2. The invention as demonstrated proved that it was possible to take energy from melting ice and run an electric motor by tapping into the heat flow drawn from the prevailing ambient background as it migrated through the device to reach and so melt the ice. The device was remarkably efficient, also in its reverse operation mode, in which it froze water upon input of electricity. The invention is seen as the basis for future non-polluting refrigeration and noiseless airconditioning as well as providing a solid-state, maintenance-free technology for generating electric power. At the time the initial version of this Report was written the author was intent on pursuing the research himself, co-inventor Scott Strachan having abandoned further work on the project. For some mysterious reason all of the operative devices he constructed had worked well for a period of months but then deteriorated rapidly and ceased to function. As this author saw the problem, a funded university project and even corporate research involvement committed to discovering the reason for this failure was needed, given the importance of the underlying discovery. In the event, though corporate interest had been aroused, that interest depended upon the sustained ability to demonstrate operation. Scott Strachan reverted to his research pursuits on laser devices, whilst this author, whose primary interest concerned power generation by a new type of magnetic motor was diverted by success in August 1994 in winning a U.K. government research award on that latter project. In these circumstances at this time, October 1996, the author is endeavouring now to complete both this Energy Science Report No. 3 and also Energy Science Report No. 9, which relate, respectively, to the thermoelectric project as now seen in retrospect and the status of the research on the motor. Admittedly also the author has been stimulated into completing this Report No. 3 by the very recent publication of a book entitled The Coming Energy Revolution by Jeane Manning (ISBN 0-89529-713-2) Avery Publishing Group, Garden City Park, New York. It was at pages 124-128 that there was reference to the Strachan-Aspden device. Reference to that book will show that I had speculated that it might be a combination of heat and vibration that had progressively affected the device's electrical storage capacity and so interfered with its operation. However, as this Report will explain, I have now formed a different opinion, based on some of my early background research experience with ferromagnetic steel laminations that are tough enough to withstand such effects. Much of what I am now introducing in this Report will explain why any bimetallic laminar structure involving a ferromagnetic substance must have a tendency to polarize magnetically when
subjected to periodic temperature changes and that is, in my opinion, the true cause of failure in the three Strachan-Aspden devices tested. To remedy the defect all one then has to do is make provision for `degaussing' the bimetallic laminar structure. The bimetallic feature is an essential limitation in the claims of the main U.S. patent on this device (U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336). The reason is that it expedites the entry of heat into the body of the device and that can make a very substantial difference by reducing its physical size for a given power output. Hopefully, with this insight for solving our earlier problem now put in proper perspective, the publication of this Report will rekindle interest in corporate and academic laboratories who will now see purpose in mounting research to apply this technology commercially. In this regard the author, who will be 69 years of age before year end 1996, will be able to act in a consultancy capacity and assist in such endeavour. Rather than making this work a complete rewrite of the original 1994 version of Report No. 3, it is intended, following this brief introduction, to present as PART I an informal overview of the underlying invention and suggest a new way by which the technology can be harnessed. Furthermore, since the author now knows why the original devices failed after a few months of operation and since the remedy is so very simple, that will be explained at the outset. Part II of the Report will be the more formal account of the technological subject matter as contained in the 1994 version. The latter has not been edited, save in that its list of contents has been merged with those of PART I and it will seem incomplete. It was the version in note form which was intended to brief would-be sponsoring research interests. It left open questions which the onward experimental research would need to resolve. It will, however, serve a purpose and though much of the material will no doubt need to be discarded in the light of developments it will, it is hoped, inspire effort to explore different options until the best solution is found. *****
PATENTS
As part of this Introduction it will be helpful to summarize the patent position as it stands at the time this Report is published (namely in February 1997). For cost reasons during our period of concern about overcoming the defect encountered, certain patent applications, particularly in Japan and Europe have been abandoned. However, with confidence restored, the following patents are now to be regarded as available for acquisition by parties interested in developing the technology for commercial application. This Report, together with Report No. 2, plus the patent specifications identified below and some further patents that will be listed only on request, constitute the briefing material which is available. Enquiries of a commercial nature concerning the patents should be addressed to Dr. Harold Aspden, Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England, the publishers of this Report. U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336 U.S. Patent No. 5,376,184
PART I
The Impossible Dream? I am going to describe something which physicists will declare to be impossible and then I am going to explain in simple scientific terms why I believe many of those physicists will see the need to retract and pay attention. I am a physicist myself, by professional qualification and by vocation, with an academic research background in electrical engineering, though my working career has been in that field of corporate management concerned with inventions and patents dealing with technology rooted in electronics and magnetism. I would not therefore be writing the words which follow without being sure of my ground. Imagine that in your dreams you catch a glimpse of a house of the mid 21st century and notice that in its cellar there is a rather curious elongated structure that you can best describe as pipework. You suspect it is a heater or air-conditioning unit. The owner of the house explains its function and how it works. Firstly, the main pipe section is composed of steel or nickel, according to whether the air flow through it is hotter or colder than the exposed outer surface of the pipe. Peripheral to the pipe is a unit described as a pump. It is a heat pump, a mid-21st century model. It does what heat pumps are supposed to do and does it rather well. It is quiet and efficient. It requires an input of electricity and it pumps heat. It can pump 100 joules of heat between two temperatures, one ambient and one 30 degrees C above or below ambient, and do that with an intake of 15 joules of electricity. Physicists know that is possible because it fits within the Carnot efficiency limitations imposed on heat engines and knowledge of 19th century technology explains how it works. It is very familiar territory to those expert in thermodynamics. Now, about that pipe. Here again, in history, going now into the latter part of the 19th century, there was the discovery of a phenomenon by which heat flow through a metal could generate electricity. Assuming the heat flow was through the walls of a long pipe, it needed a magnetic field directed along the length of the pipe to promote the setting up of an electric field, or EMF (electromotive force, otherwise expressed as a voltage), the latter being directed at right angles to both the magnetic field and the direction of heat flow. So, you see, if we magnetize the pipe along its length any heat flowing through its pipe walls, that is between its outer surface and its inner bore, will set up circulating electric current inside the pipe. Now, if you use your imagination, you can see that here is something physicists discovered over one hundred years ago (in 1886), a fascinating way in which to convert heat into electricity, but if you, the reader, are a physicist, have you ever heard of this before? I know about it because it was mentioned at page 592 of a book I was given on 20th December 1945 because I had won that year's `Physics Prize' awarded at my school. The few words on that page 592 did not refer to tubes of circular section. They referred to experiments on metal sheets, but I knew how to roll a metal sheet to form a tubular pipe and so here was a book I have had in my possession for more than 50 years and it told me that it had been known for some 60 years before then that heat could convert directly into electricity merely by flowing through metal!
Of course, now assuming you, the reader, are an engineer, you will say that electric current flowing in the pipe is not doing anything but turning back into heat, so there is a no-win situation. On the other hand, if you are a physicist, you will say that it is a thermoelectric effect and such effects are notoriously very weak and so can offer nothing of practical importance. However, that book of mine that I won in 1945 included a table of data, backed by references, which showed that at the dawn of the 20th century it was known that in steel as much as 16.6 volts could be set up by a temperature gradient of one degree C per cm if the magnetic field strength was 10,000 gauss. That magnetic field is less than half of the saturation field strength in steel. In nickel the direction of the electric field is reversed, but the voltage induced can be as high as 35.5 volts in such a field, though that is nearly double the saturation condition of nickel. Either way, whether we use steel or nickel, we are involved here with the prospect of generating 16.6 volts per cm. of path within a steel or nickel pipe magnetized close to saturation, given a heat flow rate through the section of pipe corresponding to a one degree of temperature drop per cm. It never occurred to me when I first came to browse through that book given to me as a school prize that it contained technological information of such importance to the world's energy future. Instead, I became indoctrinated in the principles governing physics, which say that it is impossible to convert heat into useful work except in compliance with the laws of thermodynamics. A pipe with one degree temperature difference between its outside and inside could not be even one per cent efficient in converting heat into electricity according to those laws. I am now a wiser being and it took me nearly half a century to acquire that wisdom and become a law breaker. One cannot argue with the facts of Nature and it was to be experimental discovery that obliged me to shift my ground, realising that Nature herself has not seen fit to comply with the wishes of whoever decided to formulate that Second Law of Thermodynamics. You see, when heat flows through metal it is carried by electrons in the main and some is transferred by atoms vibrating into one another. Those electrons, which are shed by atoms, get deflected by a magnetic field and can get reabsorbed into other atoms part way along their journey through the metal. Once locked inside an atom the electron can even migrate back in the opposite direction to the heat flow. After all, there is no net current flow in the heat transport direction, so the electrons have to go the other way too. However, in the latter motion they are paired with an atomic nucleus and so the magnetic forces acting on them are unable to move charge laterally with respect to magnetic field and heat flow. It is as if the electrons are girls in a barn dance and can go one way freely but, in migrating the other way, they have to hold hands in swinging around a boy, but they can progress from boy to boy transferring their hand hold. In their forward free motion they do not bang into the wall at the end of the barn, because some boy or other captures them and sets them into the sequence of their reverse motion. So those heat-carrying electrons seldom travel all the way through the pipe section before shedding their heat and producing that lateral EMF. To comply with the Second Law of Thermodynamics they all need to go from the higher temperature towards the lower temperature at the pipe surface, but they are not completing that journey. They never see the lower temperature. Instead, they are deflected to confront a back EMF and it absorbs their energy very efficiently, indeed with a near-to-100% efficiency. There is no such thing here as the physicists `Carnot' criterion. All there is is a temperature gradient governing the heat flow rate. So our mid 21st century homes will have pipework in their basements which use nickel or steel pipes and be designed to have heat flowing through their pipe walls. How then do we provide that heat input? Well, you have been given the answer to that question, we use the heat pump accessory already mentioned. We feed in 15 joules of electricity to generate 100 joules of heat
flow through the pipe walls and we convert most of that 100 joules into electricity which we use to supply the 15 joules input and to deliver the rest to meet our domestic needs. There is energy conservation because there is net cooling in that basement appliance and we will need to let heat flow in from the atmosphere somehow to keep the balance, but the result is a cold basement and a warm house or an air-conditioned cool house with a hotter climatic condition outside. If you see this as `perpetual motion' and so impossible then stay in the 20th century and skip the future, because you choose to ignore what Nature has on offer. If you are shaking your head, as an engineer, and still thinking about how that electric current circulating around the tubular pipe form can get out and into your wire circuits then read on. First, let me go back to those school days of mine once again. I was taught physics at a time before our student-time absorbing computer age began and so could learn a little more about oldfashioned subjects, such as ships having magnetic compasses and why ships needed `degaussing'. I want you to imagine that steel pipe mentioned above as being, in effect, a ship structure during fabrication. I was told that when a ship was made it would tend to become magnetized because of the hammering and rivetting on its steel plates which vibrated the magnetism in the steel to cause it to turn into the direction of the Earth's own magnetic field. The ship became weakly magnetized, enough to affect the reading of a ship's compass and that magnetism could not be eliminated. One had to compensate for it in some way by putting magnets close to the compass. Furthermore, my school years of learning physics being World War II years, I was told that the magnetism of a ship could attract magnetic mines set floating on the sea by the enemy and so the ship had to be `degaussed' by using currents flowing around parts of the vessel. Yet, when I took up my Ph.D. research (1950-53) on the subject of how there were anomalous excess losses occurring in electrical sheet steels as used in power transformers, I directed much of my attention to examining how mechanical stress affected those losses. I can say, quite categorically, that my research experience assured me that mechanical stress and vibrant stress would reduce, rather than increase, residual magnetism. However, I was not sufficiently enlightened as to question what I had been taught and it was of no importance to me how ships became magnetized during construction. Indeed, nor was I sufficiently enlightened at that time as to see the connection between my research and page 592 of that school book I mentioned. I went through three years of Ph.D. research on the subject of anomalous eddy-current loss in electrical steel, losses involving heat generation, without it occurring to me or the professorial supervision I received, that heat itself could be a regenerative electrical factor in enhancing those losses. There were two dominant factors, not mentioned as such, but inherent in our instinct by training, namely that in the absence of both a bimetallic structure and a temperature differential there could be no regenerative effects and, further, that any strengthening of a magnetic field meant enhancement of resistivity. As a result the whole emphasis of interest was centred on how waveforms were distorted during the alternating cycles of magnetization, owing essentially to nonuniformities attributable to the domain structure inside a magnetic material. Here the lay reader should understand that inside nickel or iron there are everywhere regions fully magnetized to saturation and all we do when we `magnetize' is to turn some of those around in their direction of polarization. This is why it makes sense to imagine that vibration can produce magnetization. However, I am now suggesting here that the ship lying in its fixed position relative to the Earth's magnetic field during its construction is far more susceptible to the effects of temperature changes than to workmen's percussion tools banging on the ship's bodywork. Heat flow through
its steel plates, transversely with respect to the Earth's magnetic field, will set up current flow around the body section of the ship. This will itself set up a magnetizing field along the length of the ship, one way as the ambient conditions warm up and the other way as they cool down. Each day there is a cycle of change and it becomes interesting to ask if this thermal cyclic can build up the gradual magnetic polarization of the vessel. At this point I will jump way ahead to refer to our invention, the Strachan-Aspden thermoelectric device. It was demonstrated repeatedly by using ice to cool its working surface and deliver electrical output and then by putting in electrical power to show the equally-amazing rapid regeneration of ice on that same surface. Internally the device operated by electrical current oscillations at quite high frequencies but these were not oscillations of the magnetized state. However, by its nature the device would be subject to some magnetic changes as the temperature cycled. Now presumably it takes hundreds of days of climatic heating and cooling before a ship acquires its full measure of magnetization. Equally, it would seem that a hundred or so sequential cycles of heating and cooling between the temperature of ice and a warm room occur before the evident deterioration of the operation of the Strachan-Aspden device is registered. Accordingly, I make the observation that it would seem that the thermal cycling is a factor which polarizes its magnetic state. Comprising, as it does, a thin film ferromagnetic material (nickel), its full polarization would destroy its operability. The principle on which it works requires the domains in each nickel layer to be fairly equally apportioned as between one orientation and the opposite orientation, because the transverse current flow, which is a.c. seeks passage through one or other form of polarized domain according to its flow direction. It chooses the one offering negative resistance and if such passage is denied then there is no regenerative conversion and simply loss. By considering the problem of ship's magnetism one can then understand our problem with the Strachan-Aspden device, the subject of Energy Science Report No. 2 and Part II of this Report No. 3. It needs little imagination to see that, just as for the ship, we simply need to provide for that `degaussing' process. How to implement this effectively will depend upon the specific assembly plan for the main thermoelectric devices, which will need some adaptation to incorporate the controlled degaussing feature. In the development stage, if not in the final product, the incorporation of some diagnostic sensing circuitry which can be used to monitor the unwanted polarization will be necessary to provided the feedback control which keeps the device in a healthy state. Such issues are matters for consultation with commercial developers who decide to exploit this thermoelectric technology and will not be addressed in this summary Report. However, concentrating on the underlying function of the thermoelectric power generator, let us go back to our mid-21st century house and that pipework in the basement. We still need to explain how it produces electricity that we can extract and use. One initial question that will interest some readers is how this topic relates to that reference I made to something that eluded me in my years of Ph.D. research. I was researching the question of why eddy-currents in electrical sheet steels could generate as much as six times the loss expected from accepted theory. It did not occur to me that heat flow from the steel laminations could regenerate EMFs that would cause the current to be far greater than the value determined by resistance and normal Faraday induction. My research clearly demonstrated that the loss anomaly was progressively eliminated as the steel became more and more polarized. By this I mean the ratio of the actual eddy-current loss to the theoretical loss. In other words, it was the fact that the magnetic domain regions in my transformer steel provided a optional current path through the metal, one that is obstructive for thermal reasons and one that aids current flow, also for thermal reasons, that created the anomaly.
It vanished once those domains had been polarized so as to eliminate enough of those that aided current flow. So, if our mid-21st century basement air-conditioning unit is to generate a net output of electrical power, we must avoid that regenerative eddy-current syndrome in its pipework. We do that by laminating the pipe assembly and avoiding its closed conductive sectional form and the laminations are provided, not because we seek to use alternating magnetic induction, as in a power transformer, but rather because we want to set up the non-linear thermal gradient and avoid a mismatch of thermally-induced EMFs which would otherwise promote unwanted current circulation. The circumferential magnetic field effects are thwarted by introducing a break in the circuit path and tapping off the current flow by diverting into a battery which becomes charged or into a load circuit such as a motor or an electric heater in another room. Hopefully, given a modest pipe radius plus a high enough heat throughput rate we should be able to develop a normal cell voltage for this purpose. Given a steel pipe of radius 5 cm. and wall thickness 1 cm. with a 20,000 gauss magnetic flux density along its length, one degree C of temperature drop between its inner and outer surfaces corresponds to a thermal induction of 1,000 V. That, at least, is the theoretical result using empirical data for the relevant thermoelectric coefficient as listed in that book mentioned above. I have verified the source data by tracking back to the original research reference [H. Zahn, Ann. der Phys., 14, p. 886 (1904) and 16, p. 148 (1905)]. Of course, working with a 30 degree C air temperature difference, it is unlikely that even a one degree C drop of temperature through metal can be set up, owing to the limited heat transfer rate across the pipe surface, but one fiftieth of this seems not unreasonable in a thick-walled pipe giving 20 volts output from each pipe section. Six sections connected in series would deliver 120 V d.c. Such, at least, is the prospect ahead and I would urge interest in this subject by those having a corporate interest in developing new technology for the world's energy needs of tomorrow. Now, the above pages have been written without referring to any supporting illustrations because I wanted the message in my words to register. The diagrams now follow and then the remainder of this Part I discourse will deal with two separate topics. The second of these is more specifically concerned with the use of bimetallic thin film layered structures of the kind which featured in the main Strachan-Aspden invention, the subject of US Patent No. 5,288,336. The other topic deals with a theme which has been left aside so far, namely the subject of the secondary, in fact the first Strachan-Aspden invention, as disclosed in US Patent No. 5,065,085. The latter invention will be addressed first, but after the pictorial review. Review of the Nernst Effect Referring to Fig. 1, if heat flow in a metal is depicted by the wavy line, and dT/dz represents temperature gradient, with B representing a magnetic field in the x direction, then there is an electric field of strength E in the mutually orthogonal y direction, given by: E = N(B)dT/dz Here N is the Nernst coefficient and it may be positive or negative, according to the choice of metal. In a sense this phenomenon is akin to the better-known Hall Effect, where a field E is generated in the y Figure 1
direction by the passage of an electric current in the z direction, given a magnetic field B in the x direction. In the Hall Effect we know that the power transferred to that E field arises because the current overcomes a back EMF, the magnetic field B being a mere deflecting agency, just as a railroad track deflects a locomotive but does no work itself. Energy is conserved at all times. However, in the case of the Nernst Effect, although there is also energy conservation, we are setting up an electric field which can deliver electrical power output and the heat input is the only energy source available. The Hall Effect, apart from some small resistance loss, is 100% efficient and, since the Nernst Effect is concerned with temperature gradient, rather than absolute temperature, we have a straight analogy with the Hall effect and so can expect that near-to-100% conversion efficiency. There are only two problems. One is understanding why electricity is generated with no electric current in the heat flow direction and the other is in devising a physical structure that will let heat flow one way while we take off electric current delivered by that E field in a direction at right angles to the heat flow. Heat conduction and electrical conduction tend to share a common path! To resolve the first problem, note that it is well accepted that most of the heat conducted through a metal is carried by electrons. The magnetic field will surely not act on heat as such. It asserts forces on the flow of free electrons carrying that heat. Note that I have used the word `free', because electrons can move through metal in two ways. They can travel freely with little restraint or they can migrate as members of the electron families seated in the outermost shell of the atoms comprising the metal. The electrons in the latter state will, as they move from atom to atom, be subjected to the usual deflecting magnetic forces, but they are held in their quantum states by the succession of atoms in their path and those forces so far as they arise from their transfer from atom to atom are thereby absorbed by the crystals forming the solid body of the metal. Imagine, therefore, that the free electrons transport heat in the z direction and that that heat has the form of kinetic energy which is used, upon deflection in the B field, to stack the electrons up sideways in the x direction against the back EMF of the resulting E field. There will be some back EMF set up in the z direction as well and this must encourage the bound atomic electrons to migrate from atom to atom against the z-direction heat flow. The net result is the slowing down of the electrons carrying heat and the transfer of that heat energy into electric potential that allows the E field to deliver power. The full line (curved, with arrow) in Fig. 2 depicts the free electron path, transverse to the E field (linear in direction of arrow) and the B field (direction normal to the page). The electron flow can be arrested as the electrons are reabsorbed by the atoms and then, as they belong to overlapping electron shells of adjacent atoms, they can migrate back to their starting point. There is no current Figure 2 passing through the metal, shown in Fig. 2 as a solid layer located between and electrically, but not thermally, insulated from the faces of two heat sink plates. By applying different temperatures to the two plates there is a resulting temperature gradient in the metal and, given the B field, the E field follows as a consequence of the Nernst Effect. The positive or negative polarity of the Nernst coefficient poses an interesting question, but its answer need be no more mysterious than the orthodox `positive holes' as referred to in the theory of semiconductors. It is simply a question of mobility of the charge carriers and understanding the quantum-electrodynamic attributes of electrons in motion. It suffices here to let Fig. 3 serve as a
guide as to how `bound' electrons can migrate through a metal without developing an E field. They are moving around the orbits in their atomic shells and they are distributed in energy bands which govern their relative freedom. From the statistical mix of their activity in transporting heat and the building of concentrations of free electrons which set up the E field effects, they somehow contrive to reveal to us the phenomenon which is termed the Nernst Effect. Sadly, technologists have not exploited this phenomenon, even though it has enormous practical potential. The reason is two-fold. Firstly, they are given scientific training which says that the second law of thermodynamics reigns supreme and, secondly, as engineers, they seem to have lacked the necessary imagination. I Figure 3 am mindful that it was not in a book on physics or one on engineering that I saw this subject properly addressed. It was a book on Physical Chemistry written by Walter J. Moore, Professor of Chemistry at Indiana University. My copy was the third edition published in Great Britain in 1956 by Longmans, Green & Co. Ltd., but the original 1950 edition was published by Prentice-Hall Inc., New York. The words which I now quote were on p. 85: "The laws of thermodynamics are inductive in character. They are broad generalizations having an experimental basis in certain human frustrations. Our failure to invent a perpetual-motion machine has led us to postulate the First Law of Thermodynamics. Our failure ever to observe a spontaneous flow of heat from a cold to a hotter body or to obtain perpetual motion of the second kind* has led to the statement of the Second Law. The Third Law of Thermodynamics can be based on our failure to attain the absolute zero of temperature." Note that the laws are not the word of God, but a consequence of man's experience and frustration at trying to replicate something following God's example, because the creation of the universe introduced perpetual motion into our environment and, indeed, in our own composition, a system of atoms, each of which involves electrons kept in a state of motion, even when the atom as a whole comes to rest at that supposedly non-achievable zero temperature on the absolute scale. Having mentioned God, I should say that I believe we can only go so far in our understanding of God's creation as to reach the point where we face questions such as "What is space?", "What is energy?", "What set that energy in motion in space?", "What came before?" and "What follows as destiny?" The human race is a life-form on one planet amongst the numerous astronomical bodies forming that universe and our immediate concern is survival based on a deeper understanding of the energy conversion processes governed by those laws of thermodynamics. However, if those man-made laws are wrong then we need to revise them before we finally accept the inevitable decline in our energy fortunes. Although Professor Moore said that the failure to invent a perpetual motion machine had meant human frustration and resulted in the First Law of Thermodynamics, I must ask how Professor Moore would view the Moving Sculpture which we are told was seen on Norwegian TV as an exhibit by its creator Reidar Finsrud. It is mentioned in the July 1996 issue of the Utah publication `New Energy News'.
10
____________________________________________________________________________ * Perpetual motion of the second kind is the continuous extraction of useful work from the heat of our environment, whereas perpetual motion of the first kind is the production of work from nothing at all. ____________________________________________________________________________ A steel ball weighing 2 lb. runs around a 25" circular aluminium track and rolls towards the pole faces of a horseshoe magnet suspended by a lever and pivot system just above the track and ahead of the approaching ball. As the ball gets close to the magnet it encounters a ramp linked to that lever system and the weight of the ball in riding over the ramp displaces it downwards to lift the magnet sufficiently so that the ball can roll on and pass underneath it. The magnet imparts a forward drive force as it attracts the ball and it needs less energy to lift the magnet clear of the ball than is gained from the magnet when in its lowered position. The report states "A working model has been running for over one month in full public view in Norway". Now, given that this is a genuine account of a real machine, we confront the reality of perpetual motion. On the face of it, the First Law of Thermodynamics has been disproved, but I remind the reader of those words above from that 1956 edition of the book by Professor Moore, "The laws of thermodynamics are inductive in character." What that means is that the laws are not `proved' 100%, because they are worded so generally as to extend far beyond the immediate experimental circumstances which have been taken as their basis, but that one seems able to predict from them what may happen if applied to hitherto untested circumstances. Now, from that year 1956, I have been declaring to whoever was willing to listen that the setting up of a magnetic field by the process we call ìnduction' sheds energy into space (even vacuous space) as heat, where it is dispersed by merger with the omnipresent vacuum energy activity of the aether. I have urged recognition that the aether becomes polarized by reacting and so is conditioned to shed its own energy when we demagnetize that field. So, if you regard that aether energy as heat, whether at zero temperature absolute or at 2.7 Kelvin, the cosmic background temperature of space, then you can see how `thermodynamics' gets into the act. In the latter case the inductive process is a mysterious exercise of influence by an electrical current in a circuit, as it somehow affects energy transfer across space to where a secondary circuit is located. My inductive powers then tell me that, for energy to go from A to B via empty space C, I cannot say space is empty if energy is to be conserved according to the first law of thermodynamics. Then, if space is not empty, since space is open terrain not assigned to the exclusive use of the energy source at A, I ask if that space could pool energy in transit from a multiplicity of sources. In that case I would hesitate before ridiculing the possibility that energy shed by A may arrive at B supplemented by an excess of thermodynamic energy drawn from C. Now, if you do not like to think about space in this context and you choose to regard the aether as non-existent, then that process of electromagnetic induction means an exchange of energy with something that does not exist and so the process cannot occur, according to the First Law of Thermodynamics as a statement of perpetual motion of the first kind. Yet, we have built electrical technology on the discovery of electromagnetic induction, building on the recorded experience of Michael Faraday. If you choose to regard the aether as existing but describe it as a field then you are playing with words and have defined aether as something other than simply an energy medium. In that case would you say that a field has a temperature? It is difficult to see where `thermodynamics'
11
comes into play unless we have heat. Physicists speak of entropy, which is a word expressing something far more mysterious than what I understand by the word aether. Entropy is heat degraded by temperature, it being Q/T, a quantity of heat Q divided by temperature T. We shed energy into empty space by heat radiation and we say that entropy always increases, but yet we do not say that that emptiness of space has a temperature. In other words, most scientists who refer to thermodynamics and entropy, really do not know what they are talking about and, certainly, they could never believe that the Norwegian Moving Sculpture mentioned above is anything other than a trick aimed to deceive. When one then considers the Second Law of Thermodynamics there is even greater confusion, because one needs two temperatures to account for heat flowing to a greater entropy state as it converts into useful work, but always needing to find a cooler destiny. Does that Norwegian perpetual motion machine run on heat? It cannot, according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, unless we feed in some heat at a temperature higher than ambient. So, what can the Third Law of Thermodynamics tell us? We can never attain absolute zero of temperature! Well, why should we want to do that anyway and, if we did, how far might we get? Professor Moore in that book which dates back more that forty years states: "In 1950, workers in Leiden reached a temperature of 0.0014 Kelvin." They did that by a process of demagnetization. In telling this story Professor Moore reaches his conclusion which is that: "The Third Law of Thermodynamics will, therefore, be postulated as follows: It is impossible by any procedure, no matter how idealized, to reduce the temperature of any system to the absolute zero in a finite number of operations." Yet, I recall a recent mention of researchers at M.I.T. having achieved a temperature that was a low as a few billionths Kelvin, and so presume that, whatever purpose there was in devising the Third Law, it is hardly important technologically. Now, I really have little patience with scientists who tell me I cannot do something or other owing to one or other of the laws of thermodynamics. Each of those laws involves `small print' and needs scrutiny to see what is meant by the `let-out' clauses. In enforcing those laws one has always to adapt their interpretation to the `case law' on which they were founded, the experience of the past. However, we must accept that we are inevitably destined to experience new discoveries as technology advances. To come to the point about what is disclosed above by reference to Figs. 2 and 3, does an electron in motion have a temperature and is that temperature different from that of the metal conductor in which the electron transports heat? Scientists can refer to Fermi energies and temperatures of electrons that can run into millions on the centigrade scale but they will not accept the possibility of using electron flow conveying heat in metal as a means for breaching the laws of thermodynamics. This Report faces up to that issue and challenges the Second Law of Thermodynamics by the facts of experiment, just as that `Moving Sculpture' in Norway challenges the First Law of Thermodynamics unless one sees the aether as an energy source in its own right. There seems no point in challenging the Third Law of Thermodynamics, because, as it is worded above, it merely says that there is a final line to be drawn between what is measurable in terms of temperature and what is not measurable and that we can only reach that line by taking one step at a time. An atom, the centre of mass of which is at rest, has zero temperature, even though its component electrons and nucleus remain in motion. A free electron moving through a metal at
12
what is virtually zero absolute temperature, might still be said to have a temperature. As such it has the capacity to do useful work. If we can extract some of its energy by slowing it down and it can get recharged by being drawn periodically into the quantum world of an absorbing atom, then there is scope for technological advantage which breaches the laws of thermodynamics. The free electron can be deflected by a magnetic field. It can act in concert with other free electrons to set up mutual inductance electromagnetically, which is a thermodynamic process shedding heat. Our task is to see how we can use magnetism to our advantage and, though Report No. 9 in this Energy Science series concerns tapping energy from the aether, our horizon in this Report No. 3 is more modest in seeking only to tap the ambient heat resource of our environment. We will defy the Second Law of Thermodynamics, but do so by harnessing a phenomenon discovered by Nernst, whose name is closely associated with that Third Law of Thermodynamics. However, we will not be doing anything in breach of that Third Law. Experiments using the Strachan-Aspden devices already tested show cooling to minus 40 degrees C from an environmental temperature of a normal laboratory and that is sufficient to challenge the Second Law of Thermodynamics and gave basis for useful technology. Unfortunately, I cannot see a way in which to build a Moving Sculpture which can demonstrate this process, but it may help to portray something along the following lines. Refer to Fig. 4. Imagine that steel ball to run down the slight incline of a straight track, where the incline represents a temperature gradient. Then suppose the track is curved through a right-angle at a low level so as to deflect the ball and cause it use its kinetic energy by rolling up a steeper but short incline. The ball represents the electron and the deflecting track represents the action of a magnetic field. Now, if the ball is set free at the top of the main track and given a starting velocity it will have enough energy, not only to reach the same height in climbing the branching track, but it will crash into other such balls that got there ahead and try to push them out of the way. Happily we provide a power-driven conveyor system by Figure 4 which a ball reaching that position can be carried back to the start position before being release again to start the ball rolling once more. That power-driven conveyor system is shown in Fig. 4. The conveyor is the zero-point activity of that microscopic quantum world of electron motion in the bound states within the atoms forming the metal conductor. The balls will circulate around that system and allow us to extract some of their energy just before they board that conveyor system, just as surely as conduction electrons are set free from host atoms of a metal and are reabsorbed by those atoms, even though they have spent some of their energy. This is an ongoing process whether or not the metal has a uniform temperature, but we need to set up a temperature differential (T to T* in Fig 4) so as to create that track which allows the applied magnetic field to serve as a deflecting influence. The temperature difference is needed to initiate the electron flow which allows us to relate this to what is shown in Fig. 1. In referring to the way in which electrons have two ways of spending their time, one where they roam free in gliding past atoms as they wander through a conductor and one where they have found lodging inside at atom, we are discussing something real and active in the world of physics. This is not imagination. It is a physical system in which energy exchanges processes occur on an ongoing basis without suffering any restraints imposed by the laws of thermodynamics. Why, one
13
may wonder, is there not a law of thermodynamics which declares that a body at a uniform temperature cannot sustain activity in which there is any ongoing changes of state as between its component parts? Such a law would not be contrary to our experience of what we see in our environment. All we can `see' inside the microdomains of a solid metal conductor using electron microscopes and the like is evidence of a crystal structure and a state of order, but yet we have not adopted a law of thermodynamics which says that there is no ongoing activity exchanging energy states in that conductor. Without such a law I am free to ask what happens when an atom with a single vacancy in its electron lodging capacity moving one way collides with an electron moving the opposite way and absorbs it. Obviously, it becomes a neutral non-ionized particle of matter and we know from Newton's laws of mechanics how to interpret momentum and the resulting energy deployment. However, Newtonian mechanics also do not tell us what happens to the magnetic inductance energy that the system had before the collision, owing to opposite polarity electric charge travelling in opposite directions, but yet does not have immediately after that collision. Suppose, just for the sake of argument, that the atom before collision had the same mass as the electron before collision, then Newtonian theory tells us that both particles could come to rest momentarily before separating again by moving in opposite directions with the same relative velocity. We have then full conservation of energy because the net electric current has reversed direction and so the self-inductance energy of this two-charge system is unchanged. Go further and allow for the atom having a normal mass much greater than the electron. Now, even with the electron having high speeds governed by the Fermi-Dirac statistics, the speeds of the atoms at normal room temperature will inevitably result in energy being transferred to those electrons by those collisions. Heat latent in the motion of atoms will transfer to the electrons, but the effect of current and the field reaction associated with inductance can play a role which ensures that the energy added to the electrons is not lost as heat but deployed in motion that sustains the overall level of that current. In short, there can be a superconductive state owing to the regeneration of spent heat as it converts into electricity which can be harnessed. Therefore, as we see superconductivity develop and come into use in room temperature applications, so we will have another route available for breaching the accepted laws of thermodynamics, but the immediate task is to describe the technology which exploits the Nernst Effect. The First Strachan-Aspden Invention It is possible to combine three different metals to form a composite conductor which operates in a magnetic field so as to convert heat into electricity, without being subject to the Carnot efficiency limits. It is even possible to generate alternating current as output, which means that it can be extracted through a transformer coupling at an elevated voltage. Consider Fig. 5. There are three metals Cu, Ni and Zn bonded together in the manner shown. The wavy line indicates the passage of heat, its direction being transverse to the direction in which electric current oscillates. A magnetic field is applied in the third orthogonal direction. The magnetic field acts on the nickel to polarize it sufficiently, say to about 80% saturation. Figure 5
14
When current flows to the left it favours passage from Ni to Cu, owing to the fact that there is Peltier cooling at the junction between the nickel and the copper. When current flows in the reverse direction, to the right, it flows from Cu to Zn and from Zn to Ni, cooling at the first junction and heating at the second. Of itself, this Peltier action of cooling and heating is productive of heat overall, meaning that the a.c. current will result in conversion of electricity into heat, which is not of special interest. However, that heat flow through the nickel plays an important role by virtue of the Nernst Effect. When current flows to the left much of it flows through the full body of the nickel sector. In travelling transversely with respect to both a magnetic field and a temperature gradient the current is aided by an induced E field. There is additional cooling in the nickel. When current flows in the reverse direction it is opposed by that same E field in the nickel induced by the temperature gradient, which is why it flows through the zinc instead. It finds passage into the nickel only at the extremity of the nickel sector. As a result, the overall effect can be a Nernst cooling which far outweighs the Peltier heating and that means that we can generate a.c. from the heat flowing into this metal structure. Note that with astute use of thermal insulation over the Cu section and on the left hand portion of the Zn as well as on the right hand edge surface of the Zn section and underside of the Ni section, the heat flow can be guided along the required path. This is sufficient to explain the principle of operation implemented in what is a fairly robust design, but one demanding the external application of strong magnetic fields (as by use of permanent magnets), a mutually orthogonal flow of heat. It needs some confidence to go to the trouble of building such a device but there is little complication in circuit design if the an a.c. power source is used as input and the load circuit is itself an electrical resistor which represents a load for test purposes. The initial prototype design could aim to take an input of heat at, say, 30oC and allow its passage through the device to a cold heat sink at !10oC. Now, if you have understood what has already been said about the Nernst Effect you will know that the temperature gradient promotes heat inflow to the device and that we use magnets to deflect that energy so that, instead of reaching the output to the cold heat sink, much of that energy is converted to augment the electrical power in the load circuit. Temperature, as such, meaning an absolute measure in Kelvin does not feature in the coefficient governing the Nernst Effect and so one could expect, say, 50% of that heat to convert to electricity that can reach the load. So now suppose that you can demonstrate this, guided by what is disclosed to you here in this Report and also in Energy Science Report No. 2, and consider how you might develop the prototype to the next stage. This involves using a reversed heat engine, such as a vapour compression machine. A coefficient of performance of 6 can be expected for the above temperatures, meaning that for every joule of electrical input there is 6 joules of cooling. Yet, at the 50% conversion efficiency rate of the Nernst device, this would mean a heat input of 12 joules from the 30oC heat sink. As augmented electrical circuit power we would generate 6 joules of electricity from the heat absorbed in transit. Of that, we can feed the 1 joule back to the reversed heat engine to sustain its operation. There is margin here for a good measure of operational losses, but a significant net power gain delivered as electricity is seemingly quite feasible, with other spin-off benefits if we wish to use the device for heating purposes as well. To keep the energy books balanced there has to be a matching external inflow of heat energy at 30oC equal to that delivered as electrical power. The logical source for that heat is the ambient atmosphere and so, if that temperature is lower in value, then the engine must be designed and set to operate between different temperature limits.
15
Conclusion There is one point at this stage that warrants comment. So much is said about the First Law of Thermodynamics by those not involved in the real technology of the thermodynamic field, everyone quoting it as a statement of something that says it is impossible to do what we have described above. However, Thermodynamics was one of the five final examination subjects I took in my honours level university degree. It was in engineering and involved extensive practical testing of many different heat engines. The Heat Engines textbook we used was written by the Director of the Engineering Laboratories of that university. In his words, the First Law of Thermodynamics "may be stated as follows: Heat and mechanical work are mutually convertible." To me, that is implicit in the thermo and dynamics expressions, just as if we refer to electrodynamics we are discussing the conversion of electric to mechanical work and vice versa. In mechanics generally, which embracing heat as the kinetic energy of the molecules in the heated fluid, there has to be compliance with the laws of action and reaction and `perpetual motion' is ruled out on that count. In electrodynamics generally, as is well known from the accepted theory of the interaction force between two isolated charges in motion, there can be out-of-balance forces. These signify energy exchange with the inductive field environment. In my above account concerning the Nernst Effect I am referring not to the motion of molecules as conveyers of heat, but electrons moving freely as discrete charges, these being the primary carriers of heat through metal. The magnetic field effect harnessed puts the action discussed outside the realm of thermodynamics and brings it into the field of electrodynamics. The latter is a subject I have researched far more than thermodynamics and the motor research, the subject of other Energy Science Reports in this series builds on that research background. Whatever the expert and academic background of the reader, the interdisciplinary nature of the subject I am discussing here cannot be ignored by assuming that someone else will be able to fault my claims. If I am deemed to be wrong, there is need to prove me wrong, not just assume I am wrong, because, if I am right, then the technology is indispensable in the onward quest to solve our energy needs. As a starter, one ought to begin by explaining an observed fact evident from the Strachan-Aspden devices as demonstrated. Though we do not have an operational unit any longer, there is a video record of operation. They were bimetallic assemblies of symmetrical construction as between the two heat sinks. When operating in Peltier mode to generate a heat difference with electrical power input along a transverse path parallel to the planes of the heat sinks, it should have been a 50:50 chance at switch on, whether heat sink A cooled or heat sink B cooled, as the other heated. That transverse path was through the planes of Ni-Al metal layers, stacked between those heat sinks. Yet, in every test witnessed, there was always cooling of the exposed heat sink, whereas the other heat sink was a metal base on which the electric circuitry was mounted, which meant that any excess power generated was dissipated as circuit current heating. The logical answer, as I see it, is that there was a cooling process supplementing and indeed overriding the Peltier Effect, and that cooling, I submit, can only be the Nernst Effect cooling which I have discussed at length above. *****
NOTE THAT THE REMAINDER OF THIS REPORT IS A TEXT DATING FROM A 1994 VERSION AND IT STANDS ON ITS OWN, SEPARATE FROM PART I ABOVE, EXCEPT THAT THERE HAS BEEN ADJUSTMENT OF THE FIGURE REFERENCES TO PROVIDE CONTINUITY OF SEQUENCE.
PART II
Introduction This is the third of a series of reports which are intended to serve as a technical briefing helpful in the evaluation of invention rights by expert opinion more familiar with conventional technology. The subject matter concerns thermoelectricity and ferromagnetism as applied in a novel combination aimed at a fundamentally new technique for converting heat and electricity using a solid state apparatus. It is foreseen that the technology proposed will allow the efficient generation of electricity on a scale that can serve as a main power supply based on non-polluting heat sources that need not necessarily be nuclear in form. The same technology is also seen as a substitute for CFC refrigeration and air conditioning systems. The background to what is here described is the demonstrated research prototype devices built by John Scott Strachan and incorporating principles which are the subject of patent rights of which this author and Strachan are co-inventors. Both Strachan and the author are independent in a research sense, meaning that the project work reported is not the work of research in a corporation or institutional laboratory. The physics involved in the invention is somewhat challenging and, in the light of established doctrines and practice, not easily understood without a special briefing. Indeed, without such a briefing as this, comment by experts on the technical viability of the technology, notwithstanding its demonstrable features, could impede the assessment task confronting technical advisors to those corporations we hope to interest in the needed R&D that the technology warrants. This Report No. 3 sets out to explore a new aspect of the technology and is supplemental to ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT No. 2 which is really a packaged assembly of prior reports and patent information covering the earlier activity on the Strachan-Aspden invention. The latter Report plus a demonstration of the working device in its refrigeration and power generation modes, as shown also in a video record, have been the basis in our efforts to engender interest by those who can take the R&D forward. This Report aims to point researchers in the direction which this author perceives as being the most promising from a product development point of view. However, in the absence of documented legal agreements, the Report should in no way be deemed to confer any implied free right of use in connection with what is disclosed, as proprietary rights are reserved, as by prior patent filing. Preliminary Observations The prototype demonstration devices all had a working core assembled from strips cut from an electrically polarised polymer sheet that formed the substrate for a very thin bimetallic surface coating of nickel and aluminium. The relevant features from a functional viewpoint are: (a) (b) (c) (d) The fact that the nickel is ferromagnetic. The fact that the two metals have contact interface that can intercept heat flow confined to the plane of the material. The fact that, in being very thin, the metal, when transporting heat, could operate with fairly high temperature gradients in the metal. The fact that the substrate was a heat insulator and a space filler separating the conductive metal films and so ensuring that losses by heat flow between hot and cold heat sinks were minimal. The fact that, in lending itself to assembly in a structure that became a series-parallel plate capacitor, we could excite electrical oscillations
(e)
17
transverse to the bimetallic junction interface plane, which meant that Peltier EMFs were directed in the line of current flow and such flow was through metal over an area of large cross-section which meant virtual elimination of I2R loss. (f) The fact that the two metals were opposite in electrical character, meaning that their charge and heat carriers were of different electrical polarities, a feature which, by virtue of the Thomson Effect, means that in-plane current flowing and circulating between the hot and cold sides of the device derived its power directly from heat throughput and did not drain the electrical power fed by the Peltier EMF. The fact that the device functioned as it was designed to function with a.c. as the transverse input-output form of power, because the Thomson current could divert the flow between hot and cold junction sides of the device according to the reversals of current polarity.
(g)
What we did not know is the design scope for increasing the thickness of the laminar metal in the device and whether the use of an a.c. operating frequency measured in tens of kilohertz was essential. It seemed from our earlier research that we needed that frequency activity to prevent a kind of lock-in effect forming super-cold spots in the Peltier-cooled portions of the junction interface or one needed a prevalent magnetic field which, by Lorentz force effects, could promote a shifting or displacement of the current flow traversing a junction. Strachan had suspected that there were oscillations developing in his d.c. experiments on thermocouples subjected to strong permanent magnet fields. Furthermore, and having regard to certain other early experiments that were performed on thick metal assemblies subjected to high temperature operation, but operating at power frequency, we may well have neglected the role of the Nernst Effect in interpreting the performance data in our high frequency capacitor coupled devices. It is noted that it was the Nernst Effect which this author saw as the crucial factor in the operation of the three metal device that became the subject of our U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 (corresponding U.K. Patent No. 2,225,161). However, Strachan in his funded experimental work concentrated attention on the form of device that was so impressive in generating power from ice and in freezing water with electric battery power input using that capacitor assembly and the subject of those other patents remained undeveloped. It may be noted also that the whole foundation of the cooperation between Strachan and myself was our correspondence and exchanges some time even before we first met en route to a 1988 Canadian symposium on clean energy. Those exchanges concerned the prospect of fabricating thermocouples by laminar thin film assemblies, virtually almost as a book-binding operation, and particularly our findings that magnets have a significant effect on the way thermocouple junctions perform. A practical problem which confronted Strachan was that a great deal of effort was needed to cut and assemble hundreds of tiny pieces of polymer film in a way which avoided short-circuits between adjacent metal films and yet allowed connections to be made linking into what was a combined series-parallel capacitor structure. In being of small size, meaning limited power rating, there was then the task of designing and connecting an electronic circuit that could develop the necessary oscillations and take off power without interposing obstructive circuit contact and threshold potentials, whilst, to get adequate current flow through the series-connected sections of the capacitor, resonant operation at high electrical stress in the polymer dielectric was necessary.
18
Indeed, the manual assembly problem and circuit design exposed, in a sense, Strachan's Achilles' heel and it was this that precluded extensive onward diagnostic testing based on building several test structures using different design parameters, eg. choice of metal combination, metal film thickness and substrate material. There were other factors too, mainly arising from the route Strachan had followed in his earlier corporate research employment, which had involved the bonding of stacks of the polymer film in a structure which was acoustically tuned to set up mechanical vibrations for a medical application. That project had encountered operational difficulties owing to delamination and the assembly technique, though tedious, had evolved to overcome that problem whilst still needing excessive care to avoid electrical end-shorting as the bonded film components were cut to size. In testing the structures assembled for that project Strachan had found that spurious electrical effects were overloading his test circuits and that there were instabilities that could be stimulated, seemingly by static charge, heat or mere physical displacement associated with manual handling. Another problem, concerning the later thermoelectric research, was that there was some uncertainty, at least in Strachan's mind, as to whether the piezoelectric properties of the polymer were contributing in some way, even though this seemed to be ruled out of significance by the a.c. operation. My assumption on this was that the heating and cooling that accompanies cycles of voltage potential would compensate one another. There simply had to be an operational asymmetry from a functional point of view if net heating and net cooling were to link with the highly efficient electrical energy exchange that was in evidence. It was only late in 1992, stimulated by a new funding sponsor interested in the power generation applications, that Strachan about measuring the magnetic field that was of necessity produced in the thin film by the Thomson Effect current circulation. His findings were of such an unexpected nature that he then stated we need have no more circuit switching problems. He became convinced that we were dealing with a phenomenon in the metal and not one in the polymer dielectric. Thermodynamics Limited, which was the vehicle through which the patent rights were to be exploited, was granted an option to acquire rights under the U.K. patents which allowed the contractual arrangement with the sponsor and the R&D appraisal funding was passed on by subcontract to Strachan's laser-orientated venture Optical Metrology Limited. Strachan's research findings were then covered by Thermodynamics Limited filing a U.K. patent application on 6th February 1993, but since then no further progress has been made and no information forthcoming from that project. In the event, therefore, though this patent application was officially published as GB 2,275,128 it was not taken further and so became abandoned. However, it is of relevance to this Report to summarize the scientific nature of the above discovery and, no doubt, more information will eventually be forthcoming from research endeavour of others now interested in that subject. In this connection, it must be stressed that, although we believe the phenomenon of interest is occurring in the metal, it is clear that there are some advantages in using the polymer PVDF because, in the form used, it has a strong electric polarization which allows one to control the cyclic changes of very strong electric fields at the interface with a metal film. This had a quite remarkable effect on the magnetic polarization developed in nickel but only when a temperature gradient was present in the plane of the film. The main thrust of this Report, which does not concern polymer features, is the onward research now needed to fabricate a product version, based on this author's own independent research findings, and this requires some discussion of the Nernst Effect.
19
What will be described below is a way of building a `solid-state magneto-hydrodynamic power generator' that has features which allow one to probe heat-to-electric-power energy conversion efficiencies not hitherto believed possible in a thermo-electric power converter. The Nernst Effect in thermoelectricity is one for which a temperature gradient in a metal in the z direction will, in the presence of a magnetic field acting in the x direction, produce an EMF in the y direction. The polarity of this EMF can be positive or negative according as to whether the heat transport is propagated by charge carriers which are of positive or electric polarity. The effect arises by analogy with the high power plasma technology involving thermal activation of ion flow in a magneto-hydro-dynamic (MHD) generator. In simple terms the magnetic field acts as a catalyst in asserting the usual Lorentz force action and causing the ions to be deflected from the z direction to the y direction. Heat is thereby deployed into an orderly electrical form which means that if electrical power is taken off in the y direction there is cooling and heat flow in the z direction loses temperature at an accelerated rate. In practical terms, of course, the problem is one of taking the electrical power off in the y direction without losing heat through the current conductor leads. In a MHD generator this poses little problem because of the plasma is transported at high speed and the heat is not merely that of conduction in a static gaseous medium. This eliminates the contest between metal conduction of heat and electricity that one finds in normal Nernst Effect devices. The Strachan-Aspden configuration is abnormal in this sense because the heat flow contest is between a polymer and the bimetallic laminations and the polymer, as a dielectric, transports electric current by Maxwell displacement processes which are unrelated to heat conduction. Now, what was the late-1992 experimental discovery? It may have been illusory, a kind of ghost action related to magnetostriction in nickel and the Villari Effect, by which a stress induced piezoelectrically in the substrate polymer and subject to applied heat conditions was affecting the polarization of the nickel. On the other hand, it could come to be regarded as a new thermoelectric effect, ranking alongside those of Seebeck, Peltier, Thomson, Nernst, Ettinghausen and Leduc, all of which are different and yet somehow related phenomena. The discovery indicated that the application of a thermal gradient in the z direction combined with the application of an EMF producing a potential drop through the dielectric interfacing with the metal and perhaps communicated into the metal in the y direction will spontaneously affect a magnetic polarisation in the x direction. On the face of it, the experiment showed that a powerful magnetic field could be switched on and off in the x direction by regulating that EMF and no significant electrical power input was needed. Strachan proved this by feeding the control signal through a very high resistance and we saw this as amounting to a kind of solid-state grid-control device by which a powerful magnetic field could be switched on and off, even at a frequency measured in tens of kilohertz. What was needed was the heat input setting up that temperature gradient. It was on this basis that the above-referenced patent application was filed, because one could see this as a way forward for converting heat input into electrical output via magnetic induction based on the use of transformer principles. However, with no useful detailed measurement data adequate at this time to determine the true nature of the action, this writer has been left in a quandary on this issue. Whereas the basic Nernst Effect is the use of magnetism as a mere catalyst in converting heat into electricity and vice versa, we had here sight of the possibility of using a controlling electric field as a mere catalyst in regulating energy exchange as between heat and magnetic induction power output. The latter represents control, modulation, operation at a power frequency
20
and voltage output governed by the turns on a inductively-coupled winding, all of which is good news for commercial exploitation. This finding by Strachan must be researched further, in the light of the fact that the discovery was made using very thin film metal on the polymer substrate, and Strachan's later attempts to replicate the control action in a unit assembled from metal sheet stock were also successful, though only partially so when the metal thickness exceeded 10 microns. The research was abandoned before he had performed enough diagnostic testing of the phenomenon and given enough attention to magnetic inductive coupling problems in his test rig. One remains in doubt, therefore, as to whether or not it may be possible to exploit the above discovery in a heat pump or in fully operative heat to electricity converter. This is where this author decided to get involved directly on an independent experimental venture which has, however, been of minimal scope so far owing to the problem of setting up a home laboratory facility with no external funding source. My objective was to see through a form of experiment where heat gradients are established in bimetallic laminations by inductive in-feed of eddy-currents. That might seem the wrong way to go about the research, bearing in mind that one seeks to avoid loss and have heat transfer supplied via external heat sinks, but the physics of the internal eddy-current heating action can be quite revealing. Also, I had become mindful of the fact that research on cold fusion had proved unrewarding as soon as èxpert' verification had involved extra care in keeping temperature constant in a test calorimeter. This, I had interpreted as a recipe for choking off the action, in that it might require a temperature gradient in the host metal cathode used in cold fusion to set up the electric nucleating charge effects that could initiate the reaction. So, my feelings were that there was sense in our thermoelectric situation in feeding heat into the metal to set up the initial temperature gradients which could act as a switch-on trigger in activating the Nernst Effect. Accordingly, with this preliminary commentary, I draw attention to the reference to my thermoelectric research reported at pp. 21-30 of ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1 which gave me confidence in the energy regeneration potential possible from use of the Nernst Effect in the manner of the Strachan-Aspden invention. ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2 gives the full background of record concerning the 1988-1993 activity on the Strachan-Aspden invention. This Report concerns therefore what this author now sees as the most promising way forward, presented as part of an overall project, but the general effort, as funded by future sponsoring interests, still ought to proceed on several parallel investigations to ensure we do know the best route to expediting commercial development. There are four separate research avenues warranting such exploration and, in retrospect, the first, which involves use of polymers, is the one that seems to be the most difficult but yet it is the one used by Strachan in all three demonstrated prototypes. The reason is that the evidence of an anomalous thermoelectric effect presented itself as unexpected spin-off from the prior research performed by Strachan for the medical application. That, fortuitously, upon special development, made it possible to table a demonstration of something that was quite tantalizing but somewhat ahead of the understanding of the true physics involved. However, in being linked to the polymer feature, that predisposed research effort in a way that has thwarted rapid progress. Strachan's full report on this background technology is an Appendix to ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2. The four research routes can be summarized as: 1) The development of thin-film polymer-based devices replicating the design features of the three prototype devices already built by Strachan and all of which functioned
21
well. Strachan has not run the two devices designed to work in refrigeration mode much below !40o C and the object should be to see how low one can take the temperature in view of the cryogenic possibilities. Strachan has avoided upper temperatures beyond that of water under normal pressure, because the polymer substrate properties would deteriorate and he relies on that for the capacitor activation. Here, however, one can see the potential for using polymers which are electrically conductive but heat resistive, i.e. not exploiting their dielectric capacitative properties, and that certainly warrants full scale R&D investigation. 2) Effort on developing the design embodied in the magnetically activated thick metal structure disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 (U.K. Patent No. 2,225,161). Test results on this have not been documented by Strachan but he reported that he had in fact done tests which were successful and it was on that basis that the subject patent applications were filed. Flame heat was apparently used as input and that promises something of interest to higher temperature needs of the power generating industry. There should be effort to explore the `discovery' of the electric field control further, first from the pure verification aspect of this as a new scientific 'effect' and then as an application study to understand if the principle can be built into a practical heatelectricity transformer device. If that proves impractical it is important to know the reason why. There should also be an experimental investigation based on the theme now to be discussed in the remainder of this Report, which aims directly at a regenerative action by which heat is converted into electricity. The prospect in sight here is not just the generation of main power from heat, but the refrigeration features that are entailed in the same process.
3)
4)
Solid-State Magneto-Hydrodynamic Power It is assumed at this stage that the reader will have access to the detailed description of the Strachan-Aspden technology as described in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2, it being the sole objective now to develop the research theme (4) of the above list. In order to focus the attentions of industrial interests it seems best to outline at this stage the anticipated constructional form of a possible product. The core design would seem to be one having two planar metal heat transfer surfaces bounding an internal assembly. A temperature differential between these two surfaces is associated with heat flow through laterally-disposed metal rib-like connections within the structure. Some means for electrical activation of a cross-current flow transverse to the heat flow direction is then needed inside the panel unit thus formed. The latter could, as simple logical alternatives, be couplings or connections that are either capacitative, directly conductive (through heat insulating polymer) or magnetically inductive, whichever is the most effective and reliable as well as viable on price considerations. This description, however, presents a quite ingenious way of using the conductive coupling without the design limitations of capacitance coupling. It has the merit of also being the most expeditious research route for this author in present circumstances, pending developments on the conductive polymer front.
THERE IS NO PAGE 22
23
In outlining this specific product form, this author is relying on his assumption that it is the Nernst Effect that can be exploited by a special combination of design features and it is important, therefore, to give a solid physical scientific basis for that assumption. This is based on a logical consideration of the problem of harnessing the Nernst Effect and, more particularly, upon an experiment. The experiment is that discussed below under the heading Nernst Effect in Relation to Eddy-Currents. The logical theme is that of the following argument. A conventional MHD generator feeds heat into an ionised gas by combustion leading to ionisation. The gas is caused to flow along a channel subjected to a lateral magnetic field. This deflects positive ions one way and negative ions the other way, causing them to develop a back EMF across the side electrodes, which EMF acts against their motion in the direction of deflection and slows them down. In cooling they have transferred energy into electric potential that feeds a current drawn off from those electrodes. This process is subject to the Carnot efficiency limitation, because the gas has a temperature and as much gas flows as output as enters as input, losing temperature on the way. The Carnot efficiency concerns the amount of heat energy extracted as electricity in relation to heat input, but that gas emerging as waste heat at a lower temperature carries away the energy that cannot be converted into electricity. Note that the Peltier Effect or Seebeck Effect have a Carnot limitation because here the relevant action occurs at a junction interface between two metals having a contact potential set up between them. Here there is a circulating current confined to the metal circuit, but the crossing of the current at the hot junction interface results in a cooling because the current is produced by an EMF proportional to the contact potential (Peltier EMF) at the higher temperature. All that power is transferred into electricity which goes around the circuit, not as heat, but as electrical action. The current, unfortunately, has to cross the other cooler junction and so it has to allow much of that electrical power to come back into the thermal picture and go to waste by producing heat related to that cooler junction temperature. This is what brings the Carnot energy conversion efficiency restriction into play. Then, there is the Thomson Effect by which the very presence of a temperature gradient, even in a single metal substance, results in heat flow conveyed by electric charge carriers. These are like the ionised gas in the MHD generator. They do not escape from the metal but if two metals work together, one conveying negative charge and the other positive charge, with that heat flow, so the action can occur to transfer heat whilst the process complies with the Carnot criteria. It is here that a discerning scientist might ask whether one can arrest the flow of heat in a metal by applying a back EMF. The answer is negative, but the answer is not to be found in textbooks. The reason, undoubtedly, is that heat flow is a shared and collective action involving all free charge present in a metal, whereas the moment one applies an EMF to a metal there is an unstable effect and a current discharge that drives electrons against the heat flow by allowing some to group into a fast-moving filamentary flow. This is seen as accounting for the `cold-spot' effects occurring at the cooled thermoelectric junction, as discussed in an Appendix to ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2. Now, let us consider the Nernst Effect. Here there is a temperature gradient, which means a flow of heat energy carried by free electric charge in metal. In iron or nickel this becomes subject to the magnetic action present in all the microscopic domains, but we will simply consider that, owing to the ferromagnetic nature or iron or nickel, we can set up a strong magnetic field transverse to that heat flow.
24
This is nothing other than a solid-state MHD scenario which suggests a Carnot limitation on performance. However, consider here what it is that is carrying that heat. It is the electrons or positive holes and we need to ask how these are affected in transit between the hot and cold sides of the metal host conductor. Firstly, they are deflected by the usual Lorentz forces to set up the EMF transversely in the metal. That means cooling as energy feeds into electric potential. Secondly, is there a difference between this and the MHD generator? Yes, there is, because once an ion in the MHD generator has cooled by delivering the electrical output, that ion merges with other gas ions that are all flowing with it along the channel towards the exhaust end of the generator and it can acquire no further energy able to generate more electricity without depriving another ion from asserting that role. In the metal, on the other hand, there are atoms vibrating about 'rest' positions in the structure that act as mediators in the thermal exchanges. This means that the heat shed by an electron can be promptly replenished while still in the hot zone, replenished by a source that does not itself have to move on to the lower temperature region. Note here that when an electron is deflected by the magnetic field to set up that transverse EMF it knows only the local temperature. It cannot just shed an amount of heat energy that leaves it at the temperature at the cooler end of the system. Indeed, it may be brought to rest in a thermal sense and have to merge with the environment by picking up heat which implies conservation of `cold' in the process. If energy and heat can be conserved, so can `cold', meaning that, if the electron has shed its heat by the Nernst Effect, it will need some action at the low temperature end of the system to bring the Carnot regime into this scenario. Yet, as the electrons reach the end of their passage through the metal and the magnetic field they are still subject to same heat-to-electrical transfer action because the Nernst Effect is still active so long as some heat is flowing. The result of this is that the Nernst Effect becomes a function of temperature gradient and not temperature as such. The temperature gradient is a measure of the relevant electric current flow as carried by 'free' charge. Heat flow carried by electrons in passage through a strong transverse magnetic field and subject to a high temperature gradient will then develop an EMF which, if allowed to feed current, will, in turn, develop a cooling effect which has no regard to the absolute temperature except to the extent that the heat content per electron is determined by that temperature. If one assumes that an electron giving up its heat energy to set up a Nernst potential loses only a proportion of that energy and recovers none in its onward passage to lower temperature regions in the metal, then one can logically argue that the Carnot efficiency factor applies as in the MHD generator. However, this seems not to be a correct physical picture of the true events occurring with the Nernst Effect. Indeed, it seems one can think in terms of a near 100% efficiency of heat-to-electricity energy conversion, just as the operation of Lorentz-related electrodynamic forces in electrical machines operate at near to 100% efficient mechanical energyto-electricity conversion. This author submits, particularly in the light of the experiments described in this Report, that the facts support the logic of this challenging argument and this, therefore, gives us a route forward to an energy technology that has enormous implications. The only question we really face from a practical point of view in performing an experimental test is the task of deciding how to cause heat to flow one way through a metal whilst we take off electric current in a transverse direction without diverting heat flow in the same direction. This assumes that we can set up a magnetic field at right angles to both, which is clearly very possible.
25
Having considered this at some length and in the hope of exploiting that unwanted heat generated, if it is confined to the region where it can still do useful work, the author has devised the following structure expressly to perform the thermoelectric power conversion using the Nernst Effect. Skin Effect Segregation In order to get current to traverse a metal in the y direction with heat flow in the z direction and a magnetic field in the x direction, one can provide a metal interface between metals A and B across the xz plane and feed a.c. current through the structure in the y direction in a way which restricts the current flow to a metal surface of the A metal, whereas heat flow in the same direction is spread over the cross-section of the conductor and not subject to such a restriction. Then that heat flow can enter metal B from metal A at a position in metal B behind the current traversal position. This means that the heat entering metal B can then turn to flow in the z direction transverse to that current in the y direction. The way to do this at normal power frequencies is to provide a rather thick highpermeability ferromagnetic conductor as metal A with metal B being a very thin ferromagnetic conductor. The current-heat segregation arises from eddy-current skin effect in metal A and, in traversing a thin section of metal B, the current will choose a flow path that is through a single ferromagnetic domain in metal B in which the magnetic polarization is transverse to the heat flow path and the current flow path and also in the direction that causes the Nernst Effect to develop a forward EMF. An experimental test rig by which to verify this action is depicted in Fig. 6(a) and Figs. 6(b) to (h) apply to its operating principle. Referring first to Fig. 6(f) the intention, for operation in the power generating mode drawing on heat supplied through a duct intermediate two panel structures in Fig. 6(a), is to cause heat to enter a thick metal heat sink layer of a ferromagnetic material coextensive with the surface of the duct. Then the heat flow is guided through 50 micron (0.002 inch) steel film which greatly reduces the thermally conductive cross-section and so results in a steep temperature gradient in that film. If much of this heat can be removed at entry into the film owing to a thermoelectric action there will then only by a small residual heat flow of much reduced temperature gradient left to provide direction for that flow towards the other heat transfer interface. To use the Nernst Effect to discharge this cooling function one needs, firstly, a strong magnetic field, then, secondly, a flow of heat and, thirdly, a route for current flow, all mutually orthogonal. This means that one must contrive a way of ensuring that the heat flow does not automatically assume the same path as the current. How can we separate heat flow and current flow in a common metal structure without having the current flow through a capacitative gap in the metal? Consider Fig. 6(d). Here a thick steel rod is shown to have an external current circuit which is arranged to magnetize the rod along its axis. One can set up a temperature differential along that axis and have heat flowing through the rod distributed uniformly over its cross-section. If now the current is a.c. and the rod has a high magnetic permeability and is thick in relation to that frequency, eddy-current skin effects will confine the current to a section close to the perimeter surface of the rod. Most of the heat will then enter the rod along a path that is different from that of the current. Should that rod be cooled in some way from the outside, as with the Fig. 6(f) representation, that small amount of heat loss will require heat to be diverted radially, and so orthogonally, with respect to any d.c. magnetic field along the rod axis and with respect to the induced skin current.
26
In this scenario one would have heat converting into electricity by Nernst Effect cooling, but all that would occur would be enhancement of the eddy-loss as the current escalates and the skin-effect becomes even more restrictive. Heat would be regenerated and there would simply be anomalous eddy-current effects, a phenomenon actually found in normal transformer sheet steels, but one that has not been understood by the academic establishment. The way forward is to consider now Fig. 6(e). Here, the circuit loop is an elongated parttubular thick ferromagnetic core and it is presumed that the a.c. current is supplied in the manner shown. In this case, the eddy-current skin effect is not on the outside of the core. The current is concentrated at the inside surface. The reason is that the current follows the path of least resistance and it would rather flow around a thin metal path embracing what is mainly an air core than around the highly inductive ferromagnetic core as well. This configuration allows us to intercept the EMFs that are developed by the Nernst Effect, because they constitute `forward' EMFs assisting flow, meaning that, if we can conceive heat action bringing about electrical current oscillations in a converter which incorporates the principles being described. Now, rather than providing a special magnetizing winding for producing a powerful magnetic field in the metal and then contriving the heat transfer interfaces inside that winding, it seems best to make use of the intrinsic domain magnetism in a core comprising thin steel film. Refer now to Fig. 6(b). Here, several such films or laminations are shown to be sandwiched between two steel bars. The bars form an energy route for heat which is to flow through the steel laminations and be bled off through those laminations to seek a cooler heat sink at their extremities. A conductive metal, which need not be ferromagnetic, in between the base section of the laminations merely serves to provide the conductive path makes their connection. Looking at a single lamination, one can see from Fig. 6(c) how the saturation magnetic flux in the domains can be directed. The dots and crosses denote arrow directions as pointers indicating the magnetic flux orientation. Any current passing transversely though the lamination will be aided by the intervening non-magnetic highly conductive metal to guide it through the domain which offers least resistance. Going one way through a domain will develop a back Nernst EMF and going the other way will develop a forward Nernst EMF. According to its polarity the current will always choose a route through a domain which offers a forward Nernst EMF. There will always be cooling if there is an orthogonal temperature gradient. This is shown in Figs. 6(g) and 6(h), with the skin effect serving to separate the heat flow path (broken lines) and the current flow path (full lines). The domain pattern in the thin film, whether in nickel or iron, which have different polarity Nernst Effects, will always govern the current flow and contribute to cooling. Note that, by using thick steel bars to provide the heat sink spacer members, the heat can flow freely to the entry into the domains in the film. The skin effect, even if such that current is confined to what is effectively a 10% section of the thick steel bar, will only suffer the resistance losses that relate to flow in that restricted section, but set alongside the power generated by the Nernst Effect cooling action, this is a quite small loss and it merely regenerates heat input. The only loss as such is that of heat conducted to the remote secondary heat exchange interface. Thus, in Fig. 6(a), the structure shows how current circuit connections can be made to link with a transformer core and other windings coupled to external circuits. The bold lines indicate a thin layer of electrical insulation, which still allows passage of heat, it being necessary to avoid the short-circuiting of the power generated. The rib-like connecting films can, in functional terms, be left floating in a cooling medium with no assembly for the secondary heat exchange interface.
27
An inert gas blown across the fins thus formed would serve as the means for assuring the temperature gradient which activates the main cooling function drawing on heat supplied to the inner duct. *********** THE ABOVE TEXT WAS WRITTEN IN MARCH 1994 WITH A VIEW TO INCORPORATING A SECTION HERE WHEN A PRELIMINARY EXPERIMENT ON THE ABOVE LINES HAD BEEN PERFORMED. IN THE EVENT THE EXPERIMENT WAS DEFERRED PENDING COMPLETION OF THE EXPERIMENT REPORTED IN THE NEXT SECTION. *********** The Magnetic Inductively-Coupled Device Whereas the above description concerns a electrically-conductive coupling between separate compartmented sections of a thermoelectric power converter and uses a transformer coupling externally to bring together the power generated from heat in each metal film current crossing, one can see scope for building a version which relies directly on a magnetic inductive coupling in each cell of the structure. In effect, this involves building a transformer within each compartment. This is shown in Fig. 11 of a recently filed patent application. (See Appendix I on page 37). The device would comprise internally a series of longitudinal compartments each containing a slender rod-like magnetic core. A winding on the core would provide the circuit by which input or output a.c. is fed through all such windings connected in series and possibly through an isolating transformer. The heat transfer problems of the outer bounding metal surfaces and their design will not be discussed as these are familiar terrain for those involved in the relevant industries and this is not intended to be part of a business proposal for setting up a manufacturing venture. Noting that the bimetallic metal circuit linked by each ferromagnetic core is virtually a shortcircuit, the reader will understand that very little EMF has to be induced to set up the internal current circulation. That said, the cross-section and operating magnetic flux density can be quite small, even though the design aims to take off substantial current by transformer action. A very close coupling as between the heat-driven primary circuit and the secondary as output winding is then essential and that is assured by the enclosed compartment feature which provides a conductive housing along the whole length of the ferromagnetic cores. The latter do not need flux closure structure in small product applications, because being very long in relation to their sectional dimensions, they have very little demagnetizing effect and such inductance as does exist is to the good, because it will serve to smooth out the loading as between the several cores. *********** THE TEXT JUST PRESENTED WAS WRITTEN IN MARCH 1994 BEFORE THE AUTHOR'S OWN EXPERIMENTS ON THIS CORE SYSTEM WITH MULTIBIMETALLIC-LAMINAR STACKS WERE PERFORMED. TWO SUCH EXPERIMENTS ARE NOW REPORTED BELOW. ***********
28
(a) First Experiment Two ferrite-cored transformer units were used, each having a primary input winding and a secondary output winding, arranged side by side and parallel-connected to feed a common shortcircuit single turn tertiary winding, the latter comprising strips of aluminium through the cores bridging external stacks of multi-laminar metal composed of alternate layers of 50 micron steel shim and electrolytically tinned sheet steel of 200 micron thickness. There were about 140 layers of steel in each of the two stacks and the thin layers of tin provided electrical contact between them and separated the current flow paths through the magnetic domains in the steel. In principle, current flow in the primary induces an EMF in the tertiary winding which, given a temperature gradient in the bimetallic stacks, should develop a negative resistance owing to the Nernst Effect. This should cause current to flow augmenting the action of the primary current in overcoming the reaction set up by a load current. Hopefully, heat input to the bimetallic stacks would then result in electrical power output from the secondary windings whilst the power supplied to the primary winding would be mainly reactive in sustaining the magnetization. The result of the experiment was that a comparison of power input versus power output from the secondary indicated that the transformers were functioning as if the tertiary single turn winding did not even exist! It did not seem to draw any short-circuit current that could effect the operation and did not contribute any thermoelectric current to the output, so far as could be judged. However, no heat input was applied and there was little point in making that provision, given that the current flow through the bimetallic stack and on which the experiment relied was not in evidence. Since ferrite cores were used in the transformers it was possible to connect a capacitor to tune the input impedance to unity power factor and run on secondary load at an audio frequency so as to explore the possibility that the short-circuit path was obstructing current flow owing to it having a high self-inductance. A resonance at 12 kHz was observed, but energy accounting in this state revealed no thermoelectric anomaly, albeit with no heat input. It was evident that there was some unexpectedly high resistance effect in the short-circuit path through the bimetallic stack, sufficient to restrict the transformer action to interplay between the primary and secondary windings, inasmuch as the short-circuit tertiary winding embraced both of those windings. Yet, the very existence of the changing core magnetic flux should still produce EMF in that circuit through the bimetallic stacks. It was decided to establish just how much of the action could be conveyed through that bimetallic stack circuit, by constructing new apparatus, the subject of the second experiment. (b) Second Experiment Here two 100 VA 50 Hz power transformers were coupled to form a unit with a primary winding on one and a secondary winding on the other, the coupling being through a single turn circuit through two copper bars linking two stacks of about 200 steel laminations, with intervening tin coating, which formed the secondary output from the first transformer and the primary input to the second. The power finding its way through this system would have to involve current flow through the bimetallic stacks. Tests were performed which, again, confirmed that the current circuit through the laminations was sufficiently resistive to preclude any chance of a thermoelectric gain, at least with a modest heat input, though, again, no provision for that was made at this preliminary diagnostic stage.
29
The two transformers and their windings were identical and so, in voltage terms at 50 Hz, the no load secondary output voltage should be reasonably close to the no-load primary input voltage, if the common coupling circuit through the bimetallic stacks could function to carry sufficient current to supply the magnetization needs of the second transformer. The first test gave the following data: Primary 50 V 100 V 150 V 200 V 250 V Secondary 0.111 V 0.227 V 0.349 V 0.493 V 0.640 V
Prior to this, the input transformer of this identical pair was tested to determine its no-load magnetizing input current. The standard rating at 240 V by the manufacturer of the kits from which the transformers were assembled was 120 mA. The following test data apply: Voltage 10 20 30 40 50 100 150 200 240 250 Current 0.80 mA 1.39 mA 1.88 mA 2.40 mA 3.02 mA 6.19 mA 12.58 mA 53.8 mA 121.8 mA 154.0 mA
It was clear from this that something significant was obstructing this 50 Hz current flow through the bimetallic stack. It was possible, from the symmetry of the apparatus, to test the d.c. resistance of the two stacks as if they were parallel connected rather than series connected. A current of 96 mA gave a potential drop of 2.5 mV, corresponding to a parallel resistance of 0.026 ohms and a series circuit resistance of 0.104 ohms. When tested at 340 mA the potential drop was 9.3 mV, meaning a loop circuit resistance of 0.109 ohms. The problem now was that, having passed some d.c. through the bimetallic stack, there was the possibility that some circular in-plane magnetic polarization had taken place in the steel laminations, possibly affecting the inductance to a.c. current flow. Accordingly, and also because the d.c. might have affected contact resistance, the primary to secondary voltage ratio was again measured, with the following improved results: Primary 20 V 40 V 80 V
Secondary 7.57 V 11.22 V 13.61 V
30
120 V 140 V 180 V 240 V
14.30 V 14.69 V 14 83 V 14.95 V
To make sense of these results, it is noted that at 240 V, the rated induced EMF per turn of the transformer is 0.37 V and to feed enough magnetizing current to develop reaction flux corresponding to 14.95 V in a magnetizing winding the above magnetization current data show that about 1.20 mA will suffice in the 240/0.37 number of turns. This translates into a magnetizing current of 0.78 A generated in the stack loop with a 0.37 V signal. The impedance of the loop is 0.47 ohms at 50 Hz. This is rather curious. If the current flow is resisted by the contact potentials in the bimetallic stack then one would expect the increasing induced EMF as the input volts range from 80 V to 240 V to cause a progressively increasing current flow, whereas the data suggest a saturation effect. Something is limiting the current. That loop current of 0.78 A passes through 400 junctions from steel to tin interleaved with 400 junctions from tin to steel. It could therefore be that the Peltier heating and Peltier cooling at each junction pair sets up sufficient temperature differential in the current flow direction for a limiting current situation to develop which overrides any hope of exploiting the Nernst Effect. Remember that in the dielectric stack assembly built by Strachan there was thermal separation between adjacent junctions in the transverse current direction through the stack and this thermal isolation of junctions could well be essential. In this author's own experiments with a transformer assembled from bimetallic laminations [See Energy Science Report No. 1] the laminations are insulated from each other as in a conventional transformer and so the close dual junction crossing does not occur in that situation either. To sum up, at 0.109 ohms, we have a higher d.c. resistance than is expected when 0.34 A flows through the loop circuit. The 50 Hz a.c. impedance at 0.78 A is 0.47 ohms, which seems enormous for a stack path through metal conductor of about 2 sq. cm cross section and 10 cm length linked by copper bars of 20 cm length and 0.5 sq. cm section. Even allowing for the selfinductance attributable to the high permeability of steel, that permeability would have to be truly enormous to account for the 0.47 ohm impedance at 50 Hz. Accordingly, the author is inclined to suspect that the Peltier effect of two closely adjacent junctions in the current flow path is defeating the scope for tapping the Nernst Effect, but, whatever the cause, it seems logical to abandon attempts to build a through-conductor metal coupling between laminations in the bimetallic stack. This causes attention now to turn to the alternative of harnessing the Nernst Effect by virtue of its interaction with eddy-currents in transformer laminations. ********* Nernst Effect in Relation to Eddy-Currents It is assumed that the reader is familiar with the way in which eddy-currents are induced in a sheet steel lamination as used in a power transformer. The cyclic oscillations of the magnetic field cause an EMF to be induced in any circuit conductor wrapped around the core. This is why power can be taken off from the secondary
31
winding. Given then that the steel laminations are of metal and that they share in carrying that magnetic flux oscillation, each lamination experiences a small circuital EMF internally and this causes a circulating current flow around what is a short-circuit path. As a result there is a loss which is termed èddy-current' loss. This loss is small in comparison with the power that can be transferred between primary and secondary windings by the transformer action, but yet it can be significant and the design reduces such loss to a minimum by using steels which have higher resistivity and laminations which are small in thickness. The loss can be avoided by use of ferrites but commercial power transformers are subject to other design criteria related to size and I2R losses and steel laminations offer the best design option. It so happens that this author devoted three years Ph.D. research effort to the study of anomalous eddy-current losses in sheet steels (1950-1953) and is aware of the fact that there has been little progress in the further understanding aspects of those anomalous losses since that period. Indeed, not many academics working in electrical engineering today even know that there is a loss anomaly. Yet, under certain circumstances, the loss, as observed experimentally, can amount to a tenfold increase over what theory based on Ohm's law prescribes. Moreover, as this author's research verified, the momentary values of the loss factor (experiment versus theory) varies significantly around the magnetization loop and in dependence upon mechanical stress and d.c. polarization. From the viewpoint of this Report the introduction of heat by eddy-current induction as a way of testing a thermoelectric action is an interesting proposition, because adjacent laminations in a transformer are electrically insulated from one another and this must, in some measure, mean that the eddy-current heating and hysteresis loss as well will involve thermal conduction in plane in the laminations. This is what we have in the Strachan-Aspden thermoelectric device, but whereas heat flows from one side of a laminar assembly to the other in that device, the flow is from the centre outwards in the transformer. Now, in spite of the fact that the writer, as an undergraduate, had in his possession a textbook on physics which includes a very extensive section on thermoelectricity and does explain all the named Èffects' mentioned above, it did not at any time in that later Ph.D. research era occur to him as relevant to study thermoelectric action in the conventional transformer core. One thinks of thermoelectricity as being something involving two metals and, if one does ponder the single metal situations where heat gradients apply, the effect of an a.c. magnetic field oscillating at 50 Hz or 60 Hz can hardly be expected to develop a non-cancelling thermoelectric action. The heat energy cycling at such frequencies by sequential cooling and heating in equal measure will, one might presume, not do much to the temperature profile in a steel lamination and so any heat that is produced by magnetization loss is seen simply in that light as being mere energy wastage and having no thermoelectric implications. What the writer completely overlooked, even though professing expert insight into eddycurrent phenomena, though well knowing that magnetic domains in ferromagnetic crystals are a factor in enhancing losses, was something that is now blindingly obvious. It has taken the diagnostic testing of our Strachan-Aspden devices to turn the essential key by seeing reason to challenge the way we accept that d.c. electric current flow in metals is uniformly distributed over the conductor cross-section, whilst a.c. current flow might experience some surface concentration as a function of frequency. Suppose that the flow is carried by electrons and ask the question as to whether electrons can convey current if they all share the action equally at every instant or if they find it easier to
32
carry current by getting in line one behind the other and all moving together. In short, for a given limited current flow, may it not be that filamentary current surges can occur by electrons taking turn in joining a team and forming sporadic fast-moving surges, whilst those left out of such teams enjoy freedom from the current transport task? If this is seen as `no more than an idea' I invite readers to wonder why there is something magical about a current of 19 amps. This is a level of current at which current discharges in certain plasma type experiments divide into separate filaments. It happens also to be the current carried by a flow of electrons, lined up one behind the other, with each electron moving forward past a check point every time, as it were, that the whistle blows, assuming that the frequency is that we associate with the Compton wavelength of the electron. Current flow through a metal could well involve short-lived filamentary surges comprising discontinuous elementary circuit elements of a momentary 19 amp strength. What we measure might seem to be a continuous mere milliamp current uniformly distributed over the metal crosssection, but what may be happening inside that metal is something else. It is for this reason that in the earlier research on the Strachan-Aspden thermoelectric device it was concluded that the a.c. activation is what precluded cold-spots forming at junction interfaces. The transport of current across the Peltier cooled junction in a metal as opposed to in a semiconductor would obviously act to cool the metal in the very limited territory of that junction and that means enhancement of electrical conductivity owing to that supercooled region. There is every reason then to believe that with d.c. operation the formation of a filamentary flow would cause the filament to lock into one junction spot. Effectively the spot would cool until it nearly was at the temperature of the remote Peltier heated junction and that would mean that d.c. thermocouples composed of base metals, such as aluminium and nickel, would have very poor thermoelectric power properties. With a semiconductor the cooling usually tends to increase resistivity and that would drive the filament away to a path of lower resistance and so preclude that cold-spot locking. Now, keeping in mind that current flow may be filamentary and that currents like to follow the paths of least resistance, consider that steel transformer lamination and suppose we apply a strong d.c. magnetic field plus a relatively weak a.c. field which puts some eddy-current heating into the lamination. We then have a situation where, by the Nernst Effect a temperature gradient on one side of the lamination will interact with the d.c. magnetic field to produce an EMF directed through the thickness of the lamination. Similarly on the other side, because heat flow is in the opposite direction, we have a Nernst EMF directed the other way through the thickness of the lamination. This is a recipe for setting up a current circulation in the lamination that is not an eddycurrent but a d.c. current flow. Now, depending upon the polarity of the Nernst Effect for the metal, such current would either act to strengthen the d.c. field or would act to suppress that field. In one case, the action would, in theory, mean an escalation of the d.c. field strength. In other words, unless there is something that qualifies what is being described, a ferromagnetic lamination could conceivably become a bistable element, polarized overall in one direction or the other and lock in to that state by virtue of the controls we exercise on heat gradients. Note that nickel and iron have opposite polarity Nernst coefficients and so one or other should meet the specified criteria. The phenomenon suggested is, however, is something that I believe can rightly be declared as `contrary to experience' and therefore unlikely. However, it means that we have to explain now
33
why it does not occur and so, since I did not argue the filamentary current case, in developing that polarization theme, I will now reexamine the question assuming filamentary current flow. To proceed, take note that in truth the steel lamination comprises magnetic domains all of which are magnetized to saturation in one or other of the three orthogonal axes in its crystals. Imagine that the Nernst Effect is at work setting up those circuital EMFs but pose the question as to which magnetic field direction really governs the action, because any externally applied d.c. field is not going to affect much the strength of the local magnetic field in the domains which happen to be momentarily occupied by the filamentary current. Consideration then shows that the filamentary current flow will, if the `hypothesis' holds, always choose a path through a domain having the magnetic polarization in a direction which corresponds to cooling since this is the path of least resistance, indeed of negative resistance. In short there could be a net cooling effect if the ohmic losses arising from in-plane current flow are less than the Nernst power action that is generated. Indeed, such a scenario would be one that escalates because the heating in the central region of the lamination would enhance the temperature gradient as that heat is conducted back to the edges and, in effect, the action would be selfregenerating and run continuously with no intervention from outside. If the applied field were an a.c. field the action would see the filamentary current direction reverse, it having then the phase of the eddy-currents, but in physical terms it would be as if the resistivity of the steel lamination had, in effect and overall, reduced virtually to zero. To summarize the position, either one accepts the filamentary current hypothesis or one does not. If it is not accepted, then one has the problem of explaining why a steel lamination in a transformer does not virtually convert into a permanent magnet. Also one cannot then explain the very high thermoelectric EMFs which we measured for Al:Ni junctions using a.c. activation, because there is then no reason why the very much lower d.c. thermoelectric power of record in reference data should not apply to the a.c. embodiments. That also leaves us with a problem. If it is accepted, then one can predict a very high anomalous eddy-current loss under circumstances where the lamination thickness is small enough to imply single domains over that thickness. The issue is intimately associated with the exploitation of the Nernst Effect as a cooling process because the interaction of our external controls and the internal current circulation inside the metal lamination can greatly enhance the scope for practical energy conversion. Experimental Investigations The objective of the experimental investigations can be set in context if one refers to a vector diagram showing the normal operation of a power transformer on load and on no load. The focus of attention is the eddy-current induced in a single lamination as normally used in a transformer. The current flow parallel with the surface of the lamination is subject to resistance and that flow accounts for virtually all of the eddy-current loss, whereas the flow of current at the edges and transverse to the main flow makes the short crossing of the thickness of the lamination and will take the path of least resistance. A lamination that has a 200 micron thickness is one in which single magnetic domains could well span the full thickness, meaning that a current which has, near those edges of the lamination, to flow from one side to the other can do that by passage through that single lamination. This contrasts with the main flow parallel with the surface, in that the latter has no choice but to travel
34
through the succession of domains in its path which have polarizations first one way and then the other way. Given that the temperature gradient in the lamination will normally be confined to flow in the plane of the lamination and across its width as opposed to its length, that makes it orthogonal with the current crossing the thickness and with the magnetic polarization of some of the domains. That current can choose a domain for which the Nernst Effect asserts a cooling action to give an EMF impetus to the current flow. In summary, therefore, we see that the Nernst Effect in a thin transformer lamination will drive eddy-currents as if it introduces a negative resistance in the eddy-current loop circuit, given the natural heating that occurs anyway with the presence of magnetization loss. The question at issue is how this Nernst Effect can be represented on a vector diagram showing transformer core operation and the answer to this is that it amounts to a forward EMF driving a current in anti-phase with the back EMF and so amounting to a magnetomotive force (MMF). It may now be realised that there are interesting considerations when one makes a comparison between the on-load operation of a transformer and the no-load operation of a transformer. Remember, however, that, without the temperature gradient, there is no Nernst Effect. Provided, therefore, we operate the transformer on load and try to avoid the no-load situation, which aggravates loss owing to the Nernst Effect, there is special advantage from a power generation point of view in accentuating the Nernst Effect by incorporating the bimetallic lamination feature. This transfers heat in a way which can sustain the thermal gradient and allow the transformer to provide more output electrical power than needed as input, by virtue of the Nernst cooling action which draws on the external heat source. In its own curious way, this on-load-no-load distinction between the magnetization loss action in a transformer can account for the lack of concern about the eddy-current anomaly by transformer design engineers. The loss anomaly is there to be seen if one tests the no-load properties but transformers are so efficient when operating on load that one need not worry about it at all. However, if the subject under discussion in this Report becomes a technological reality, the transformer that accentuates the Nernst Effect by using thinner bimetallic laminations will bring that eddy-current anomaly more to our attention. ******* At the time of writing this Report the author has encountered the problem that the same test device, albeit after a lapse of time and following some spurious testing involving connecting a capacitative load across the secondary winding, has exhibited operation in a different mode when comparison is made with the initial tests. It is therefore of interest to explain first the test protocol and objective of the experiment, but to facilitate latter analysis this will be done from two viewpoints related to the two different temperature profiles that might be set up in a lamination. The laminations were bimetallic and of Fe:Ni composition. See Energy Science Report No. 1 for description of the test apparatus and results. Assumption I The temperature profile from edge to edge of a lamination is deemed to be of the kind shown in Fig. 7(a). This assumes that the heat flow by normal conduction through metal is from right to left and that any excess heat generated by eddy-currents is mainly shed on the left hand edge of the lamination. We do not consider the thermoelectric current circulation owing to the Peltier and Thomson Effects at this stage, though their action would affect the heat deployment.
35
Assumption II The temperature profile from edge to edge of a lamination is symmetrical as if eddy-current heating occurs normally and heat flows to both outside edges. This is shown in Fig. 7(b). Now, by having Fe and Ni as the two metals in the lamination, both having opposite Nernst coefficients, Figure 7 we will examine the action where there is a rapid change of temperature. The heat flow in these regions crosses the strong saturation fields in successive magnetic domains and this induces Nernst EMFs which will set up microscopic current circulation around loops through adjacent domains. This is a parasitic action that does not interfere with the main eddycurrent effect; it feeds on heat produced by self-cooling and the energy books balance as part of the natural thermal equilibrium inside the ferromagnetic metal. However, we have a circulating loop of eddy-current that changes from a clockwise to an anticlockwise current flow and vice versa at the power supply frequency. This current, regardless of direction will always follow the path of least resistance, which is the one through the forwardly directed Nernst EMFs in the domains which have the polarization direction giving the forward EMF. In other words, but only deriving from where the temperature gradient profile is steep, there will be substantial cooling adding power to drive that eddy-current and there will be ohmic I2R heating in the mid-range where the current flow is, in any case, not transverse to the temperature gradient. By the Assumption I temperature profile, this means that the eddy-currents will enhance the temperature gradient on the left hand side of the lamination and merely feed the balancing heat as a build-up on the left-hand side, so preserving the profile. By the Assumption II temperature profile, the Nernst Effect action will be to take heat from the sides of the lamination and feed it to the centre, so preserving that form of temperature profile. Conceivably we have a bistable thermal situation sustained by the eddy-current action. In both cases, however, the Nernst Effect will have enhanced the current flow as if the resistivity of the lamination has been reduced. Indeed, the eddy-current flow will be enormous and, even though heat is merely moving around a loop by virtue of the Nernst Effect, there is added input of energy needed from the external induction source because the superimposed action has reduced the path resistance. It is as if a resistor R is fed by current from two sources I from A and Io from B. When we work out the loss this suggests (I+Io)2R but source A contributes I2R plus IoI2R/(I+Io) and source B contributes (Io)2 plus I(Io)2R/(I+Io), whereas the latter is matched by an internal cooling effect. We still have to feed in extra power from source A. That extra power is anomalous eddy-current loss. From an experimental viewpoint it is then of interest to find which situation, temperature profiles I or II apply, given that we can check our theory by examining the level of that eddycurrent anomaly observed.
36
Now, let us consider the Peltier Effect as superimposed on this situation. The eddy-current component seems to have no relevance because the oscillations mean heating and cooling in balance, though one could suspect that an overall added heating effect might apply if the Peltier EMF exceeds the Nernst EMF and the Peltier activity is biased towards heating. For the temperature profile of Assumption I there will be a d.c. current circulation which will partially polarize the state of magnetism in the lamination as a whole. For the temperature profile of Assumption II there will be no overall d.c. polarization but there could be two d.c. current loops, one clockwise and one anticlockwise, whereby one half of the lamination is biased in one direction and the other half is biased in the other direction. Any such d.c. effect, in either case, will limit the range of flux change as evidenced by a BH loop test. In the first case of assumption I, the loop will be displaced. So, in mounting the experiment, the writer was just curious to see what happened and was expecting the assumption I scenario. The plan was to build a test rig with no provision for asymmetrical heat exit from the test specimen and then rebuild with the eddy-currents generating heat but with one core edge insulated from heat egress and the other having a cooling facility. This latter version of the experiment has not yet been implemented and it may, indeed, be facilitated by co-operation with an institutional laboratory, should such assistance be proffered by sponsors. The report on the initial experiment, some of which was recently published, as in the Australian magazine NEXUS (pp. 48-51, February-March 1994 issue), has also been presented and in its updated form in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1, the findings suggest that the test device is bistable and can be made to work in either assumption I or assumption II mode. Discussion The tests just reported tell this author that the Nernst Effect, if exploited in thin ferromagnetic laminations, having surface provision for guiding conduction current through single domains selected naturally by `path of least resistance' action, and having a temperature gradient that is in-plane in the lamination, will serve as a very efficient cooling device. The findings reported in the test conforming with assumption I are very exciting in that, given confirmation by further experiment, there is reason to believe that a self-generating action is possible. It may even be that we can feed heat into a transformer implementation and with a controlling primary input get the main power from the secondary. This combines refrigeration and power generation, not just as variants on the same technology, but as one and the same, though to get main power generation on a kW per unit weight of apparatus basis one will need to force-feed heat energy input. The technology needed on the basis of the reported experiments is one of intercepting the èddy-current' flow and that is essentially what we see in a power transformer, because the secondary windings are circuits in which eddy-current flow if the output connections are shorted. We simply need to incorporate a secondary winding that can react inductively to the èddy-current' circuit or include the Nernst activated elements into that secondary circuit directly. These issues, therefore, become design questions that involve R&D of a proprietary nature and it is submitted that this ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT has served its purpose of introducing prospective development interests to the potential of the technology outlined above. The technology is destined to provide a very effective route to converting heat into electricity and, since the principles of operation depend upon temperature gradients and not absolute temperature in Kelvin, there is no Carnot factor to limit performance. There is therefore,
37
with some internal heat recyling, clear scope for a near to 100% conversion of heat into electrical power and at least refrigeration prospects down to 77K, where the warm superconductor regime offers future promise.
HAROLD ASPDEN 15 MARCH 1994
POWER FROM MAGNETISM: THE TRANSVERSE RELUCTANCE MOTOR by HAROLD ASPDEN, 1997
Contents Section Title Introduction Basic Energy Anomaly A Test Result from the Experimental Motor Test Result Significance Test Machine Description Supplementary Commentary APPENDIX I: LC Circuit Loss Analysis APPENDIX II: Machine Description in Patent Specification page 1 2 7 13 16 18 22 24-40
******
HAROLD
ASPDEN, 1997 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 7
THE TRANSVERSE RELUCTANCE MOTOR
POWER FROM MAGNETISM: THE TRANSVERSE RELUCTANCE MOTOR Introduction This Energy Science Report is Part I of a research report documenting progress on a project funded by the U.K. Department of Trade and Industry as a Stage I SMART AWARD*. This was awarded in August 1994 to Thermodynamics Limited in an open competition based on an invention submission by the author. The object of the research is to establish whether or not a magnetic reluctance motor can derive any of its power by tapping the thermodynamic field background and the proposal suggested a novel form of motor construction with this objective. At this interim report stage (May, 1995) tests on an experimental machine give a preliminary indication that such thermal effects, which involve magnetocaloric cooling, do exist and account for the enhanced efficiency anomalies observed. This machine, which has technological features hitherto unexplored and which meant that its design is somewhat of an exploratory nature, provides the evidence needed to design a viable prototype demonstration machine system. The latter should now progress on a much shorter time scale and will be the basis of the Part II report. The content of this report will not relate to the many problems that beset this project in its initial period, nor to the spin-off research findings, which also have a special interest, nor to the different machine constructions explored en route. What will be disclosed is: (a) The author's original reasons for expecting a thermodynamic power gain in the pursuit of this project, (b) The experimental evidence supporting the above proposition as derived from detailed analysis of one set of test results on the primary machine and (c) The constructional features of that machine which will also be the basis of the onward design of the prototype to be tested for the next Report. The tentative conclusion emerging from what is here reported is that we can hope to see a way forward to magnetic reluctance motor development which brings in sight the possibility of generating electrical power by tapping the ambient thermodynamic field background. Success in such a venture would bring with it a much-needed new nonpolluting energy resource. _______ * "Small Firms Merit Award for Research and Technology. HAROLD
Basic Energy Anomaly It is hoped that technical specialists reading this report will not prejudge the findings by believing, inappropriately, that the Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to this particular technology. This preliminary section gives a background introduction to the scientific principles underlying the work, including comment on its thermodynamic principles. The magnetic reluctance motor differs in operating principle from normal d.c. or a.c. motors in that it relies upon magnetic induction, a process which involves storing energy in gaps between magnetic poles. The more familiar electromagnetic machine operates by passing current through windings which are acted upon by magnetic poles to set up the drive force causing machine rotation. In the reluctance motor it is the release of energy from the pole gaps as they close that feeds the drive power to the machine. When we consider how a d.c. voltage power supply is used to feed that priming induction energy to the reluctance motor the equivalent circuit is seen to be one having winding resistance R and inductance L connected in series to a supply providing an EMF E resulting in a current I. By applying standard electrical theory it is an easy task to calculate the proportion of energy input that goes into the I2R losses and the proportion LI2/2 that is stored by inductance. Their ratio changes as the current builds up and would become extremely large if the flow were allowed to continue long enough in its effort to reach the ultimate value Io of E/R. However, as in the reluctance motor, we commutate the flow, allowing just enough inductance energy into the machine to give it the drive power before switching the current off. The time period involved need not therefore be any greater than 25% of the period of the magnetic flux cycle resulting from successive pole gap closure and separation, this being determined by the synchronous frequency of the machine. For the 8-pole machine test reported later this becomes 1/200 second at 50 Hz and 375 rpm. At 1500 rpm the 25% duty cycle would be of 1/800 second duration. Even though these time periods are short, the design of the machine has to be such that a sufficient input energy can reach that inductance in that short time and that means that the winding resistance has to be low. However, a design compromise is needed here. It might seem reasonable to require operation for which that charging time period is of the same order as the time constant of that inductive circuit, namely L/R seconds, thinking that if this were not so then the full inductance of the machine would not be harnessed to give the machine its best power rating. The question at issue, is the amount of the loss in the resistance in relation to the energy fed to inductance. HAROLD
For an ongoing power input rate simple calculation (see Appendix) gives this ratio as a function of time as: eRt/L - 1 (1)
which at the end of the period defined by the time constant L/R becomes e-1 or 1.718. This means that only 37% of the power input at the end of this period can be finding its way into the drive of the machine, because 63% is being lost. As shown in the Appendix if the cumulative energy input during that time period L/R is calculated, based on a linear inductance assumption, then 54% finds its way into the power drive and 46% is lost in that resistance R. Of course, if, as is the case, the inductance increases as the poles of the machine close this will progressively shorten the relevant time period in (1) and reduce the proportion representing loss, but it would still seem surprising that there could be a reduction of an overall loss percentage to 10% or even 20%. Yet, as is well established, magnetic reluctance motors can operate in the 80-90% efficiency range, even taking into account magnetization losses in their core structures. This can be explained by the design expedient of putting a strong input EMF on the motor winding so that the input pulses develop a rapid rate of change of the magnetic flux accounting for the inductive energy input. This develops a back EMF which leaves little potential drop across the low resistance of the winding. The pulse period must then be much shorter than the time constant L/R, so that the current is switched off before the magnetic circuit begins to saturate. This is tantamount also to using a very low resistance winding, an awkward design constraint if the coils forming that winding have to fit on salient poles. Modern electronic switching technology, which in itself brings with it another form of loss, has progressed to the point where the expense of the current pulsing makes the magnetic reluctance motor a viable alternative to the normal a.c. induction motor. Evenso, we need to look at ways of developing the reluctance motor further, not only with that winding resistance and the L/R factor in mind but also with regard to the following argument concerning a thermodynamic factor. Given the high efficiencies obtained by reluctance motors and accepting that designers will know precisely where the loss occurs, there is really no fully justifiable basis for suggesting that existing magnetic reluctance motor technology may be already deriving benefit from a magnetocaloric energy regeneration effect. However, this author does wonder if, marginally at least, such an effect is already assisting motor performance.
HAROLD
If a pulse duration period commensurate with the circuit time constant L/R were to be used and the I2R losses were 50% of motor input power, then to regain the 90% level of efficiency the inductance energy would need to be augmented by the equivalent of 40% of motor input from the quantum field background. The latter governs the atomic electron quantization in the ferromagnetic state in iron and plays a key role in magnetocaloric cooling. In this case, the flux recovery cycle of the machine would result in environmental cooling within that field system and this would draw on the heat generated in the resistance to gave the overall appearance of an efficient motor. So here might be an important technological phenomenon that we may, in some small measure, be using unknowingly in our reluctance motors, but one we could use to much more advantage if it were researched and well understood. The author, therefore, has had occasion to examine more closely what is of record in university teaching concerning how energy is stored in an air gap in a magnetic circuit. The author's Ph.D. thesis had concerned anomalous energy losses in iron based on research (1950-1953) in Professor E.B. Moullin's Department of Electrical Engineering at Cambridge and one needs to look no further than a textbook by Professor Moullin. On pages 172-174 of his 'Principles of Electromagnetism', (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1955), an experiment is reported which describes the inexplicable aspects of apparent magnetic flux linkage between two magnetic cores separated by an air gap. The teaching conclusion was that leakage flux defies calculation when one tries to theorize about experimental results. This author, having developed suspicions about the thermodynamic aspects discussed above, has come, many years later to see the Moullin experiment with new eyes. The evidence is clearly there indicating that the energy in the air gap is greater than the energy supplied as inductive input to the magnetizing winding, greater by a factor that increases with increasing magnetic flux density. This led the author, in the first of these Energy Science Reports, to describe and report findings on an experiment based on that performed by Professor Moullin, in order to confirm this position. That experiment involved a sequence of tests on static cores with successively different air gap spacings and has been reported by this author to a conference on the new energy topic held in Denver, Colorado. It has since been repeated independently by others, all of whom confirm that there is a significant energy gain. The magnetic reluctance motor is the device one turns to if one wishes to use that excess energy before it is recaptured by the magnetic core system during the reset period. It was this background that inspired the inventive concepts which are now under test in this SMART AWARD project.
HAROLD
To end this introductory section, and before moving on to present test data on the experimental motor, a few words concerning the Second Law of Thermodynamics are appropriate. This law is based on the doctrine of the impossible, namely that one cannot take heat from a source and convert it into useful power in a machine unless that source sheds heat to an absorbing medium at lower temperature. Now, in a magnetic core, or in an air gap between magnetic poles, there is an activity that accounts for energy storage by inductance. That activity involves electric charge in motion and reacting to the applied field. That reacting charge is kept active by thermal motion, whether this be mere thermal noise in the magnetic circuit seated in conduction electrons or whether, as applies in the vacuum gap, that 'noise' is and the quantum activity known to physicists as 'zero-point' field energy. If energy is fed by machine excitation into that inductance then the energy supplied, whether driven by current in a magnetizing winding or augmented by the ferromagnetic core it embraces, must be pooled with that thermal energy. It is shed as heat. Then, when the demagnetization process occurs or the pole gap closes to reduce the inductive energy stored, so there is cooling as energy is used to do work. The latter may be by setting up an EMF in the magnetizing winding or by mechanical work derived from the force action between the poles, but this thermodynamic activity is an ongoing and essential part of the physical property we describe as inductance. Its return is not by a random heat diffusion process, simply because the applied magnetic field set up by current in a winding brings order into the reacting charge motion and orientates its vector in readiness for an eventual collapse directed into the winding as a back EMF. Electrical science does not ascribe temperature to the field energy stored by induction. Accordingly, scientists reading this will not be familiar with this summary description. However, no reasonable scientist could assert that this process is in any way restrained by a need to comply with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The latter only concerns true heat engines that operate between set temperature limits and not to machines which know only one temperature, the ambient temperature, and in which magnetism is the catalyst converting heat into electricity. This latter statement needs just a little qualification because MHD technology is subject to the Carnot efficiency limitations, MHD being the magnetohydrodynamic technology of the 1960 period, in which ionized gas passes through a transverse magnetic field which cools the gas to develop an EMF producing electrical output in the mutually orthogonal direction. Here, the heat is that of ions in a gas and the gas emerges at a lower temperature than at entry. If we consider instead the energy associated with the motion of free electrons in metals or the charges that sustain displacement currents in the field medium of space, then that temperature property, so far as it concerns the hidden charge reacting to the inductive field becomes at best something that is notional and unrelated to the temperature of a machine proper. That hidden charge, whether in the system of free electrons or in the zero-point field of the vacuum medium, becomes the 'prime mover' HAROLD
reacting to shed heat energy to sustain the EMFs regenerating useful power from inductance and recovers heat by cooling the surrounding atoms in the machine structure. To use the Second Law of Thermodynamics to argue against this, one must contend that there are two temperatures and assign a temperature to the 'prime mover' that differs from the ambient temperature of the machine. The 'prime mover', however, in iron, for example, is the free electron population and one is told in physics that such electrons have very high Fermi velocities and so are, notionally, kept at very high temperatures. If such temperatures are so high, they are higher both for inward transfer of inductive energy and the later return of that energy. The Second Law of Thermodynamics can only apply to one way energy transfer but inductance is a two-way phenomenon, as we well know from the highly tuned resonant oscillatory conditions that can be established in inductive circuits. Even by normal equipartition of energy rules concerning particle collisions within the iron core, the free electrons we need to account for electrical conduction are kept in motion at higher effective temperatures than the surrounding atoms. One can, therefore, argue that the Second Law of Thermodynamics has to be confined to the machines such as steam engines and internal combustion engines and not applied to the inductive properties of the reluctance motor. This is in spite of the fact that the latter do involve thermodynamic energy processes. Unquestionably, however, the doctrinaire attitude of academic physicists on this question of the Second Law of Thermodynamics has precluded acceptance of this author's long standing explanation of electromagnetic induction and related gyromagnetic reaction phenomena. Enough has been said for the moment on this scientific debate and this Report need not take the argument further. What matters is the experimental evidence reported in the next section. The real purpose of this Part I introductory discourse has been to argue that the thermodynamic foundations of the invention to be described are on very firm ground and can be traced by survey of this author's work of published record in scientific periodicals and books.
HAROLD
A Test Result from the Experimental Motor The design and construction of the motor will form the subject of a following section. Here it suffices to state that the motor has two magnetizing windings which are inductively coupled, the excitation of which can switch the magnetism of a permanent magnet between a path through the pole gaps to develop drive torque or a leakage path where no torque is developed. The intention is that the magnets will do the work needed to drive the motor, buffering energy through inductance, and absorbing ambient heat to replenish that shed by the magnets, with applied electrical input power serving essentially to control flux switching. As will be seen the design precludes any torque reaction from normal electrodynamic effects between current in the magnetizing windings and magnetic flux in the machine, thereby restricting any motor drive to a true magnetic reluctance action seated in the inductive field energy. The reason is that all conductor turns on the windings, to the extent that they are linked by magnetic leakage flux, can only assert forces in directions that are radial with respect to the machine axis. As a summary statement, the test to be described gives reason to believe that the thermodynamic efficiency gain predicted as a basis for the project has been confirmed. It remains now to build a prototype machine and a new control system designed to a more effective specification which can now be formulated from the data provided by this test. Note that, so far as this test result is concerned, emphasis is placed upon the establishment of the principle that a magnetic reluctance motor can operate with an efficiency enhanced by magnetocaloric cooling, the ultimate hope being to secure evidence of 'over-unity' performance. By 'over-unity' is meant a mechanical output power exceeding the electrical input power owing to thermodynamic input involving environmental cooling. The dominant pursuit, the focus of the SMART AWARD, has however been the less ambitious aim at a modest efficiency improvement by investigating the possibility of self-commutation by a 'shaded-pole' construction of unusual design which has similar thermodynamic implications. Both technical objectives have been served by the same test machine. Note particularly that this 'self-commutation' objective explains why the machine has no conventional commutator, a feature which has made the broader scope of the research testing of the machine particularly difficult. The test reported here was a no-load test in the sense that the only mechanical function was that of running both a drive motor and the test machine as a mechanicallycoupled system. The task is the assessment of the inherent operational electrical and mechanical characteristics of the test machine. This latter has a very special and unusual
HAROLD
design configuration which has made it impossible to use standard electrical engineering knowledge to make a reliable prediction of its response to applied power. Besides this, as can be seen from the opening text of this section, there are certain complexities in the magnetic circuit form, which includes permanent magnets, and the pole gap configuration as well as end effects, not to mention eddy-current reactions. All these pose unusual design considerations, involving non-linear characteristics and non-harmonic time characteristics, and so are best explored empirically. The Equivalent Circuit of the Test Configuration This is shown in Fig. 1 where the two machines are depicted by the broken line as having mechanically coupled shafts and each machine has its own circuit powered by a stabilized d.c. voltage supply. The d.c. drive motor has a permanent magnet stator system and rotor windings fed as a single input through a commutator incorporated in the machine. It has a high torque and a maximum speed rating of 5,100 rpm when driven by a 12 volt d.c. supply, its maximum power rating being 65 watts.
Fig. 1
[Note that as the research developed, the 'shaded-pole' feature was implemented by providing laminated stator cores, which were mounted in the motor in a 'transverse' sense and were tilted in the forward direction of rotor spin. The word 'transverse' means that they were arranged to act in a cross-wise direction. This explains the title of this Report.] HAROLD
It was chosen because the cogging effect owing to the the stepping action of the pole structure of the test machine showed the need for a good drive torque, but evenso the system had to be given a hand-start by bringing the poles out-of-register when the d.c. motor was started up. This requirement will be avoided in the onward construction of the prototype machine. Vm was measured by a digital voltmeter (d.c. scale) and its waveform observed on an oscilloscope. Vi was also observed as a waveform on an oscilloscope. The machine speed was measured using an optical tachometer. The 2.2 and 2.6 external resistors were included as load devices to buffer potential drop and, in the case of the d.c. motor, to allow its power supply to remain unadjusted whilst the motor changed speed during the test. The 0.65 resistance was the measured internal resistance of the d.c. drive motor winding, whereas the windings on the test machine had a 2.6 resistance.
Test Machine not Excited The drive motor was run coupled to the test machine at 800 rpm and id was found to be 1.03 amps with Vd of 5.5V. Total power input: Power in 2.2 load: Power supplied to motor: Loss in 1.2 winding: Drive power to system: (5.5)(1.03) (2.2)(1.03)2 (0.65)(1.03)2 5.665 watts 2.334 watts 3.331 watts 0.690 watts 2.641 watts
After the system had been operated with the above voltage input but with the test machine excited the following further measurement at higher input voltage with the test machine non-excited was performed at higher speed. The drive motor was run coupled to the test machine at 1350 rpm and id was found to be 1.15 amps with Vd of 7.1V. Total power input: Power in 2.2 load: Power supplied to motor: Loss in 0.65 winding: Drive power to system: HAROLD
(7.1)(1.15) (2.2)(1.15)2 (0.65)(1.15)2
8.165 watts 2.910 watts 5.255 watts 0.860 watts 4.395 watts
10
Test Machine Excited Vd was held at 5.5V and the test machine now powered by adjusting a regulating potentiometer controlling a power transistor used as a switch, avoiding an oscillation mode, to result in a Vm waveform of the form shown in Fig. 2. The d.c. supply voltage to the transistor circuit was 12.26V.
Fig. 2 Note that the trace showed an upward surge just before the current ceased. This will be explained later, but for the immediate purpose we will interpret the waveform as being a rectangular pulse with an initial exponential transient, such as one expects from switching a d.c. step voltage into an inductance. Note that Vm as a voltage is really a measure of current in a 2.6 load resistor. The measured d.c. average of this voltage waveform was 1.31V and the machine ran on this setting at 1350 rpm with the drive motor current id having reduced to 0.64 amps. From the waveform it was estimated that the switched-on duty cycle of the test machine was 60% and it was clear that the exponential rise in the signal represented the inductive power input needed to sustain magnetization loss and the true drive power fed to the test machine, whereas most of the power was dissipated in the I2R loss of the load resistance and the machine winding as well as by potential drop in the power transistor used for this test. This 60% duty cycle was longer than had been intended but it did serve to give a result as control settings providing such pulse duration were found more effective than the shorter pulses obtained by biasing the control. However, this is most certainly only because the timing of pulse onset was not optimally set owing to a weakness in the electronic circuit design used and this, too, will be overcome once the main prototype machine system is built. Such redesisgn will avoid reliance on the close magnetic coupling of the power input winding and the winding used to produce the commutating control signal.
Fig. 3
HAROLD
11
In a sense, therefore, the test result presented is a good example from the data obtained by varying several control parameters but a 'worst case' example from the I2R loss point of view, owing to the long duty cycle of the pulse. Note that without the inductance effect the power input to the machine plus load resistor would be a step voltage waveform of rectangular form applied across a resistance of 5.2, the 2.6 winding plus the 2.6 series resistor. The shaded area in Fig. 3 is the portion signifying the time variation of the inductance voltage component driving the machine. It was estimated by inspection of the waveform that approximately 20% of the rectangular outline form was a measure of the time period corresponding to the inductive input. Bear in mind that an exponential build-up of current combines with an exponential decay of induced EMF to give an inductive energy input of half that expected from a multiplication of current amplitude, voltage amplitude and the time duration. This means that only 10% of the power represented by a volt-amp measure of d.c. power input is deployed into inductance. Of the 12.26V input to the transistor circuit some voltage drop would occur across the transistor even during the inductive transient period, though a much greater potential drop, involving loss in the transistor, occurs as the inductive transition ends. Proceeding on this basis the 1.31V measured across 2.6 converts to a measure of Vs, the voltage across the load resistor during the non-transient portion of the rectangular pulse form, given by: (0.6Vs)(1-0.2) = (1.31) from which Vs is found to be 2.73 volts. This, when doubled to account for the identical drop in the winding resistance, was consistent with the estimated operating load potential delivered in the on-state of the power transistor used as the switch. The inductive drive power will involve a back EMF diminishing from 12.26V and we need to calculate the resistance losses not only in the 2.6 machine winding but also in the transistor and in the 2.6 external load resistor. Total power input: (12.26)(1.31)/(2.6) 6.177 watts Power loss in load resistor: 80% of (2.73)(1.31)/(2.6) 1.100 watts Power loss in winding: as above 1.100 watts Inductive drive power: half of 20% of total input of 6.177 0.618 watts Power loss in transistor: balance of above 3.359 watts
HAROLD
12
Ignoring the power transferred to the load resistor and the loss in the transistor (which can be reduced to negligible proportions by suitable design) the deployment of power by the machine combination operating at 1350 rpm was found to be: Test machine input: Power loss in winding: Inductive drive power: Power supplied to drive motor: (0.64)(5.5-[(0.64)(2.2)]) Loss in 0.65 winding: (0.65)(0.64)2 Drive motor power to system: Total power (other than I2R loss) needed to drive the system at 1350 rpm: 1.718 watts 1.100 watts 0.618 watts 2.618 watts 0.266 watts 2.352 watts
2.970 watts
This 2.970 watts at 1350 rpm compares with 2.641 watts needed at 800 rpm and 4.395 watts at 1350 rpm when the test machine was not on power. The reason that I2R losses are excluded from this comparison is that, owing to specific design characteristics, the test machine losses can be reduced very substantially by using a winding conductor of larger cross-sectional are and much lower resistance, whereas this is not feasible for the d.c. motor which already uses winding space to maximum advantage. The real gain in performance is that evident from the inductive power drive, which involves the magnetization losses in the system. What we see here is a power reduction of 1.425 watts from a base value of 4.395 watts. Yet we are activating more magnetic excitation in the test machine when excited than was present for simple non-excited drive by the motor alone. We have excluded the I2R loss and there must be more magnetic loss for the system running with both motor and test machine excited, but yet the overall power intake has reduced by 32%. This can only be ascribed to the regenerative effect of magnetocaloric cooling which the machine design aimed to explore. If such cooling does accompany the enhancement of the magnetic pole action in driving the motor then the magnetization losses of the expected order can occur to generate heat in the normal way, but overall the machine must be operating with an exceptional efficiency.
HAROLD
13
The test, as interpreted above, does establish that there is an anomalous excess power phenomenon at work. Test Result Significance The tests were made with the test machine rotating clockwise, which was the direction corresponding to the shaded-pole construction of the stator pole pieces. Anticlockwise rotation for the same input power conditions gave speeds some 10% below those measured for clockwise rotation. Therefore this feature, in aiding commutation, is contributing to machine performance and will now be accentuated further in the onward construction of the prototype machine. This prototype version of the machine will be designed to overcome the test difficulties encountered in the pulse control of the machine as tested above. The tests suffered from the problem of correctly timing the onset of the pulse current and its duration. When the design parameters of such a control could be ascertained from the tests it became apparent that the best way forward was to design instead a machine having a dual excitation so as to avoid the inductive coupling of the single excitation which set up unwanted oscillations and so limited scope for full power testing. The machine had a size and weight commensurate with a normal motor of several hundred watts rating and yet was tested at 1350 rpm, taking a coupled d.c. motor up to that speed from a base speed of 800 rpm, with only 0.329 watts of additional input drive power! This excludes the power needed to sustain I2R losses in the windings of the two machines, but the corresponding increment in such power was only 0.676 watts. The above data show 0.690 watts as drive motor winding loss at 800 rpm, 1.100 watts as loss in the test machine winding at 1350 rpm and 0.266 watts loss in the drive motor winding under combined operational conditions at the latter speed. As is explained below, the latter losses can be very substantially reduced but the prime attention has to focus first upon the thermodynamic implications to clarify a very basic issue. The question at issue is whether one can be 100% sure that the machine is acting regeneratively in a thermodynamic sense. There is every indication that it is, but there is one open question that is crucial to scaling up the design to a high power machine. The answer to the question will decide whether this research is leading to a new machine technology of highly efficient motors, which can, as it were, feed on the heat they generate and so come close to being 100% efficient or whether it can lead to a technology breakthrough of far greater importance.
HAROLD
14
There is good reason, by reference to the Moullin-type of experiment already mentioned, to suspect that we can draw on energy feeding the underlying quantum field that powers the atomic spins in a ferromagnet. If this is so then the magnetocaloric cooling process has much more to offer than the near-to-100% efficient electric motor. In sight comes the possibility of building a new form of power generator. In other tests on the same machine system as that discussed above it was found that increased current input to the test machine could reduce the d.c. drive motor current to 0.2 amp, less than 20% of its normal value, but it was not possible with the particular test rig used to run the system with only the test machine on power. The objective there was to see if one might reach a stage where the d.c. motor current reversed as it became a generator. Then one could explore the degree to which magnetocaloric cooling can be exploited in a power generation mode. Clarification of this issue will be the objective of the Part II Report which will follow from tests on the prototype machine now under construction. In the meantime, the following technical points emerging from the above test findings are to be noted: (a) The I2R losses attributable to the test machine winding can be reduced by a factor of 5 at least, because it should be possible to limit the inductive power input to less than 40% of the pulse period used in the test and because a single winding of 2.6 was used instead of two such windings in series driven at half current. The second winding was deployed, contrary to original design intention, to provide the commutating signal control for the electronic switch and the pulse period was longer than it should have been and its onset poorly timed owing to control settings adjusted to avoid feedback-induced oscillations. The latter problems can easily be eliminated with a dual test machine combination. The machine design would allow the winding resistance to be reduced very substantially if the weight and cost of the copper could be justified by the efficiency gain. The use of only 4 magnets in the test machine may mean that end effects which weaken the operation owing to magnetic leakage can be present. These can be reduced relatively by using more magnets and a longer rotor axis. The latter was accepted as a limitation in the design of the first machine, dictated by availability of stator pole pioece laminations, but the findings now warrant building the longer machine. More magnets on a longer stator with the pole gap spacing halved should give power enhancement by a factor of 3 or more, without appreciably changing the overall size of the machine. The magnets used in the machine tested above developed a flux density in the stator having an a.c. RMS value of between 600 and 800 gauss, which implies a unidirectional polarization of 1700 to 2260 gauss. By using stronger magnets or,
(b)
(c)
HAROLD
15
in a large machine, electromagnetic excitation of a soft iron rotor core by input of current to a rotor winding, this could be increased to 10,000 gauss, meaning a power rating enhancement by a factor of 20 to 35. The latter increases as the square of flux density. (d) Concerning the I2R losses, these can also reduce further as a function of scale so as to become negligible in a larger machine. For a machine of the same 3dimensional proportions, the power rating increases as the cube of the base length whereas the I2R losses increase as the square of the base length. Therefore, in a large machine such losses can be dscounted to leave the machine performance at efficiency levels tested by reference to the inductive power and magnetization losses. Possibly also a higher power rating can be obtained by running the machine at higher speeds than those used in the above tests. In one set of tests using an excitation control circuit different from that used for the above data, it was found that the machine had to run above 2,300 rpm to avoid oscillations in the power circuit, but the system did operate to relieve the power input to the d.c. drive motor quite substantially at that speed. Finally, and of considerable importance, there was an observation not discussed above and this was an indication of a return of inductive power by the test machine. In several of the tests the transient increase of pulse current was accompanied by a transient on pulse switch-off. What was observed was an increase in current to a peak, a kind of one-sided spike that could nearly be double the current just before it switched off. Even in the test reported, the duration of the pulse exceeded the controlled on-state of the transistor* and this meant that the inductance of the machine was forcing current flow even though the transistor should have switched off. The fact that the current was sustained as the reverse induced voltage transient occurred is sufficient to indicate that there was power feedback not allowed for in the above calculations. This promises an even greater efficiency in the onward development. The hidden promise here can be understood immediately, once it is recognized that the inductive input voltage pulse occurs as current builds up, whereas the inductive reverse voltage pulse accompanying flux collapse occurs as current increases further. Since the time-integral of voltage has to be the same for flux change in either direction, this can only mean that more inductive energy is being returned as flux collapses than was supplied during flux build-up. The reasons for this and the source of power, the magnetocaloric cooling, are now well understood by the author and, so having seen the evidence in the performance data of the test machine, this will be the focus of attention in onward development. [* The control was by an inhibit signal, and would not base current sustained by inductive feedback]
(e)
(f)
HAROLD
16
Overall, therefore, in the expectation that a machine modelled on the one tested above could, with a higher speed, convert that small power gain to a 5 watt gain, there could be as much as a 60-100 fold gain by using a better magnet structure. This implies a 0.3 kw to 0.5 kw rating for a machine having a base length of 125 mm, of about the right order expected with conventional motor technology, but we are here considering a machine that could be a thermodynamically powered generator. If such a performance proves feasible, then by scaling up the machine size to a 10 metre base, that power rating becomes 150-250 Mw, which is of power generation station capacity. As will now be seen from the onward description of the constructional features of the test machine, its mechanical structure and assembly are eminently suited to scaling to large size. It is a salient pole machine but there are no windings on those individual poles and this is very important from the point of view of dynamic balance. Furthermore, where the rotor magnetization is excited electromagnetically by a rotor-mounted winding, that winding could comprise a simple superconducting coil system coaxial with the rotor axis or a coaxial solenoidal coil system neatly mounted between the rotor pole pieces. It is a particular feature of the design of the machine discussed in this report, which has a permanent magnet rotor, that the single magnetizing winding is an externally mounted solenoid which can be made without need to restrict the cross-section of the winding. Therefore, the winding resistance can be very low and related losses commensurately reduced, an important power saving feature for a motor. Regardless, therefore, of the thermodynamic implications and their effect upon machine efficiency, the fact that a motor having this special single winding design works at all is something that gives this project merit. The following machine description represents a form of construction that should prove interesting in its own right and in connection with a motor development on conventional lines, devoid of the shaded-pole and themodynamic factors, but where high powered magnets are incorporated in the rotor. Test Machine Description The test machine incorporated four 60 mm diameter ring magnets of anisotropic ferrite. Their thickness was 8mm and they had a 24 mm diameter central hole. They were mounted with spacer hubs on a 19 mm diameter brass spindle separating five rotor pole sections comprising 90 mm diameter laser-cut disc laminations having perimeter teeth forming 8 salient poles. They were cut from electrical sheet steel of 0.5 mm thickness. The magnets were very inexpensive standard loudspeaker-type magnets having no special properties and a relatively low power of about 3 MGOe. They were chosen because their size as available of-the-shelf stock items suited the needs of the test machine. There are commercially-available magnets of sintered neodymium-iron-boron with a power of 10 HAROLD
17
or more times this. High speed operation is certainly possible with cast Alnico magnets which have a 5.6 MGOe rating, but the onward prospect on the horizon is a new type of magnet developed in Japan which is said to have an enormous BHmax rating of several hundred MGOe. The design technology implicit in the motor described below has, therefore, to be viewed in the context of such development and the 100-fold prospect of power enhancement suggested in the previous section of this report is then realistic even where magnets are used to polarize the rotor. To spare effort and demands on the author's time during this onward research phase, the following description is not presented in research report style, but is, apart from the following illustrations in Fig. 4, 5 and 6 simply the text written for a patent application covering the machine. Accordingly the figure numbering sequence following those three figures is that of the separate figure number sequence of the patent specification and the excerpts taken from the patent specification are incorporated at the end of this Report as Appendix II. As will be seen, the magnets produce a magnetic field directed along the axis of the machine, but this field develops magnetic flux which is diverted laterally through the laminar rotor discs and then, after passage through the pole gaps, diverted again in a return direction parallel with the machine axis to pass through the bridging stator laminations. All this occurs within the confines of a solenoidal magnetizing winding and, to the extent that the fluctuations of magnetic flux from the magnts are confined to the pole gaps and the magnetic circuit including the rotor and stator, there can, in principle, be no back EMF opposing the action of the magnetizing winding. Yet, the pulsating current in that winding has been found to operate the motor. There is, of course, some leakage flux which contributes to the inductance of the magnetizing winding but there is reason to expect much of the inductance energy input to be recovered, whilst the magnets actually do work and generate power solely owing to the control effect of that inductance. The following supplementary commentary provides some further information and may explain why the author is encouraged by these findings and is anxious to know the outcome of tests on the dual machine system which is described in the latter part of the appended patent description. As indicated above, a Part II Report will be prepared as soon as tests on the dual machine system are completed.
HAROLD
18
Supplementary Commentary The above test data is subject to some modification which can best be explained by first explaining that the first test on the machine was a test using half-wave rectified 50Hz a.c. This meant running the machine at low speed (375 rpm), not enough to test the shaded-pole feature, which was the dominant interest owing to the funding arrangements. These tests were therefore of a cursory nature just to see if half-wave current pulses did affect the machine in the manner expected, but more particularly to get a measure of the induced back EMF and so the level of flux activity across the pole gaps and to see how such pulse input relieved load on the drive motor. It proved extremely difficult to get the adjustments of the controls just right with the motor running at 375 rpm for the expected sychronisation to establish itself. Then, and only then, was it possible to reduce slowly, stage by stage, the current input to the d.c. drive motor while holding that 375 rpm speed. In spite of this, several such tests were performed and the a.c. magnetizing current and voltage was measured as the power input to the d.c. motor progressively reduced. Each such test proved very satisfying, because the saving in d.c. power input to the drive motor far outweighed the a.c. input as measured in VA (volt-amps), without regard to power factor. Effort was made to take run the system with the test machine driving the d.c. motor as a generator, but with the test system used the system lost the 50Hz synchronism once the d.c. input current had reduced to about one third of its original value. The problem here arose because the d.c.power suply used was a stabilized voltage supply and it could not drop below a 4.5 volts, which is why a load resistor had been put in series with the motor. Although some time was spent in effort to overcome this, the author was more anxious to develop a control system for running the machine at much higher speed and so these 50 Hz tests were abandoned. One important aspect of the test was, however, the monitoring of both the current waveform as supplied to one test machine winding in relation to the voltage waveform induced in the unloaded magnetically-coupled and near identical second winding. Together these waveforms gave an insight into the inductive power fed in and returned from the machine over the cyclic period of pole closure and separation. It was then very evident that the power factor governing the a.c. power input was such as to indicate a quite significant excess power, even assuming that the d.c. drive motor was only 50% efficient. Ostensibly, it seemed that the test machine had to be operating above 100% efficiency by drawing on thermal heat input.
HAROLD
19
The most important observation, however, apart from finding that a pulse amplitude of about 0.8 amps in the single test winding was needed in the test, was that very nearly all of the inductive power input to the machine was being returned by the a.c. circuit. The volt-amp product reversed polarity as the half-wave current decreased. It could do this because the rectifier diode used could sustain current flow by the winding generating a forward EMF. Now, here was a feature that was important. With the machine driven by the permanent magnet system the inductive power fed in to secure flux switching was not all used in adding power to the machine drive and even in these 50 Hz tests, where current was reducing as flux collapsed, most was, it seems, recoverable. This had been anticipated, or at least hoped for, in developing the machine design because of the relative configuration of the source magnets and the stator pole pieces, but it was gratifying to see this confirmation. This then became a reason for examining the prospect of building or procuring an a.c. power source that could operate efficiently at 250-400 Hz to power an inductive load regeneratively through a diode. The attendant problem was also that of assuring sufficient frequency stability to be compliant with the synchronous operation of a motor not receiving its power drive as such from that supply. This pursuit tended to runaway with the time available for the project, with partially successful results using the same test machine. Eventually, to move the project forward, the author decided to use a simple electronic power drive where one machine winding signalled the control timing needed to put power on the other winding. A pnp power transistor was connected so as to deliver its collector-base current to one winding in its ON-state, and inhibited so as to be in the OFF-state when the other winding delivered a positive polarity signal to the base. With such a control system the test results of this Report were obtained, but any inductive power returned from the machine winding is necessarily dissipated and detracts from the possible efficiency of the machine. This is because the forward EMF set up by that return of energy causes unwanted current spike at the end of the cycle. There was the problem with the system under such test that it could very easily be set with its magnetic pole gap flux wasting power in oscillations.
Fig. 4 HAROLD
20
Had a capacitor been incorporated without informed design based on test performance then that too could have aided oscillation, rather than helping to suppress such effects whilst storing energy for use in the next machine cycle. With only slight adjustment of the bias controls a Vm waveform corresponding to Fig. 4 corresponding to Fig. 2 on page 9 was obtained. The exponential rise of current peaks before dropping a little and then rising again to end in a upward surge which, in some tests, was so narrow that only its amplitude could be validly measured. This waveform shows that the input current, which is really what this voltage waveform represents, owing to it being the potential drop in a series 2.6 resistor, builds up as in a normal LC circuit. The pole gap flux is therefore changing so as to set up a back EMF acting against the supply EMF. Then the flux levels off and begins to reverse the back EMF, owing to machine rotation changing the pole gap spacing. Once this occurs the back EMF becomes a forward EMF increasing in its effect the supply voltage feeding the collector of the transistor and so overriding the inhibit signal set up by the bias and enhancing current flow in its ON-state. Now, to interpret Fig. 4 in terms of energy one needs to take note that the supply EMF to the transistor circuit has to be strong enough to overcome the maximum back EMF induced in the magnetizing winding. Note then that a magnetic reluctance motor works in one of two ways. In both the inductive energy fed into the machine, as measured by I(ViI)t, far outweighs the return energy expressed when this quantity becomes negative. One way of assuring this is to switch I off at the point when the motor poles are in register. Thus I is zero during the reset stage and, since the net flux change has to be the same but opposite in sign for the two stages, IVi.t is equal in magnitude for the two stages. In the first mode of operation, the inductive input power augments the magnetic flux to strength the pull between poles during the pole closure phase, so that the energy added in this way goes directly into the mechanical power drive during that phase. In the second mode of operation, the inductive power input is used to suppress the magnetic attraction between poles during their separation and the energy is deployed as in compressing a spring to recharge the magnetic energy potential of pole gap without that recharge drawing on the inertial power of the motor. Then, during pole closure, with current off, the energy in the gap does the necessary work. In this case the machine would normally include permanent magnets. However, what we see in Fig. 4 is something quite different from either of these situations. Drawing the waveform in the manner shown in Fig. With the voltages now corresponding to a current drop in 5.2, the total test machine circuit resistance, the 5.46V line represents a norm in the transistor ON-state set when the inductive effect is zero. The full line represents current or voltage across the 5.2 resistance. Above this line the HAROLD
21
voltage difference to the 12.26V level represents voltage drop across inductance or in the power transistor, the intermediate broken curve showing a demarcation between the two. The latter when multiplied by current is the heat loss in the power transistor. 12.26V is the supply voltage fed to the transistor circuit. The determination of the input IVit quantity is then represented by the voltage drop in the shaded section in the upper right portion of the rectangular boundary shown. Consider now the return of inductive energy. Of necessity, IVit has to be the same in magnitude for input and output, and the question at issue is how much of the latter change occurs with I on, as seen in Fig. and how much occurs with I turned off. Certainly, the showing is that the current is greater, much greater, on average during the return transient. Guided, however, by the observations at 50 Hz already mentioned, the author tends to the view that most of the input inductive energy is returned and is in this transistorpowered test shed in I2R loss in the circuit resistance. This means that the underestimate of the input inductive power is compensated by the return of inductive power and becomes an entry in the energy balance sheet as excess heat developed in the load resistance. Certainly, it is clear that the inductive energy put into the system has not been wholly used to power the motor. Much of the energy is returned but precisely how much energy is difficult to ascertain. These observations do not detract from the validity of the conclusions reached in the main sections of this Report, but what has been discussed here becomes a factor in designing the onward prototype machine system and particularly its control circuit. The machine system to be built next will present few design problems because it will be a cross-coupled dual combination of the single test machine already tested, the cross-coupling bringing the machine flywheel action into play as a regulator avoiding parasitic flux oscillations caused by the close-coupling of the windings of the single test machine. The control system needed will be researched in exploratory stages, beginning with transistors in the form of power MOSFETs, but attention will focus on the inductive energy recovery and that may dictate the need for other control techniques for powering the system.
HAROLD
22
APPENDIX I LC Circuit Loss Analysis Before calculating the resistance loss portion of the power input transient supplied to an inductive circuit, it is instructive to study first the capacitative situation. Consider a step voltage E applied to a resistor connected in series with a capacitor. Such a circuit (resistance R, capacitance C) has a time constant RC, verifed as follows. The current at any instant is denoted I and Io is E/R. E = IR + (1/C)I I.t where the integration is from t = 0 to t = T. Write: I = Ioe-t/RC (2) (1)
and substitute in (1) followed by performing the integration: E = Io[Re-T/RC + (1/C)(RC-RCe-T/RC)] which reduces to: E = IoR (3) (4)
verifying the assumed time variation of I expressed in equation (2). The I2R loss is then: WR = Io2RI(e-2t/RC)t which integrates to give at time T: WR = Io2R(RC/2)(1 - e-2T/RC) and the corresponding energy stored in the capacitance is: WC = EIoI(e-t/RC)t - WR which is: WC = EIoRC(1 - e-T/RC) - WR (7) (8) (6) (5)
It follows, therefore, that if is infinite WR is Io2R2C/2 and WC is EIoRC less WR. From (7) WR becomes E2C/2 and is equal to WC. In other words, for every unit of energy stored in the capacitance exactly this same amount of energy is lost in the resistance R.
HAROLD
23
In the initial stages of the transient energy is lost at a greater rate than it is being stored and the situation reverses as charging proceeds. With an inductive circuit, on the other hand, this situation reverses as the energy stored in inductance outweighs the loss initially but then the situation reverses with passage of time and the energy stored settles at a final level whilst there is an ongoing steady resistance loss. The relevant equations with inductance L and resistance R are: E = IR + LdI/dt where: and: I = Io(1 - e-(R/L)t) E = IoR (9) (10) (11)
The total resistance loss to time T is given by evaluating the following expression over the range of integration from t = 0: WR = Io2RI(1 - 2e-(R/L)t + e-2(R/L)t)t which is: WR = Io2R[ + 2(L/R)e-(R/L)T - (L/2R)e-2(R/L)T - (3/2)(L/R)] If T is L/R then WR becomes (LIo2)(1 + 2/e - 1/2e2 - 3/2) or (0.168)LIo2. In contrast, the inductance energy stored at that time T is found by evaluating LI2/2 from equation (13). It is simply LIo2/2 times 1 - 2/e + 1/e2 or (0.200)LIo2. One sees from this that at time the inductance has stored 54% of the energy input, this being the proportion 0.200 of (0.200 + 0.168). Concerning the rate at which energy is apportioned between the resistance loss and inductance this is the ratio of I2R to ILdI/dt or, from (13), (R/L)(1 - e-(R/L)t)/(R/L)(e-(R/L)t), or simply: e(R/L)t - 1 (14) (13) (12)
so one sees that at time T, which is L/R, the proportion of loss to energy being stored has become e - 1 or 2.718 - 1 or 63% of power input.
HAROLD
24
This Appendix therefore guides the design to determine a value of L/R which is high, meaning that R has to be as low as possible, and then driving a voltage pulse into the winding using a sufficient, but not excessive, input EMF of adequate duration to block unwanted magnetic flux oscillations. The technology suggested by this Report using a single solenoidal magnetizing winding allows R to be very small whilst providing for some power regeneration sourced in I2R heat generated. APPENDIX II Test Machine Description This text is extracted from pages 1, 2 and 5 to 26 of the description in a patent specification relating to the test machine. The 4 sheets of drawings containing 16 figures in the patent specification are numbered as 35 to 38 of this Report. The application was filed at the U.K. Patent Office on July 7th 1995. [Official publication date February 12, 1997 as GB 2,303,255]. ****** MAGNETIC RELUCTANCE MOTOR FIELD OF INVENTION This invention relates to magnetic reluctance motors, which are motors having salient poles which drive the motor by magnetic attraction rather than interaction of a magnetic field with current in a winding. Such motors can operate by applying current which strengthens the magnetic polarization as stator and rotor poles come into register as the rotor rotates or which weakens the magnetic polarization as the poles separate from the in-register position. Magnetic reluctance motors are known to have high efficiency and could well become a dominant type of motor now that the cost of the semiconductor circuitry needed to control such machines has reduced to the level at which they can prove commercially more attractive than the induction motor. This invention is concerned with an improvement in the basic structure of the reluctance motor, which increases efficiency even further by a technique which harnesses a physical property known as 'magnetocaloric cooling'. This property is intimately connected with the manner in which the energy in an iron-cored inductance is stored in the core. The field of this invention is therefore primarily concerned with thermodynamic power input to a reluctance motor, which is, in fact, a new field having a very limited technical background. HAROLD
25
BACKGROUND OF INVENTION The background relevant to this invention, so far as it is known to the Applicant, will be described in the following specification, by reference to the drawings. At this stage it suffices to make simple bibliographical reference to the following patents which are discussed in this specification. These are: GB Patent No. 2,234,863 corresponding to U.S. Patent No. 4,975,608, GB Patent Application No. 2,267,995 corresponding to U.S. Patent No. 5,376,184, and GB Patent Application No. 2,282,708, the first four of these having the same applicant as applies to the subject invention and the latter having additionally, as co-applicant, Robert George Adams of New Zealand. GB Patent No. 547,668 granted to Stanley Isaiah Hitchcock. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS Figs. 1 to 5 show schematically the form of five different prior art permanent magnet reluctance motor constructions, which serve as background relevant to the invention. Fig. 6 shows a test core configuration used to verify a magnetic flux switching feature that is applied in the invention. Figs. 7 and 8 show, respectively, a side elevation sectional view and an end elevation sectional view of a motor constructed according to the invention. Fig. 9 shows the magnetic flux paths in a part-section of the structure shown in Fig. 7. Figs. 10, 11 and 12 show different interacting stator and rotor pole arrangements in a magnetic reluctance motor, Figs. 11 and 12 pertaining to the invention and Fig. 10 to a prior art form. Fig. 13 shows a design variant of the motor construction presented in Fig. 8, the rotor poles being tilted in the forward direction of rotation. Fig. 14 shows a machine system incorporating two reluctance motors coupled in an anti-phase pole configuration, with a cross-connected magnetizing winding arrangement for coordinated power input pulse regulation. Fig. 15 shows a B-H magnetization curve applicable to the stator cores in the reluctance motor according to the invention, illustrating how the field excitation, in interacting with reluctance changes as the motor poles close and open, causes flux density changes in a loop direction which represents power generation rather than loss. Fig. 16 shows the rotor of a reluctance motor having provision for rotor magnetization by current in rotor windings on ferromagnetic soft iron cores mounted between laminated rotor sections. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION At the end of this specification there is an Appendix which shows, by technical analysis, using formulae familiar to experts in electrical science, the physical basis on HAROLD
26
which this invention relies. What is described and claimed has been established by experiment, but inasmuch as it will surprise many experts in the art to learn that thermodynamic effects can contribute to the improved efficiency of an electric motor, the Applicant has deemed it prudent to give the formal scientific basis for the research which underlies this invention. The essential point made is that, if one can feed power into an inductance L having a high value by supplying a current of strength I, the energy then stored being LI2/2, and then cause L to reduce substantially before reducing the current, one must gain electrical energy. The Applicant's research extending over 40 years has recognized that inductive energy is stored by the partial ordering of the thermal state of a reacting field medium, which means that upon the recovery of inductance energy there has to be a cooling of the reacting medium to assure energy balance, just as there is heating upon energization. In spite of this awareness for so many years, it is only now that the Applicant, owing to this invention emerging from experimental research funded by the U.K. Department of Trade and Industry by their SMART AWARD programme, has been able to bring this knowledge to fruition in a technological application. The essential considerations, as applied to the reluctance motor, can best be described by first examining how energy is deployed in the motor. Suppose that the motor incorporates magnets and the stator and rotor poles begin in the out-of-register position. Without feeding in any external power, the magnets can serve to pull the poles together and so put drive torque into the machine. At the in-register position the magnetic circuit through the poles has its highest inductance as seen by windings on those poles. It is at this position that a current of strength I is supplied in the direction that aids the action of the magnets. As the current builds up L holds its high value. The current will do no work other than sustain some I2R loss and store energy LI2/2 in that inductance. If the current is then kept on at the level I as the poles separate, by the time they have reached their outof-register position the poles gaps formed will have virtually reduced the inductance to near zero. The current can then be switched off without the return of any energy at that final stage. However, during the phase when the poles were moving apart, L was reducing at constant current I and this means that, since the power delivered is I(LI)/t or I2L/t, one has an overall electrical output in energy terms of I2 times the change of inductance, which is L. In other words, one gets twice as much electrical power back as was fed in when the current was switched on. Of course, there is some ohmic heating loss, but there is also that cooling already mentioned. Also, one can rightly assume that the current I strengthens the magnetic pull between the poles as they separate so that more mechanical work is needed to pull them apart against the action of the magnets than was delivered from their mutual attraction during pole closure. This may, therefore, seem normal and unsurprising, even though electrical power is generated, because mechanical work has been added and because standard science in dealing with such problems applies what is known as 'the principle of virtual work' which assumes an answer based on energy conservation. If the heat exchanges are not factored into the analysis, use of this principle becomes a misleading exercise. HAROLD
27
Now consider the situation where that same current I is applied in the opposite direction to weaken the magnetic flux between the poles when they are fully in register. The current experiences a back EMF in the windings and only senses flux rate of change; it has no knowledge of the biasing magnetic field set up by the magnets. There will be inductance energy supplied as input amounting to LI2/2 as before. In this case the poles can separate without there being any strong magnetic attraction demanding mechanical energy, because the magnetic flux has been biased to a zero value. As the poles separate the current can reduce progressively to keep the zero flux condition and no exchange of inductive power occurs. The overall result is that the energy input LI2/2 has been spent and mechanical energy gained from the magnet during the pole closure phase. These two energies can be presumed to be equal, but if the motor has the design described below, it is found that the mechanical drive power of the machine exceeds the inductive power input. It is then a matter of design to reduce the I2R heating loss so as to gain overall enhancement of motor efficiency by the magnetocaloric cooling thus evidenced. The reluctance motor which has variable pole gaps complicates the situation represented in the Appendix, the more so if magnets are involved, and it should be explained that using the magnetizing current to divert flux from the magnet and along a leakage path will set up demagnetization effects which effectively reduce the inductance L. This allows the value of the current I and the angular position of the rotor in adjusting the pole gaps to combine as a control determining LI. As one then sees from the Appendix, the root principle of the power gain argument is that if one can contrive to reduce LI of a circuit whilst it carries constant current I, then the inductance will deliver more energy output than was supplied and there will be commensurate cooling in the inductor core. By suitable positioning of magnets or magnetizing windings in a reluctance motor, this becomes feasible technologically. The essential design factor in this is the positioning of the magnets or windings which govern the inductance at positions not directly linked by a magnetic field to the seat of the inductive action. Here 'magnetic field' is used in the context of ampere-turns and is distinct from the magnetic flux which necessarily provides the inductive linkage. The magnets or windings can be placed in positions offset from the pole gaps in a reluctance motor or positioned with axes orthogonally angled with respect to the flux direction in the pole gaps. Referring to Figs. 1 to 6, the background applicable to this invention will now be described. In each of these figures the components marked with arrows represent magnets, the arrow pointing from south to north poles so as to represent their field action and magnetic flux direction. In Figs. 1, 3 and 5, the spindles 1 support two rotor sections 2 each comprising an assembly of electrical sheet steel laminar rotor discs having a set of salient poles. In each of Figs. 1 to 5 the cross-shaded components 3 are stator windings, each of which has a stator core 4. These cores are of solid soft-iron form in Figs. 2 and 4, but otherwise in Figs. 1, 3 and 5, they consist of an assembly of electrical sheet steel laminations. Each stator core in Figs. 1 and 3 provides a pair of stator poles, interacting respectively with the rotor poles of the separate rotor sections. HAROLD
28
Fig. 1 shows a prior art reluctance motor disclosed by this Applicant in GB Patent No. 2,234,863, corresponding to US Patent No. 4,975,608. In principle the motor there disclosed has magnetizing windings 3 which, when energized, block the through-passage of magnetic flux sourced in the magnets, forcing diversion around a path through outer bridging yokes 5 to the poles on stators 3 and corresponding poles of the two rotor sections 2. These rotor sections serve, according to the angular position of the spindle 1, to open or close pole gaps between the rotor and stator so that flux from one pair of magnets in one stator core can return as flux through another pair of magnets on an adjacent stator core. There is an even number of such stator cores and the magnets of adjacent stator cores are arranged with opposite polarization directions to assure this. By pulsing current through the windings 3 at times when the poles are closing, this allows the magnets to drive the motor. As the poles separate the current is switched off and the magnetic flux diverts through the stator 4, the path of least reluctance, leaving the poles free to separate. The relevance of this prior art disclosure is its showing of magnetizing windings that are mounted parallel with the spindle axis and so are orthogonal with respect to the flux direction across the pole gap. In the invention, the subject of this patent application, a superior construction incorporating the magnets in the body of the rotor is disclosed. It has been found easier to exclude from the pole gaps the flux sourced in the magnets if the latter are rotormounted, as opposed to stator mounted. Fig. 2 shows a motor structure which became public knowledge from the publicity in Australia relating to a motor construction by Robert G. Adams of New Zealand. The Adams' motor has all poles of the same polarity bonded together at a collar 6 on the spindle 1, leaving the end poles at the free ends all also of the same polarity. Each such pole sweeps in turn past a stator pole and is attracted to the soft iron of the stator core 4. As it passes the in-register position, the magnetizing winding is energized to act in opposition to the flux then linking the core from the magnet. This expels the flux and allows the magnet to move on until attracted by the next stator core. The Adams' disclosure shows that, by using powerful magnets, accepting flux leakage and by using short stator cores as controlling electromagnets, a motor can be constructed which, according to test reports by Adams, is said to have a quite exceptional performance of the kind contemplated in the above preamble. This Applicant opened a liaison with Robert Adams and proposed cooperation to find then that we had developed our ideas on common ground in conceiving a motor version with rotor-mounted magnets disposed parallel with the spindle axis. This led to the filing of GB Patent Application No. 2,282,708 relating to a motor having the construction shown in Fig. 3. Adams had built and tested a machine of the form shown in Fig. 4. In both machine designs the separate bar magnets 7 all rotate together so that all their poles at one end of the machine are of N polarity and all the poles at the other end are of S polarity. This avoids flux reversal in the stator cores which would develop extra loss, bearing in mind that the motor is driven by flux changing in amplitude rather than in direction. HAROLD
29
The Fig. 4 machine operates in a manner analogous to that of the Fig. 2 machine, whereas in the Fig. 3 machine the flux from the magnet is diverted through rotor laminations to traverse poles gaps to the stator in a radial direction. The U.K. Patent Office cited GB Patent No. 547,668 (inventor Stanley Isaiah Hitchcock) against the patent application corresponding to the arrangement shown in Fig. 3 and this citation is a disclosure of a motor of the form shown in Fig. 5. Here the design is much the same as that of Fig. 3 except for the vital differences in Fig. 3, (a) that the stator magnetizing windings and the magnets, which together control the flux acting across the pole gaps, are both orthogonal with respect to the flux direction across those gaps and (b) the flux closure path is through separate bridging stator cores rather than into annular stator cores having salient poles. The latter avoids problems of flux closure, as through a casing 8 (shown in in Fig. 5 in broken outline), by using the stator core members to support windings 3 located in the magnetic flux circuit between the rotor sections 2. From the viewpoint of the subject invention, the weakness of the Hitchcock disclosure is the use of short-length stator coils mounted very close to the operative pole gaps. This provides such close field coupling that none of the power gain from flux domain rotation, as discussed in the specification of GB Patent Application No. 2,282,708 (the Fig. 3 machine), is available from the magnetizing action. Also, with the need to minimize I2R ohmic heating loss as a paramount consideration, if high efficiency is to be achieved, the contraint on space available for the stator magnetizing windings poses problems which are avoided by the following invention. Referring to Fig. 6 it is noted that a test on a static assembly of the form shown, comprising a magnet 9, a laminated ferromagnetic core 10 having a magnetizing winding 11 with laminated core members 12 linking the two revealed that a quite moderate current was sufficient to break the magnetic holding force between the core and the magnet. In principle this served to demonstrate that a current in the winding directed to oppose the action of the magnet will sense the core 10 as having very nearly its normal high magnetic permeability , whereas the stray action of the direct magnetic field from the magnet will have little effect. Accordingly, the magnetic flux, which the magnet would normally drive around leakage paths between its poles, but which it transmits at a magnetic flux density B through a bridging yoke if one is present, is effective in the core 10 as a field B/. It needs very little current in the magnetizing winding to obstruct passage of flux from the magnet in such a case. There are some additional field effects from the laminated core members 12, but the general point holds, namely that if one wishes to improve efficiency and gain power in a reluctance motor there are distinct advantages in putting the field-generating sources in positions around the ferromagnetic circuit orthogonally directed with respect to the gap orientation. Figs. 7 and 8 show different views of a motor construction incorporating the invention. The rotor has a spindle 1 which is of a non-ferromagnetic metal, such as brass or stainless steel. It is mounted in ball bearings 13 set in end frame members 14 which are of a tough electrical insulating material, a rigid polyurethane product being used in experimental versions of the machine. These are connected between their corners by stainless steel studding 15. The object is to minimize stray magnetic field effects and, so HAROLD
30
far as possible, confine the magnetic flux produced by the machine to the space within the bounds of solenoidal winding 16 located on and enclosing 8 stator core members 17. These stator members 17 are formed from I-section transformer laminations and are located on shoulders formed as part of the end frame members. They are disposed parallel with respect to the central axis of the spindle, this axis being also the central axis of the solenoidal winding. Each set of I-section transformer laminations forming stator core members 17 is bolted between rigid polyurethane supports of triangular section (not shown in the drawings). These hold the laminations in a tilted position, at a 45o angle as depicted in Fig. 8. In a test machine of this form the solenoidal magnetizing winding comprised two coils, each of 220 turns. The rotor, in the representation shown, which is that of one machine constructed, comprises four barium ferrite ring magnets 18 of the kind used in loudspeakers. These magnets have a thickness of 8 mm and an outer diameter of 60 mm. Five rotor core sections 19, each comprising an assembly of 0.5 mm thick disc laminations of electrically sheet steel having 8 teeth at its perimeter to form salient poles, are mounted on the motor spindle 1, separated by the four magnets 18. The end rotor core sections had a thickness of 4mm and the three intervening sections had a thickness of 8mm. The magnets were mounted on the spindle, with their polarizations all in the same direction, as shown in Fig. 9. The principle of operation of the motor will now be explained by first commenting on Figs. 10, 11 and 12. A conventional design of a magnetic reluctance motor has a salient pole rotor 20 with no magnets in its structure. Its poles interact with salient poles on a laminated ring stator 21, these having individual windings 22 to control the magnetic flux across the interpole gaps. When the magnetizing winding is energized the rotor and stator poles moving into register as the rotor turns develop a magnetic flux across the pole gap with flux lines tilted forward as indicated by the arrow. If these flux lines were perfectly radial as applies to electrostatic field action, should that analogy be contemplated, the pull between the poles would not develop torque on the motor spindle. By symmetry, when the poles are in perfect register (Fig. 11), the magnetic field in the gap is radial and the torque produced is then zero. It then serves no purpose to maintain the energization of the winding. Indeed, the current must then be terminated in order that pole separation should not develop a brake torque. Fig. 11 shows the stator core 21 as formed with its laminations lying in planes transverse to those applicable to the stator in Fig. 10. Thus, whereas the magnetic flux in the conventional stator of Fig. 10 has to find a path to an adjacent pole through a stator lamination coplanar with a rotor lamination, the stator form shown in Fig. 11 guides the flux between mutually orthogonal laminations to a pole on a separate rotor core section at a position further along the spindle. This latter construction then allows tilting as shown in Fig. 12, the object of this being two-fold. Firstly, in some small measure, the tilt assists in conforming with the inclination of the flux and so the force action across the pole gap. Secondly, the flux, having been established, has to be precluded from developing a tilt in the backward direction corresponding to a retarding torque action. As already indicated, if the flux is HAROLD
31
set up by a magnetizing field, then the commutation is less of a problem. It is just a matter of terminating the current pulse at the right moment. However, if the magnetic flux is developed by magnets, as in the machine shown in Figs. 7 and 8, then the commutation task involves setting up an action opposing the magnets as the poles separate. Given then that in the Fig. 12 position, the magnets cause flux to cross the pole gaps and enter the planes of the stator laminations, the action of pole separation requires either that the flux should break whilst still tilted forward, at least in the stator, or that the flux must be pulled through the full planar faces of the laminations on the forward side of the stator cores. This will induce eddy-currents which oppose this action. However, it is important to realise that what is opposed is not the reduction of magnetic flux already present, but rather the build-up of magnetic flux in passage through the planar faces of the laminations. This therefore can but aid commutation and ease the task of using control circuit means to set up the currents opposing the action of the magnets. In summary, therefore, there is purpose in tilting the stator laminations as shown, and this is not an available option with the conventional ring-type stator lamination. In the operation of the motor shown in Figs. 7 and 8, the control involves pulsing the current in the solenoidal winding to set up a magnetic field directly in the stator cores directed in the same orientation as the polarization of the magnets. Notwithstanding the fact that all magnets face the same way and are separated only by good ferromagnetic material, the magnets do not seek a common flux path along the axis and through to the open pole regions near the motor bearings. Because the rotor laminations have projecting teeth which extend 15mm from the outer perimeter of the magnets, the rotor lamination discs being 90 mm in diameter, these guide the flux to the stator region. Therefore, if the rotor and stator poles are in register the magnet sends its flux around a closed loop across the pole faces and through the sections of stator cores located at corresponding axial positions. When current is applied in a direction which supports the magnet, this developing a magnetic field H as shown in Fig. 9, this opposes and blocks flux passage in those stator sections and forces the magnet to seek a leakage route for its flux. Much of the diminished strength of the magnet is then deployed away from the pole gap and much of the flux finds a return leakage path within the confines of the cylindrical boundary set by the solenoidal winding. This means that the current pulses fed to that winding can serve to control the action of the magnets in driving the reluctance motor, but the actual change of flux involved does not all link that winding inductively. Such flux as does link the winding will be a measure of the inductance of the winding and some of the power supplied as inductive energy will be recovered during a complete pulse period. The former factor means that in some measure the motor will be driven by the magnets without drawing commensurately on input electrical power and that can only mean that there has to be magnetocaloric cooling of some kind to provide that excess power from a heat source. In Fig. 13 a modification of the motor depicted in Fig. 8 is presented. It uses rotor laminations 23 which have the pole-forming teeth angled in the direction of forward rotation of the motor to complement the tilt of the stator laminations. In this figure the arrows on rotor lamination 23 show the magnetic flux lines sourced from the magnets HAROLD
32
entering the rotor disc and being guided by the angled teeth to track along a path to the pole gaps. The construction of a machine of the general form shown in Figs. 8 or 13 can prove difficult if it is attempted to assemble a unitary stator core with winding and a rotor separately and then bring the two together. The powerful magnetic attraction between the rotor and the stator then make it virtually impossible to mount the rotor inside the stator and support it in its end bearings. A solution to this difficulty was found by adopting an assembly process by which the rotor was first mounted in its end bearings with the linking studding 15 bolted in position. Then each stator lamination component is inserted and secured in position, this providing sufficient bonding to hold the end frame mambers 14 in place when the studding is temporarily removed to allow the solenoid to be wound. The innovation involved here is the use of the end frame mambers 14 as side flanges of a bobbin form for that winding. With this construction the motor can operate with one single solenoidal winding by suitable current pulsing, but it is foreseen that the ultimate benefits of the thermodynamic features of the machine render it adaptable for use as a power regenerator or in a coupled motor configuration which has a pilot drive motor as a starter motor. In this case, by reference to Fig. 14, a solenoidal winding 24 on one of two machines 25, 26 having the form shown in Figs. 7 and 8, is used to control the timing of power input to a solenoidal winding 27 on the other machine. The stator core system of each machine is depicted in Fig. 14 as incorporating a core 28 which inductively couples two windings 24 and 27. The inductance of the core depends upon the pole gaps in the associated machine, because the core is formed by the magnetic path through the rotor and stator core system. In Fig. 14 the d.c. motor 29, which has a power supply not shown, is used as starter motor and it serves during normal operation at speed to regulate the speed of the machine combination. It can also be used as a d.c. power generator feeding on the drive power generated by the machine system, thereby serving to recharge batteries used as an energy source on start-up. In the cross-connection between the solenoidal windings 24 and 27 on the two machines there are power amplifiers 30 serving to boost the power exchanged between the machines and these power amplifiers are supplied with electrical power from an external power supply system when the regenerative action of the machine system is inadequate. To understand the regenerative action, refer now to Fig. 15. This shows a B-H relationship between flux density B and magnetic field H in a stator core of the machines. When B is low, the rotor and stator poles are out-of-register and no field current is supplied to the magnetizing winding. The pulse timing governed by the power amplifier or the biasing arrangement through an electronic coupling including diodes assures that no significant current flows in the winding until the pole gaps have closed. The machine has periods during rotor rotation where the gap spacing changes very little over a range of rotor movement. It is during this period that the circuit control allows current to flow to a level determined by the input voltage. The state of magnetism of the stator core then shifts from X to Y in Fig. 15. Since this is a range involving high inductance, commensurate with the effective permeability HAROLD
33
of the stator core being of the order of 1,000 times that of a non-magnetic material, this action needs very little current, meaning a low field strength H. At Y, even though the poles, though beginning to separate, are still in near-register, the current reaches a level where it has succeeded in driving the flux sourced in the rotor magnets from the closed paths through the stator core and thereafter with increased current obliges that flux to seek a leakage path to find a closure route. It is then found from tests on such a machine that one route adopted, besides leakage within the confines of the solenoidal winding, is that through the open ends of the stator cores, which means that these free ends develop poles which set up a demagnetizing effect. This demagnetization, although principally set up by the flux from the magnets in the rotor, has a direct action opposing the onward build-up of field by the current in the magnetizing winding. Accordingly, the transit from X to Y occurs at high inductance, but the transit from Y to Z occurs at a rate subject to a very small incremental magnetic permeability, even though the motor poles are still virtually closed. During this Y to Z phase there is the need to feed in substantial current and substantial inductance energy to take the flux density B to the value at Z. The B-H area between YZ and the B ordinate is a measure of this input energy. At Z, the current input pulse having peaked, the motor pole gaps begin to open rapidly and since the current is sustained the action of the motor inertia in forcing the pole separation operates to deliver a return of inductance energy to the magnetizing winding. The energy returned is that represented by the B-H area between ZX and B ordinate in Fig. 15. Overall, the area of the B-H loop formed is a measure of the energy excess that has been fed back by this induction process, by drawing on magnetocaloric cooling. Note that the loop is described clockwise, whereas in conventional magnetic systems such as transformers, the B-H loop is always described anticlockwise, in which case the B-H loop represents magnetization loss. Such magnetization loss as does occur in the motor will therefore detract from the B-H loop area and so be accounted for in the overall gain. To maximize this power gain the machine must be able to act virtually as a magnetic reluctance switch with the motor function serving only to open and close pole gaps. If the motor system is not loaded as a mechanical power drive, its reluctance function, especially that attributable to the magnets in the rotor, will serve to assist rotation during pole closure and that will nearly balance their braking action during pole separation. Inasmuch, however, as there is a magnetocaloric input of power there is scope for dividing that power output between motor drive and electrical power regeneration. Indeed, it is essential if this technology is to be exploited to the full, that the inductive power regenerated has to be deployed usefully in assisting the system operation, rather than spent on resistance loss in the electronic power source. This is why a back-toback coupling of two machines has merit, in that as one machine is operating over the XZ range requiring power input, so the other is phased in its operation to be operating over the ZX range. This phasing is incorporated in the machine system by adjusting the angular setting of the mechanical coupling between the spindles of the two machines.
HAROLD
34
The induced EMFs in windings 24 are anti-phase signals so that by suitable electronics, or simply diode interposition, they can be used to cross-feed power between the machines when set with the appropriate pole position phasing. A typical test on one machine system using the structure shown in Figs. 7 and 8 has shown that more inductive energy is returned in each flux cycle than is supplied as input, even though the d.c. starter motor itself drew a reduced power whilst the whole system increased in speed from 800 rpm to 1350 rpm. In this case the inductive power gain, though positive, was marginal in comparison with the mechanical power gain, but the findings were a very clear indication that the theoretical basis of this invention, with its reliance on a magnetocaloric cooling as a source of excess electrical power input, is soundly based. Although the invention has been described in its form as implemented in a test prototype, which used permanent magnets, it is to be understood that the essential component is the ferromagnetic core in the system, which need not be of permanent magnet material. In its technological application, the optimum design based on this invention depends upon the scale of the machine. A large machine system can employ rotor and stator structures which are simply electromagnetic in form, provided the core is ferromagnetic. The key feature of the invention is the way in which the reluctance of the core effective in the magnetizing winding can be switched from a high inductance state to a low inductance state by means not directly coupled to that magnetizing winding. The specific design of the reluctance motor by which the pole closure and pole separation design serve this reluctance switching functions is the attribute which brings about the enhanced efficiency condition. The permanent magnets are not essential and, indeed, a rotor built with a soft iron ring cores 31 to replace the magnets with rotor windings 32 such as is shown in Fig. 16 could serve quite well functionally and in fact better in cost terms in a large machine. The rotor winding, supplied through slip rings, would merely carry a steady d.c. current and the flux changes resulting from the pole opening and closing would set up eddy-currents which involve a moderate loss. However, these currents would have limited core penetration and would tend to sustain a steady magnetic flux condition in the body of the rotor. As with the coercive force action of a permanent magnet, these would help to force the leakage flux action that is part of the functional operation of the machine as described. The importance of the enveloping solenoidal winding as the primary magnetizing winding governing motor operation can be seen when it is realized that, if individual windings are used on each stator core, these would need to be segmented along the core length so as not to obstruct the pole gaps. The enveloping solenoidal winding has therefore several advantages, namely its low resistance because of its unrestricted outer diameter, its ease of assembly and its continuity along the body of the machine. In machines constructed by the Applicant to test this invention, the motor end frame members were of electrically insulating material because some pulsating magnetic flux leaks from the open ends of the stator core members. This leakage seems essential if provision of a return flux path through a ferromagnetic casing is to be avoided. HAROLD
35
However, the end frame members could be metal castings of spider-like construction which, with the axial studding 15, provide no closed circuit linked by the changing magnetic flux. The eddy-current losses in the end frame members would then be reduced to those set up by a small amount of flux penetration into the thin spider limbs connecting the studding and the central hubs supporting the motor bearings. APPENDIX OF THE PATENT SPECIFICATION Ferromagnetic Inductor Energy Analysis The energy stored in an inductance L formed by a magnetizing winding mounted on a ferromagnetic core is the integral: II[(LI)/t]t (1) evaluated over the range from zero current I to the applicable level of current. This can be written as: I[LI/t + I2L/t]t (2) 2 2 which is I L+LI /2 where L is the change of inductance, assuming this occurs at the level of current I. It follows from this that if L is reduced when I is high and increased when I is low, the inductance can deliver more energy during the current reduction phase than is supplied to it during the current input phase. This may sound anomalous but it is consistent with basic physical principles, because the process by which an inductance stores energy involves heating and cooling. Heat is shed when the inductance is energized, because the electromagnetic induction polarizes the reacting field in the manner described in the Appendix of the published specification of GB Patent Application No. 2,267,995 or that in U.S. Patent No. 5,376,184. Conversely, there is cooling, known in physics as magnetocaloric cooling, upon deenergization. There the energy balance is attributable to thermal effects which are not formulated in the above expression. To prove that more energy can be extracted from an inductance than is supplied to it, suppose that the inductance has a high value L as the current increases and a progressively lower value L-L as the current is sustained at a high level, the current not being switched off until the inductance is very low. The energy input during the current increase phase is then given by: L(I)2/2 (3) and the energy output at the transition when L reduces is given by: L(I)2 (4) with further energy output during the current decrease phase: (L-L)(I)2/2 (5) Since there is no current when the transition to increased inductance occurs, these three energy components are all we need consider. Together they show a net gain of electrical energy of half the expression (4). This assumes that the inductance can be changed without expending energy equal to that gained and this is not possible for an air-cored inductance. It is possible by using HAROLD
36
a ferromagnetic core, for example, by adjusting an air gap in the core, assuming the gap is positioned somewhere in the core not directly field-coupled with the magnetizing winding. Here the word 'field' (H as used in Fig. 15) has a meaning distinct from magnetic flux (B) which necessarily does couple the air gap with the magnetizing winding.
HAROLD
37
HAROLD
FIG. 7
FIG. 8
HAROLD
HAROLD
HAROLD
POWER FROM MAGNETISM: OVER-UNITY MOTOR DESIGN
by
HAROLD ASPDEN
Sabberton Publications P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England
ISBN 0 85056 0241

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
Contents
Section Title Introduction PART I: Multi-Megawatt Over-Unity Design PART II: The ASPDEN Motor PART III: The Energy of a Magnetic Circuit PART IV: Commercial Development of the Invention
page 1 2 11 19 27-29
*****
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996

Introduction This Energy Science Report is one of a series concerned with new energy technology and the fundamental energy science that is involved. In this series of twelve such reports there are three, Nos 3, 8 and 9 of which are of outstanding importance. Report No. 8 was devoted exclusively to the remarkable discovery of Dr. Paulo Correa and Mrs. Alexandra Correa of Concord, Ontario, Canada. In proving that electrical power at normal power voltage can be generated by tapping aether energy by a plasma discharge technique, we have in prospect one solution for our future energy needs. In this Report No. 9 this author now reveals another way forward to tapping aether energy, one which could well replace main electrical power generating installations in the years ahead. In Report No. 3, soon to be issued, the author will describe a technology which, when developed, will serve as a `free energy' air-conditioning or refrigeration unit. This latter technology does not tap aether energy. It does, however, operate in defiance of the second law of thermodynamics by extracting electricity from ambient heat. This Report in four parts. Part I outlines the design of a large scale motor such as might become a prime mover in a power generating plant or used to power an ocean liner. Part II concerns the design features of a small prototype motor that can be assembled in a home workshop. Part III is an academic discourse aimed at educating students and even university professors of electrical engineering on some elementary, but unfamiliar, principles of magnetism. Part IV discusses further the scope for research and commercialization. It is aimed at government officials and research directors in industry, with a view to urging action to exploit this new technology. For the record, the author explains that he has begun writing this Report on October 6th 1996 and aims to publish by November 6th in advance of a New Energy symposium to be held in Rotterdam on November 9th. This Report will be revised and reissued in updated forms periodically thereafter in the light of developments. [Note added here in this June, 2003 reprint of this Report for placing as a record on the authors website www.energyscience.co.uk and listing in the paper section of the authors other website www.aspden.org which is where any such commentary as to onward development will be reported. However, it is mentioned here that, at this time, the authors attentions have been more directed at the understanding the scientific physical basis on which energy can be tapped from our aetheric environment, replicating in a sense the process by which our Earth and sun acquired their energy. The future prospect here points towards solid-state technology, rather than the theme discussed in this Report.]
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
PART I: Multi-Megawatt Over-Unity Design There have been many reports of motors incorporating permanent magnets and claiming over-unity performance. By òver-unity' is meant the generation of output power in excess of the electrical power input. It is important to note that the use of permanent magnets in motor construction is standard practice for many commercial d.c. motors. Usually the motor drive is generated by currents in conductors interacting with the magnetic field to produce lateral forces on the structure supporting the conductors. In this case the resulting motion induces back EMFs which absorb input power to set up the drive force. There is no anomalous energy gain in such machines. An entirely different motor principle involves setting up a magnetic field in a pole gap as the poles come together and weakening the magnetizing field during pole separation. Such machines are known as `magnetic reluctance' motors. Incorporating permanent magnets in such machines poses problems but offers scope for òver-unity' performance. It should not, however, be assumed that energy is being drained from the magnet. The magnet is merely a catalyst in energy conversion. Also, whatever function can be performed by a magnet can also be achieved using an electromagnet, meaning a ferromagnetic core excited by a magnetizing winding, subject to the scale of the system involved. In large electrodynamic machines used in power generation there is a developing tendency to use superconductive magnets, superconductive coils having no ferromagnetic core. The fact that electric current can be sent around a multi-turn magnetizing winding with no loss that produces heat offers the alternative to a powerful magnet for many scientific applications. This is especially the case now that `warm superconductors' have been discovered, with the promise of room temperature superconductivity. However, here again, it must be noted that, if the ferromagnetic core is to be used as the catalyst for tapping energy from the aether, the use of superconductive windings must be accompanied by the presence of ferromagnetic cores within those windings. The design of the multimegawatt power generating machine to be described below does, therefore, use superconductive windings on ferromagnetic cores. The general principle which forms the basis of the design combines (a) the avoidance of loss by using superconductive magnetizing windings and (b) the minimization of inductive power input by near-to-total enclosure of the complete core circuit of the machine within a single solenoidal magnetizing winding. The operating principle of the conventional magnetic reluctance motor is easy to understand. One stores energy in the magnetic field within the gaps between the rotor and stator poles. The poles come together by magnetic attraction. That magnetic field energy fed in as inductance is then converted into mechanical work imparting drive torque which delivers output power to a motor drive shaft. All one then has to do is to be sure that the magnetizing current is switched off when the poles come into register as the pole gaps are very nearly closed and then they can separate to step on to the next operating position without there being much magnetic drag arresting the motion. The energy fed in as inductance energy is deployed as mechanical output. There is no power gain, but there is some loss owing to magnetization (hysteresis and eddy-currents) and, unless superconductive windings are used, there is ohmic heating loss attributable to the currents in the magnetizing windings.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
Now just reconsider this situation. Firstly one assures that there is energy stored in the magnetic field of the pole gaps. Then one converts virtually all of that energy into mechanical work. Finally one ensures that no further magnetic energy is fed into the pole gaps during their separation. There is no reference to a magnet in this sequence of events. So let us now introduce a magnet and regard the rotor poles as being those of a permanent magnet, with the stator poles being those of an electromagnet, the latter having a magnetizing winding. Instead of supplying electric current to set up the magnetic field in the pole gap during the pole closure phase we let that field be that solely attributable to the permanent magnet. The magnet will pull the poles together and supply mechanical drive torque which spin the motor. The electromagnet will be excited during pole separation so as to set up a magnetic field in opposition to that of the magnet, in effect neutralizing the field, or as some might say setting up poles of the same polarity so that they repel whereas there was attraction during the pole closure phase when a magnet pole attracted a nonmagnetized soft-iron stator pole piece. Here the situation is that the magnet does the work first to drive the machine and then we do something by which we input power to reset the machine for a repeat cycle. If what we do requires less energy that was delivered by the magnet, then we have òver-unity' operation. Whatever we do in feeding that energy into the machine involves the process we call `magnetic induction'. There has to be a back-EMF set up in the magnetizing winding when we supply current, if there has to be energy input. By our laws of physics there has to be what is termed a rate of change of magnetic flux linkage to set up that back EMF. The question at issue therefore is whether we can set up a current in the magnetizing winding which opposes the magnetic field in the pole gap but does not promote any change in the net magnetic flux linking that winding. To reduce this to something quite simple, imagine you are sitting at a table in a room and you have a magnet in one hand and a piece of soft iron in the other hand. See Fig. 1.
The word `soft' in this connection merely means that the iron is of normal composition and not an alloy or special substance that is used for making permanent magnets. It means that it readily accepts change of magnetic state and readily loses its magnetic state given a demagnetizing field. A permanent magnet requires an extremely strong demagnetizing field before it suffers any permanent loss of magnetism and it recovers from any temporary reduction of strength promptly upon removal of the less-than-extremely-strong demagnetizing field. You can feel the pull of the magnet towards the soft iron. The two having come together, you try to pull them apart to find that it needs a lot of force. If you
apply current to magnetize the soft iron bridging yoke then, depending upon the current direction, the yoke will be pulled towards the magnet with even greater force (Fig. 1) or that force will be weakened or even reversed (Fig. 2). If you introduce alternating current (Fig. 3) then the force will oscillate and you can contemplate building a motor by fitting a flywheel, connecting rod and crank shaft. Now there is nothing contrary to simple electrical engineering principles in this method of designing an electric motor. Indeed, for anyone interested in building model steam engines there could be a fascination in using the connecting rod, crank and flywheel arrangement to convert pulsating translational motion into a rotary form of motion. It so happens, however, that the usual design of an electric motor is more suited to producing rotary motion. It is based on the magnetic poles on a rotor and a stator moving owing to a sideways pull which exists even though the interacting rotor and stator pole faces are equidistant whilst altering their areas of overlap. However, staying with our horseshoe magnet and reciprocating engine model, suppose now that, wrapped around the room, running around the perimeter walls, there is a magnetizing winding (or rather a demagnetizing winding) and someone switches a current on in that winding (Fig. 4). Its field acts on the magnet and the soft iron just as it would if the winding were closely wrapped around that soft iron bridging yoke. You would still find you can easily Figure 3 separate the two, thanks to that current in the winding, if it flows in the appropriate direction. Now you do have a problem. You know enough about magnetism to accept that magnetic flux lines close around their paths in loops quite close to the magnetic source. The flux lines emerging from the magnet and the soft iron are therefore all virtually completely closed well within a metre or so from that table. However, that winding around the room is all embracing and hardly any flux escapes as a linking flux through that winding. There is negligible back EMF induced as it accepts the current which breaks the pull between the magnet and the soft iron. Therefore, one has a situation where power can be generated from the magnetic reluctance action as the poles come together but we input no inductive power to weaken that attraction and so allow the poles to separate to reset them for the next action cycle. This is a recipe for òver-unity' operation. We have drawn energy from the thermodynamic system of the quantum power state of the magnet and used it to serve a mechanical purpose and we find that no energy input is needed to reset the system for the next cycle of operation. Now it is not realistic to suggest that windings should be placed around the whole room housing a motor but one can so design a motor that the magnetic flux circuit is closed within a solenoidal winding as if that solenoid does house virtually the whole motor. It is also
Figure 4
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
realistic to contemplate the use of superconductive windings to avoid loss of energy by normal joule heating produced by current flow. It is even realistic to build a small prototype machine which does not use superconductive windings and perform tests to verify the principles just outlined. That is described in Part II below. Furthermore, in Part III we will come to understand where that energy that is drawn into the machine to give it òver-unity' performance enters the machine, though a full understanding of its underlying source, which is within the aether, is beyond our scope here in this Report. For that one needs to study this author's book Àether Science Papers' [This was listed as ref. 1996a in the Appended Bibliography that was included in the original version of this Report. That bibliography is not included here as it can be found on website www.aspden.org along with a copy of that book in PDF format.] To summarize, given that one can design an electrical motor having a magnetizing winding which has no resistance loss and sets up no significant ferromagnetic inductive reaction when carrying an alternating current and given that the motor will run at a synchronous speed set by the pulsation rate of that current, we can design an òver-unity' motor. As already indicated the design of a multi-megawatt system will be presented first, before we come to the design of the small bench-type test machine which the author has devised. Of necessity, the latter form of machine has had to use magnetizing windings which are resistive and which do involve inductance, though these are minimized by astute design. However, since the real significance of this effort is the implication for large scale exploitation as power generators in the electrical supply industry, it is appropriate to present the multi-megawatt design next, the object being to arouse interest in government circles and in the electrical power supply industry. This is done with deliberation, because there have been several claims by inventors asserting that they have over-unity' machines. Often the inventors lack the formal technical academic background of the heavy electrical engineering profession. If their machines work they get involved with prospective sponsors who want the secrets of the invention to be kept confidential until they have exploited the rights, but it needs the engineering talents of the established corporate motor manufacturer to develop the technology. The reason is one of scale. The larger the machine, the easier the task of overcoming the power loading involved in breaking through the over-unity' threshold. A dynamo-electric machine rated at tens of megawatts needs to have dimensions for which the rotor diameter would be of the order of a metre and a length of two or three metres. Machines of this size are not built as a speculative experimental exercise. They should be, in this author's opinion, because the research funding is negligible when compared with the expenditure which governments waste on high energy particle accelerators and reactors aimed at hot fusion power generation. The problem, of course, is that scientists think they know all there is to know about the way in which the dynamo-electric machine operates. They devote their research efforts to writing programs for computer-aided design and thereby underline the point that the basis of their formulations is sound and beyond any dispute. About ten years ago I asked a university lecturer, who specialised in teaching electric machine design and was active in creating computer programs for that purpose, how he allowed for the èddy-current anomaly' in his calculations. His response to me was that he had never heard of the èddy-current anomaly'. I was surprised because I had spent three years of my life doing Ph.D. research on that very subject in the Department of Electrical Engineering at Cambridge University in England. I knew that the precise way
magnetic flux density B in iron varies with the magnetizing field H is not something one relies upon from electrical steel manufacturers' specifications. I will not bore the reader here by enlarging on that theme. If you are interested then do refer to Energy Science Report No. 3 in this series, but take my word here for the fact that the machine design I shall describe below would not be something that could perform in the manner predicted by use of those programs for computer-aided design. Ask yourself, "Could such a program on offer commercially today really predict the òver-unity' performance of an electrodynamic machine?" You see, I know of two fundamental processes that are at work in such machines, either of which has òver-unity' implications. One is the process that undermined by Ph.D. research effort. I found that the eddy-current induction losses in electrical sheet steels could be six times greater than theory predicted, albeit only over a limited portion of the B-H hysteresis cycle. I attributed this to a loss mechanism as if there was a mystery time delay in the flux transitions accompanying change of magnetic state. I was not, in those Ph.D. research years (1950-1953), aware of the possibility of breaching the second law of thermodynamics. Otherwise I would have been writing about òver-unity' machines and `free energy' power sources in my early career, rather than now in my retirement. The mystery which underlies the èddy-current anomaly' is the regeneration of electrical power from heat wasted by ohmic resistance loss! That six-fold factor I measured, later to be surpassed by researchers who found that a factor of 10 was in evidence in some steels magnetized across the direction in which the steel had been rolled to form in into sheets, tells me that there is thermodynamic regeneration of power on a mammoth scale. It exceeds by far any level set by the Carnot criteria and I see in that the basis of a new technology. That may explain why I deem Energy Science Report No. 3 to be very important. Now, in the design of the multi-megawatt machine under discussion here, I need to keep that èddy-current anomaly' in mind, while aiming to tap energy from that quantum world which powers the ferromagnet. The energy source is thermodynamic, but whereas the èddy-current anomaly' draws on normal heat energy generated in the steel by resistance loss, the quantum activity taps entropy of the underlying vacuum medium, or aether, which is where the quantum (Planck's constant) is determined. Moving on, I stress that those who will be consulted in the evaluation of what I say here will not find they can use their computer-aided design techniques to verify in advance whether or not my machine will work to deliver òver-unity' performance. They need to understand rather more about `magnetic flux leakage' than they do at present, before they can even adapt those programs to face this new task. Furthermore, they need first to understand inductance and the `half-field reaction' phenomenon that I describe in Part III of this Report. The only way forward is to bite the bullet and spend the money needed to build the test prototype machine I now describe. They can by all means debate the pros and cons of my proposal, but they will not be able to deny the validity of my overall conclusion, because of what I say above by reference to Fig. 4 and what I shall describe below in Part II. Fig. 5 shows the sectional side elevation of the machine and Fig. 6 shows the sectional end view from the position indicated by the outer arrow markings. The machine comprises a solid steel rotor having a laminated set of toothed electrical steel stampings at each end. The teeth on these stampings form rotor poles which interact with the six stator pole members. These have the form of laminated electrical steel stampings
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
assembled in a stator support frame (not shown) and forming bridging yokes. The structure is comparable functionally with the simple arrangement depicted in Fig. 3.
However, there is a fundamental difference in the way in which the magnetizing winding is incorporated. The main magnetizing winding is solenoidal and shown as the cross-shaded stator-mounted structure in Fig. 5. It is superconductive. There is, however, an additional magnetizing winding (not shown in Figs. 5 and 6) that is positioned in slots around the perimeter of the solid steel rotor. See Fig. 7 for an outline of constructional
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
detail. This winding is a normal copper winding connected between slip rings mounted on the rotor spigots. Between adjacent pole teeth on the rotor laminations there are blocks of electrical steel laminations interfacing with the sides faces of the teeth to guide magnetic flux from the pole teeth around a closed circuit shown by the three arrow markings on the full line curves in Fig. 5. The path is through a spiral wrapping of laminated electrical sheet steel
providing infill between the inter-teeth blocks. As can then be seen there is a closed flux path through the body of the rotor and this spiral wrapping, so that very little magnetizing current in the rotor winding can produce a flux density near to magnetic saturation around that rotor circuit. For design purposes one can assume a magnetic permeability of several thousand so that 15,000 gauss can be developed by a few ampere-turns per cm. length of the rotor. Very little power is therefore expended in introducing the priming magnetic condition of the rotor. So far as induction is concerned, note that the rotor body comprises solid steel. Once the magnetic flux is set up in it the rapid fluctuations of any externallyapplied field will have no effect on the rotor body. Eddy-current screening will confine related flux changes to a very small penetration depth and losses arising from that at the surface of the rotor body will be negligible. However, in resisting inductive flux change through the body of the rotor, the flux has to remain constant and that means that, external to the core body of the rotor, it must find a through path regardless of the varying position of the poles of the machine. The task in operating the machine is, therefore, that of ensuring that the magnetic flux from the solid body of the rotor either finds its way back through the spiral laminar steel wrapping on the rotor or diverts through the outer perimeter faces of the rotor poles and finds its closure path through the bridging yokes of the stator. The latter route is indicated by the broken line curves shown in Fig. 5. With no current in the superconductive winding the paths of least reluctance are those shown by the full line curves. The 15,000 gauss flux density of the core body will,
by appropriate design in determining the ratio of the cross-sectional areas of the solid and laminar portions of the rotor, be such that 8,000 gauss, say, applies in the right-hand direction within the laminated portion. However, when current flows in the superconductive winding in a sense that reverses this flux direction, the design requirement is that the combined effect should produce a 20,000 gauss flux density in the stator bridging yoke members. The plan is to operate the machine by feeding current pulses into the solenoidal winding to divert the rotor core flux across the pole gaps as the rotor and stator poles come into register and have no current in that winding as the poles separate. What is so special about this machine design is the fact that we have built into the machine a basic polarization bias which allows us to use a solid-bodied rotor construction, needed for strength in withstanding rotation at, say, 3,600 rpm and have located a single solenoidal stator winding in a structure that is easy to cool to assure the superconductive condition.
It is special also because we have a ferromagnetic core subjected to pulsating magnetic flux conditions by a unidirectional current pulse fed to that superconductive winding. Note further that the flux density range of change in the spiral laminar wrapping around the rotor is between, say, 8,000 gauss, which is very moderate in electrical machine design terms, whereas the flux density range of change in the bridging yoke members of the stator is between, say 5,000 and 20,000 gauss in the same direction. The thickness of the latter members can, as one sees from Fig. 8, be made such that this 20,000 gauss level of flux density is assured, given that the 15,000 gauss of the solid rotor core portion will be sustained by induced reaction currents if the current excitation of the superconductive winding is not perfectly matched to the load conditions. Also, in the design of this machine an important factor is the retentivity or residual magnetism trapped in the stator bridging yoke members. This residual magnetism makes it easier for the basic level of stator flux density to be maintained at 5,000 gauss. Now, although we have, by reference to Figs. 1 to 4, seen that it is possible to operate a motor with òver-unity' performance, we have not explained how the energy is
10
drawn in from the aether to balance that gain. As we shall see presently from Part III of this Report, we need to activate a magnetic core over a range of magnetization where the ferromagnetic domains in the steel begin to turn owing to the action of a magnetic field, as distinct from flipping spontaneously by trigger action involving a weak magnetic field. The latter is what happens at low flux density. Fortunately, from the viewpoint of our machine design, that `flipping' of flux direction is avoided in the solid portion of the rotor and is very much reduced in the stator owing to the magnetization cycle being centred on a flux density of 12,500 gauss. Hysteresis loss which is associated with those spontaneous flips of the magnetism in the domains within the steel is very much reduced under these conditions. So far as the hysteresis loss in the spiral wrapped laminated portion of the rotor is concerned the 8,000 gauss range limit keeps that loss below normal levels prevalent in transformers and dynamoelectric machines. It follows that the primary loss would be the ohmic resistance loss in the main winding, but we have avoided that by using the superconductor in its construction. Note, further, that the strong magnetic flux densities we see in the steel are not required to penetrate the superconductor material and that the use of a `warm superconductor' substance is likely to prove commercially viable as the machine design suggested here is implemented. It will be apparent to experts in electric motor design who may come to read this Report that the machine depicted in Figs. 5 to 8 does not exploit the feature by which inductance of the magnetizing winding is reduced. Yet it does, in a sense and indirectly. The superconducting winding has to reverse the magnetic flux in the spiral laminar portion of the rotor. This means that we must supply energy as input to match that stored by inductance in the pole gaps of the machine. We intend to use that energy priming condition to develop machine drive torque but, owing to the bias polarization, we intend to draw in some extra energy into that gap, as will be explained in Part III. This augments the drive torque. Now, if we were to wait until the machine had used its magnetic drive fully as its poles reach their in-register condition, before we switch the current off, we would not get much of that input energy back. However, if the machine is operating under òver-unity' conditions, we can target a moment to reduce that current so as to get substantially the whole of that input energy returned from the inductance. In effect, therefore, though we have to contend with the back EMF attributable to inductance, we have in sight the design criteria for a machine which possibly might have the merits of the notional motor arrangement shown in Fig. 4. It will be easier to understand the technical points involved in this proposition if some of the design details for operation of the multi-megawatt machine are deferred until Part IV of this Report. This is because the analysis in Part III will provide a foundation for understanding the way in which the machine functions to tap aether energy and because there will be some reference to patents bearing upon the subject and these patents warrant inspection for their commercial significance. Accordingly, attention is now turned to the bench-type motor which implements the principle introduced in the above discussion of Figs. 1 to 4.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
11
PART II: The ASPDEN Motor The ASPDEN motor is based on an evolving design principle which encompasses several technical features implicit in the name just given. Although ASPDEN is this author's surname, it can serve as an acronym for: Asymmetric Shaded-Pole Dynamo-Electric Negentropy machine. The expression `negentropy' signifies òver-unity' operation, because the usual expectation in energy science is that entropy, which is a notional quantity representing an amount of heat Q as degraded by temperature T, or Q/T, always increases. The term `negative entropy' or `negentropy' implies the reversal of this process and signifies a regenerative action. The àsymmetric property' is a subject discussed in Energy Science Report No. 7. It is introduced by tilting the laminar assemblies constituting the stator poles, the object being to cause the machine to operate more efficiently when rotating in a specific direction. The orthogonal relative disposition of the laminar planes as between the stator and rotor poles accounts for the `shaded-pole' aspect, but this is not strictly a shaded-pole design in the normal sense. The reason is that the `shaded-pole' feature aims to preclude magnetic flux from leaving the poles in a direction that retards the drive, whereas the conventional `shaded-pole' design relies on magnetic flux penetration and that generates unwanted inductive heating. The current giving that heat shifts the phase of the emergent flux and creates the drive. The latter is an inefficient process. The former can be quite effective in supplementing the efficiency of the machine. From what has been said by reference to Figs. 1 to 4 it will be understood that the machine must have a single solenoidal winding mounted externally with respect to the whole operating magnetic circuit, so that it is not restricted in dimensions to the small aperture space that allows it to fit onto individual pole pieces. Furthermore, we want the winding to be so positioned on the machine that it acts only indirectly on the pole gap and lets the magnet system do the work of feeding energy to that pole gap region. Contrary to the design shown in Fig. 5, we will set the solenoidal magnetizing winding so that when it is powered to oppose flux in the pole gaps it assists the magnetism of the magnet. Alternatively, when it is powered to assist the flux in the pole gaps, it opposes the magnetism of the magnets. This poses no problem, however, because the magnets are virtually immune from the effects of fields of the strength needed to run the motor. By putting the magnets into the rotor assembly, it is the soft iron bridging yokes forming the stator that `see' the power of the field we apply to that magnetizing solenoid. The magnets set up the basic polarization which develops demagnetizing effects in those bridging yokes, making it an easy task then for the magnetizing (or rather demagnetizing) current to reduce the magnetic flux across the poles gaps as they separate. However, running in the alternative mode with current assisting the pole gap magnetization, the effective permeability of the irom in the bridging yokes is still of the order of 100, whereas the effective permeability of the magnets in the rotor is close to unity. It is feasible, therefore, to run a motor by using a single magnetizing winding wrapped around the whole body of the machine so as to surround virtual all of its internal flux path. Inevitably, of course, since we are not talking about the notional embodiment shown in Fig. 4, we will have some flux leakage that escapes from the winding. Also, there will be a reduction of magnetic flux through the magnet as the poles separate. This will not involve significant eddy-current losses if the magnet is of a composition that is non
12
conductive, such as a ferrite. It would be a problem if one uses an alloy such as Alnico as a magnet. At least, it is feasible to build and test a small motor that operates by using a single solenoidal magnetizing winding in the manner just described. Fig. 9 illustrates the second test machine built by the author. It dates from April1995. It uses loudspeaker-type barium ferrite magnets of 60 cm outside diameter, 24 mm internal diameter and 8mm thickness. The rotor laminations of 90 mm external radius have 8 poles and an internal diameter of 19 mm permitting a tight fit on a slightly reduced 3/4 inch diamter brass spindle. There are 8 bridging yokes which comprise small rectangular transformer laminations of 3 inch by 1/2 inch dimensions. The machine was fitted with a d.c. drive motor that could serve equally as a generator and was intended to bring the machine up to speed before current was applied to the test machine. The decision to use 8 poles proved to be a problem, because it was not feasible, given the author's circumstances, to assemble a suitable commutator and the author opted to control the machine electronically. Note that, to operate with the current assisting the drive as the poles close, one can expect the machine to be self-synchronizing with the pulsed input. However, in the
opposition mode, unless the pulses have to be correctly timed according to the position of the motor shaft, otherwise it will lose synchronism. To the extent that these problems could be overcome, the plan then was to apply power to the test machine and relieve the load on the drive motor gradually to see whether the energy input to the test machine was less the energy saving in feeding the drive motor.
13
In short, the question was whether any drive at all could be provided by that single external magnetizing winding, because it was quite unorthodox to configure a motor so that the only winding did not link the magnetic circuit traversing the pole gap. Instead, the motor shown in Fig. 9 was designed with a magnetizing winding that was linked only by stray leakage flux and there could be no doubt owing to its outer position on the perimeter of the stator bridging yokes that most of the flux diverted from the pole gaps had still to find its return passage confined within the magnetizing winding.
Note further that the essential issue of concern was, not the amount of loss caused in the winding owing to I2R heating effects, but whether the energy lost as inductive power input to drive the machine was less than the mechanical energy gained. Keep in mind that, whether working in the supporting drive mode or the opposing drive mode, the object is to draw more mechanical power from the closure of the pole gaps than is supplied as irretrievable inductive power input, either to augment the gap flux during pole closure or to weaken the gap flux during pole separation. One troublesome question faced by the author during these tests of the opposed mode excitation was that of being sure that the current applied did not exceed that needed to suppress the pole gap flux, because if it was too large it could simply divert the flux from the magnet into the ends of the bridging yokes and so through an external leakage closure path. The leakage had, so far as possible, to be from the sides of the rotor poles and confined close to the rotor core. That is why the design of the machine was as illustrated by the sectional drawing shown in Fig. 10.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
14
Note that in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11, which shows more detail, there are numerals which are used because these illustrations are copied from one of the author's pending U.K. Patent Applications. The assembly comprises a spindle 1 mounted in bearings 13 in end frame members 14. The latter have shoulders which located stator bridging yokes 17 around which there is a helically wound coil or solenoid 16. Mounted on the spindle is an interleaved assermbly of ring magnets 18 and electrical steel rotor laminations 19, the latter having 8 poles uniformly spaced around the perimeter. The angular spacing between the pole teeth is the same as the pole width. The current pulses fed to the winding 16 are assumed in this case to produce a field H acting to oppose the tendency of the magnetic flux developed in the magnets from producing a full measure of magnetic flux through the stator yokes 17. When no current pulse is present then the magnets can promote magnetic attraction between the poles on rotor laminations 19 and the stator yokes 17. Otherwise, when current
is present, that attraction is weakened. As a result, by pulsing the winding 16 at the right timing, the motor will develop a drive torque. Now, although it is not easy to see from these figures, at times when the current is on and blocking some passage of magnetic flux through the stator, there is a diversionary route for flux closure from the magnet. The inner side faces of the rotor pole teeth allow leakage of magnetic flux lines across the axial gap between adjacent sets of rotor laminations. This is an easier flux leakage route than passage from the ends of the machine and around a path external to the winding 16. What happens is that the intensity of the flux through the magnet diminishes somewhat during the current pulse periods and, of course, at times when the rotor and stator poles are out of register with one another. The magnets, being of ferrite composition, offer negligible eddy-current reaction to such flux change. However, in penetrating across the faces of the rotor laminations the flux from the magnet does encounter such a reaction because currents are induced in those laminations. This has the effect of tending to keep the flux passing
15
through a magnet and reaching the rotor teeth at a constant level. This enforces the flux switching between the leakage paths and the stator and means that the flux across the radial pole gaps varies as the rotor turns in step with the current pulses. The essential question one confronts is that of knowing how effective the current can be in driving magnetic flux from the stator. The answer to this is best found by experiment and the evidence of operation of the machine. It is found that the pulsing of that helical winding wrapped around the whole stator assembly will, in fact, impart drive torque to the machine. This means that we can contemplate making the machine larger in size and making the helical winding so large in cross-section that its I2R loss is very small. Furthermore, if we examine the efficiency of the machine, measured with that I2R loss discounted, we should find that it exceeds unity or 100%, if our assumptions are correct and much of the flux switching occurs within the confines of the winding, with little flux escaping from the ends. The following data is an extract from what was reported in the first report on this subject submitted to the DTI, the U.K. Department of Industry in July 1995. The full text of that first report is provided in Energy Science Report No. 7 of this series. As there acknowledged, the DTI have funded the initial stage of this research project as part of their SMART Award system for technological innovation. "The first test on the machine was a test using half-wave rectified 50 Hz a.c. This meant running the machine at low speed (375 rpm), not enough to test the shaded-pole feature, which was the dominant interest owing to the funding arrangements. These tests were, therefore, of a cursory nature just to see if half-wave current pulses did affect the machine in the manner expected, but more particularly to get a measure of the induced back-EMF and so the level of flux activity across the pole gaps and to see how the pulse input relieved load on the drive motor." It proved extremely difficult to get the adjustments of the controls just right with the motor running at 375 rpm for the expected synchronization to establish itself. Then, and only then, was it possible to reduce slowly, stage by stage, the current input to the d.c. drive motor whilst holding that 375 rpm speed. in spite of this, several such tests were performed and the a.c. magnetizing current and voltage were measured as the power input to the d.c. motor progressively reduced." "Each such test proved very satisfying, because the saving in d.c. power input to the drive motor far outweighed the a.c. input as measured in VA (volt-amps), without regard to power factor. Effort was made to run the system with the test machine driving the d.c. motor as a generator, but with this test arrangement the system lost the 50Hz synchronism once the d.c. input current had reduced to about one third of its original value." "The problem here arose because the d.c. power supply used was a stabilized voltage supply and it could not drop below 4.5 volts, which is why a load resistor had been put in series with the motor. Although some time was spent in effort to overcome this, the author was more anxious to develop a control system for running the machine at much higher speed and so these 50Hz tests were abandoned." "One important aspect of the test was, however, the monitoring of the current waveform as supplied to one test machine winding in relation to the voltage waveform induced in the unloaded magnetically-coupled and near-identical second winding." (Note that the winding seen in Fig. 9 is really a two-part winding, each section having 200 turns.) This gave some versatility for testing and operation, even though both windings are
16
wrapped around the same core system. "Together these waveforms gave an insight into the inductive power fed in and returned from the machine over the cyclic period of pole closure and separation." "It was then very evident that the power factor governing the a.c. power input was such as to indicate a quite significant excess power, even assuming that the d.c. drive motor was only 50% efficient. Ostensibly, it seemed that the test machine had to be operating above 100% efficiency by drawing on thermal heat input." "The most important observation, however, apart from finding that a pulse amplitude of about 0.8 amps in the single test winding was needed in the test, was that very nearly all of the inductive power input to the machine was being returned by the a.c. circuit. The volt-amp product reversed polarity as the half-wave current decreased. It could do this because the rectifier diode used could sustain current flow by the winding generating a forward EMF." "Now here was a feature that was important. With the machine driven by the permanent magnet system the inductive power fed in to secure flux switching was not all used in adding power to the machine drive and even in these 50Hz tests, where current was reducing as flux collapsed, most was, it seems recoverable. This had been anticipated, or at least hoped for, in developing the machine design because the relative configuration of the source magnets and the stator pole pieces, but it was gratifying to see this confirmation." "This then became a reason for examining the prospect of building or procuring an a.c. power source that could operate efficiently at 250-400 Hz to power an inductive load regeneratively through a diode. The attendant problem was also that of assuring sufficient frequency stability to be compliant with the synchronous operation of a motor not receiving its power drive as such from that supply." "This pursuit tended to run away with the time available for the project, with partially successful results using the same test machine. Eventually, to move the project forward, the author decided to use a simple electronic power drive where one machine winding signalled the control timing needed to put power on the other winding. A pnp power transistor was connected so as to deliver its collector-base current to one winding in its ON-state, and inhibited so as to be in the OFF-state when the other winding delivered a positive polarity signal to the base." "With such a control system the test results of this Report" (i.e. Report No. 7) "were obtained, but any inductive power returned from the machine winding is necessarily dissipated and detracts from the possible efficiency of the machine. This is because the forward EMF set up by that return of energy causes an unwanted current spike at the end of the cycle. There was the problem with the system under such test that it could very easily be set with its magnetic pole gap flux wasting power in oscillations. Had a capacitor been incorporated without informed design based on test performance then that too could have aided oscillation, rather than helping to suppress such effects whilst storing energy for use in the next machine cycle." The above excerpts from Energy Science Report No. 7 will show the reader that one cannot just build a motor such as that illustrated in Fig. 9 and expect it to deliver 'over-unity' power on demand. It is essential that one understands how the design features are supposed to function. What was soon evident was the fact that the magnetic flux density across the pole gap was far below the level where 'over-unity' operation can really
17
reveal itself in a dominant way. However, the machine was a prototype that could be scaled up to achieve that result and the tests that could be performed could verify design feasibility. The fact that the machine could be operated by the control of that external winding was the proof this author needed to see purpose in advancing the project. As can be seen from Fig. 9, a d.c. motor is coupled to the main test machine, the latter having the all-enveloping helical winding by which it is powered. The 50Hz tests reported above as well as the electronically pulsed tests reported below were done at an early stage. It is only recently that the author has reverted to this early machine version and fitted the vane switch that can be seen behind the pulley. That vane switch comprised a single 8-pole electrical steel rotor lamination as used in the internal construction of the rotor. Its teeth swept through a gap in a sensor device including a small magnet and a Hall effect switch. The latter was used in onward testing to control the commutation. However, it was not fitted at the time the following test data were obtained. These data were produced with only half of the test machine winding carrying drive current, the other half being used to provide the induced EMF controlling the electronic switching. One can, therefore, see that the I2R losses in the winding can be halved by using both windings for drive power and using either the vane switch, a commutator, or fitting a winding of a fine gauge wire to produce the induced signal for electronic control. Further, one can have more turns or use much thicker gauge wire for the main winding. Essentially, the I2R loss can be reduced to a very small value, the more so if the motor is scaled up in physical size. This is because the loss increases as the square of the linear dimension of the machine, whereas the drive power increases as the cube. The objective is to see if the machine derives any drive at all from the current pulsing of the single helical winding and to get some measure of power gain. Keeping speeds low, but well in excess of the 375 rpm used in the 50Hz tests, the whole machine combination was run, first at 800 rpm and then at 1350 rpm, just powered by the d.c. drive motor. This means that the test machine was simply a load, as the magnetism fluctuating across the pole gaps would involve some parasitic losses. There would be hysteresis loss and eddy-current loss and the retentive property of the stator bridging yokes would apply a stronger drag acting as a brake during pole separation than was gained as a forward drive during pole closure. For these speeds the electrical power input was 3.331 watts and 5.255 watts, respectively. Note that the d.c. motor developed a high torque and was rated at 68 watts at a speed of 5100 rpm and a 12 volt input at that speed. It was of a kind used to power model boats. It included permanent magnets and tests indicated that its efficiency was about 50% over its main working range. It could be run in reverse to generate electrical power with much the same efficiency. Indeed, two such machines, coupled back-to-back, were tested to see how much d.c. power input to the drive machine could be recovered from the generating machine and overall the efficiency was between 25% and 30%. Keeping the d.c. motor drive power on, the circuit feeding pulses to the winding of the test machine was then activated and the power supplied to the d.c. motor adjusted so that the whole machine combination ran at 1350 rpm, as before. The d.c. motor was then taking a power input of 2.618 watts, less than half the power needed to reach that speed without the test machine excited. Of course, there was electrical power input directly to the test machine, but that power was going into the helical winding you see in Fig. 9.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
18
Clearly, the machine could be driven by such a winding, even though it was not linked by magnetic coupling to a flux path through the pole gaps! Now, these tests were run at low voltage and the transistor circuit was very poorly designed for the purpose, but the oscilloscope waveforms could be analyzed and it was possible to segregate the power fed to the test machine to get a measure of the true power input, ignoring transistor losses. The latter can be reduced to very small proportions by using MOSFET technology. From this analysis the power supplied to the test machine for the 1350 rpm speed was 1.718 watts, of which 1.100 watts was VR loss in that helical winding. If the latter I2R loss is discounted, because it can be reduced to negligible proportions with appropriate design, and we look solely at the magnetic activity of the drive, we find that the added 0.618 watts plus the d.c. motor input of 2.618 watts is doing the work which needed 5.255 watts using the d.c. motor on its own. It took 3.331 watts to run the system at 800 rpm before the test machine was excited, but, once excited by magnetic power input of 0.618 watts to the test machine, the 3.331 watts input reduced to 2.618 watts and the whole system increased in speed to 1350 rpm. Ostensibly, to the extent that we can virtually eliminate much of that VR loss in the helical winding, we have a reduced power input of 0.095 watts and the machine runs 69% faster. Now, even if the test machine were 100% efficient and the d.c. motor were 50% efficient, this could not account for this reduction in power, and so one simply must conclude that there is evidence of 'over-unity' performance. Although I could, at this point, begin to describe my onward research efforts and other machines that I have assembled, I intend to confine this Report to the basic issue of establishing a scientific basis for the design of an 'over-unity' machine. There are really only two questions to answer when it comes to assessing the prospect of such technology impacting our future. These are: (a) can one build a machine of such large power that we can use it for generating electricity supplied by a utility distribution network and (b) can one explain the design principles in sufficient detail for scientists to understand the true source of power? I see little point in just building a bench-top machine which runs to illuminate a few light bulbs as if with no input power source, because others who have done that are deemed to be performing tricks and are not heeded by the scientific establishment. As I see it, it should suffice to present the outline of a motor design such as is introduced in this Report No. 9 and as described in Energy Science Report No. 7 and let those interested ponder on my explanation of the scientific principles that I explain. If they can then see the light then, and only then, will they see purpose in building their own machines, guided by what is here disclosed. As with any technological development there is much to learn in the know how of the design and I do not see myself as a one-man R&D operation competing with major industrial power engineering interests. Nor is it my role to educate those expert in that field of endeavour. I will, however, disclose the secrets of that energy world which I have deciphered from my studies, founded as they are on early academic and industrial training in heavy electrical engineering and research in ferromagnetism, and I look only for recognition for my scientific endeavour. This is why I have interrupted my motor research and given priority during 1996 to producing my book 'Aether Science Papers' [1996a]. Accordingly, for those having the necessary skill and background experience in understanding magnetism and electrical theory, especially those versed in power engineering, I will now move on to Part III of this Report.
19
PART III: The Energy of a Magnetic Circuit The academic understanding of the way in which energy is deployed within a magnetic core in which there is a small air gap was a mystery some 50 years ago and has remained a unsolved mystery, now ignored by professors of electrical engineering. Professors of physics teach the science of magnetism but are seemingly unaware of the problem. Indeed, by adopting a particular interpretation of a physical phenomenon of no practical importance they have, in effect, blocked the way forward to solving that mystery and in so doing they have not seen the scope for generating power thermodynamically from the aether itself. The mystery is rooted in the phenomenon discovered by Michael Faraday, namely electromagnetic induction. It is an experimental fact that a closed magnetic circuit formed by a ferromagnetic ring core wrapped within a magnetizing winding will develop a very powerful state of magnetic polarization around the core even when a quite small current is supplied to the winding. However, if you so much as slice a gap in the core no greater than two thousandth of its overall length, then that polarization will immediately lose of the order of 5% of its strength. Make the gap four thousandths of the core length and you lose 10%. Professors will tell you that this is caused by `magnetic leakage'. The core section may have a width of one hundred times that of the gap but those professors will still say that 5% of the overall magnetism in the ring core is `leaking' from the gap and presumably finding a route through air that is far longer than that through the air in the gap. Now, I say that is simply `rubbish' and I can also say that I have yet to see any textbook present a verified theory of magnetic leakage that explains the phenomenon in a formal scientific way. The nearest one can get to that, so far as I know, is the Oxford Clarendon Press textbook published in their Oxford Engineering Series in 1955 under the title `The Principles of Electromagnetism'. Its author was Professor E. B. Moullin, who was President of the Institution of Electrical Engineers in U.K. when I began my first year of research in the Department of Electrical Engineering which he headed at Cambridge (1950). That is nearly half a century ago. You will find that 5% factor, just mentioned, on page 174 of that work and you may take note of his final sentence on that page: "The writer is not able to forecast any relation between the leakage inductance and the size of the magnet". However he did find it possible to match up theory and experiment in the case where the gap was made extremely large by completely removing the bridging yoke in his experiment. the calculated leakage inductance did agree with the measured inductance in that case, but there was something amiss in the concept of leakage when the gap width was small and of the order of a few millimetres. Professor Moullin presented experimental data of tests he had performed on a core which was about one metre in overall circuit length and which had a square cross-sectional area of 8 cm by 8 cm. Although he saw the experimental data as representing `leakage' this author sees something far more important in that data. There was more energy in the gap than had been supplied by the magnetizing current! This was only noticed many years after Moullin's book was published, but it then caused the author to repeat the experiment and confirm that the flux was not leaking to the extent suggested. This was reported Energy Science Report No. 1 in this series, where it
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
20
was suggested that we might be able to build òver-unity' motors, guided by that new knowledge. I wish here, however, to enlarge on the academic theme involved in this question of the core with a small air gap. There are other mystery questions involved in this subject. Firstly, how can it be that a coil uniformly wound over a one metre length of core can somehow shed energy confined to a one millimetre length where the air gap is located? You may say that the magnetic core accepts that energy and transfers it to the air gap but, again, apart from doing an accounting fiddle and making the energy books balance, how does energy travel through that magnetic core? We are not dealing with water in a porous conduit having an empty cavity at one position along its length, though some professors may be satisfied with that type of analogy. No, the answer to this question is something rather startling that will surprise any professor! In fact, what happens when we put electric current through that winding is that it produces a magnetic field around the whole core and in the onset of that field there is electromagnetic induction by which energy is fed uniformly into the whole reacting system, whether the latter is the substance of the core, mere air or even just the vacuum. I am saying also that all that energy input is lost as heat with no time delay since it is fed directly into charge in motion over which we have no control. That moving charge can be in the form of free conduction electrons in a metal or electrons belonging to atomic structure in, for example, a ferrite or be the charges that sustain Maxwell's displacement currents in the vacuum field. The energy is lost as surely as if it were shed in a microwave oven by eddy-current heating. It adds to the entropy of the environment. The secondary effect of that magnetic field acting all the way around the ring core is to assert forces on the electric charges that are moving freely as part of that world of entropy, whether in the air gap or elsewhere around the core inside that winding. No energy transfer is involved in this steady-state condition because the forces act at right angles to charge motion. However, by Lenz's law which requires an opposing reaction or by reference to the derivation of what is known as the Larmor formula, there is deflection of charge motion into helical paths orientated to set up a reaction field. The existence of this field even in metals is never mentioned in physics textbooks. On the contrary, the nearest one gets to this is the occasional reference to what is known as `the absence of free electron diamagnetism'. Physicists who studied this problem early in the 20th century were at pains to eliminate it from their thoughts by inventing statistical reasons, such as spins being paired in opposite directions and so cancelling, their objective being to avoid the embarrassing question of why a steady magnetic field could penetrate copper when, in theory, it should be completely suppressed by diamagnetic reaction. I found those arguments unconvincing and decided that we had to face up to this question and accept that Nature did react to set up a strong opposing field. I went a little further in my interpretation of the reaction and added the rider that Nature would limit its response to the extent that allowed potential energy to transfer into the magnetic energy of the reacting field. You see, my argument is that forces acting on charge in motion are not set up by a magnetic field just because some scientist or other enunciated a form of law. Forces exist only as part of the energy transfer process and are governed by what happens to energy, the latter being subject to that natural `law of conservation of energy'. Simple analysis told me that the maximum transfer of energy into the reacting field occurred when the reaction halved the strength of the applied field. It further told me that the kinetic energy density deployed from the random motion of that world of entropy and used in the orientation of the reacting orbital motion of charge will exactly correspond to
21
that we associate with the magnetic field. In other words, I had discovered how magnetic energy is stored in the vacuum field and how it is recovered when the field subsides. I had discovered the mechanism underlying the process of electromagnetic induction and I knew that it involved reversible thermodynamic processes. Back to our magnetic core problem, I knew that the energy fed into the magnetizing winding is all shed as heat and lost to the world of entropy but, equally, I knew that, of the entropy action inside that core, as distributed all along the length of the core and through that air gap, there is an orientation of magnetic moments producing a uniform reaction field. Furthermore, this reaction is not just attributable to the field H set up by the winding. The reaction cannot discriminate between fields set up by windings or those set up by electrons in motion within atoms in a ferromagnet. So the reaction field really is of strength B, the full intensity of the flux traversing the air gap. However, its direction is in opposition to that of the primary magnetization. Now, far from this being a problem, it was truly wonderful to see what all this implied. The theoretical analysis underlying the reaction effect had told me that the reaction field would halve the strength of the applied field. So, if the learned professor tells me that the magnetizing field set up by current in a winding has a value H but there is no diamagnetic reaction in the vacuum, I say "Oh, no!" and declare instead that the field set up is 2H but it is always opposed by the reaction H in the vacuum state and so the measured field is H, but because of that reaction there is reason to understand how the vacuum stores energy as a function of H and how when the 2H influence is switched that energy is returned to the winding by induction. The professor may say that this adds up to the same result as his interpretation so why complicate things; it is better to keep the argument simple. My answer to that is that it is essential to know the truth where energy is concerned and, furthermore, that it is the physicist who has complicated things beyond all reason. I refer here to the obvious fact that if what I say above is correct the intrinsic magnetic moment of a charge in orbit when measured in relation to angular momentum will be double the value calculated by that professor on his own reasoning. I then appeal to experiment and ask what happens when a ferromagnetic rod finds its magnetism reversed. Will it acquire a change of angular momentum corresponding to its electrons having the gyromagnetic ratio e/mc or e/2mc, where e/mc is the charge mass ratio of the electron in electromagnetic units? Lo and behold, the textbooks say that the theoretical value for electron orbital motion is e/2mc but the value e/mc is observed! So how does that learned professor explain the anomaly of that gyromagnetic ratio of 2. He invents, or rather Nobel Laureate Paul Dirac invents, the notion of èlectron spin' and says that a spinning electron will set up twice the ratio of magnetic moment to angular momentum as applies to orbital charge. The Larmor formula demands the reaction of charge in orbital motion, but Dirac invented spin. What Dirac did not invent was a way of explaining how magnetic induction energy can return to electrons in spin. You see, there is no area described by the motion of a centre of charge and so no scope for flux linkages by which to capture an EMF that can act on the electron to give it energy! Dirac was wrong to offer `spin' as an explanation for the gyromagnetic properties of an iron rod and because of that error professors of electrical engineering live in the dark when it comes to understanding how energy is transferred to and fro the vacuum by magnetic induction. They live in the dark by not realising that we can take more energy from the entropy of our environment than we release, thanks now to this knowledge presented here.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
22
The question I want now to address is the further understanding of how that, magnetic field set up around the ring core can cause an excess of energy to be fed to the air gap. From about 1988 onwards I realised that one could see a way to extract energy from the aether by magnetic techniques, but I thought it would involve magnetizing a magnetic core beyond the knee of the B-H magnetization curve. That really means expending energy in setting up strong currents or contriving to incorporate powerful magnets. The Moullin experiments on the core with a small air gap did, however, suggest that something offering energy gain was occurring below the knee of that B-H curve. I now know why. Essentially it is because we can cause magnetism to turn around corners in a magnetic core. The magnetic flux wants to follow preferred directions in the crystals inside the body-centred structure of iron. If it confronts a corner that is not much of a problem unless there is an air gap ahead around the bend. In that case the magnetism has to get leverage as it were to contend with the demagnetizing effects of the air gap. It has to back-up in some way to build an underlying magnetic field action. Once there is a field H set up inside that iron core then the core is no longer one having high permeability and it develops characteristics that are non-linear which are accentuated below the normal flux density level of the knee of the B-H curve. To glimpse the reason why that `knee' is so important, imagine you are sitting inside the iron of that core, well away from the air gap. You sense the field H. Now if you are inside a magnetic domain within an iron crystal you are where the iron is magnetized to saturation along one of the three main axes of its body-centred cubic structure. That field H is not going to have much effect unless you are close to a domain wall separating you and an adjacent magnetic domain. In the latter case the wall could sweep right through you as the domain polarization reverses. Very little external energy is involved in this exercise. The field H needed when that air gap is present is far too strong to be wholly absorbed by the lateral shifting of domain walls. Given, however, that the field H exists, those magnetic domains that have the most vulnerable orientation, allow some rotational deflection of their polarization vectors and they will respond as if they have a magnetic permeability of the order of, say, 50 in gauss/oersted units. With no air gap the normal B-H curve can show a permeability of several thousand up to the knee and then, as domain rotation takes over from domain wall movement, the incremental permeability drops to that lower value. With an air gap the need for H to exist at a significant level, even within the core in its below-the-knee state, means that some rotation occurs. Note that rotation in the normal sense begins when all domains have taken up states of polarization along the preferred crystal axes most nearly aligned with the core axis. The sudden instabilities that flip the transitions over lower ranges of magnetization account for hysteresis loss, but once all the triggered transitions are complete and the rotation is smoothly controlled by the strength of the field H, the hysteresis loss reduces. Indeed, rotation regulated by a field strong enough to assure saturation involves no hysteresis loss. This can be a considerable advantage in machines operating with superconducting windings and with limited magnetic flux ranges confined to the above-the-knee region. Using that arbitrary value of 50 for permeability attributable to flux rotation developing at a flux density of, say, 15,000 gauss, the increment HB which equals BH for the normal linear permeability condition can flip to one where a change of B of 1,000 gauss would make HB 20,000, whereas BH is 300,000. As will become evident from what is reported below, this implies a `free energy' power gain of about half of this 15:1 ratio. The reason, as we shall see, is that HB represents energy supplied by a magnetizing
23
winding whereas BH represents energy fed into the system by the aether which sustains the quantum condition of the polarized atoms in the ferromagnetic core. The formal mathematical summary of this situation now follows. First, we perform the energy calculations for normal below-the-knee operation, ignoring domain flux rotation. Let P denote the intrinsic field intensity set up by the ferromagnetic properties of the core, so that: P = B!H (1) Let I denote the current in the magnetizing winding, which has N turns over a total ring length D. The core has a cross-sectional area of one sq. cm. and an air gap of width g, so that the length of iron core is D!g. The winding is tightly wrapped around the core and we can assume this winding also has a cross-sectional area also of one sq. cm. At this point I explain that I prefer to use a system of units which takes the vacuum state as the base of reference, by which it is assigned unit dielectric constant and unit magnetic permeability, meaning the cgs system. It involves use of 4 but avoids other complications that tend to dominate and confuse formulations where the fundamentals of magnetism are concerned. The energy input W to the magnetizing winding is then found by integrating the current I in amps times the induced back EMF E in volts. We write: H = (4/10)(N/D)I (2) !8 and: E = (NB)10 (3) We will work in ergs, rather than joules, and this introduces a factor 107 in the expression: W = (IE)107 (4) From (2), (3) and (4): W = (1/4)HBD (5) By analogy with the derivation of equation (5) one can see that the corresponding amount of work performed by the atoms generating the ferromagnetic state of the core is given by: Wi = (1/4)PBD (6) From standard physics we know that the energy in the air gap is given by: Wg = (1/8)B2g (7) It then follows, from (5) and (8) that: Wg = W (8) if: B = (D/g)H (9) because, given this linear proportionality, the integral form of equation (5) becomes: W = (1/8)HBD (10) It has been the logical assumption, therefore, to accept that energy conservation implies the transfer of the energy input W to the air gap and presume that the action effectively attributes the core-cum-air-gap with an overall magnetic permeability of D/g. This is in no way a proper physical explanation of the energy transfer phenomenon because the flux density B traversing that air gap exists essentially owing to the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
24
polarization by the ferromagnet and must therefore have been powered primarily by the energy represented by equation (6). This equation was not used in deriving equation (8). To proceed, we may add (5) and (6) to obtain, from (1): W+Wi = (1/4)BBD (11) which, upon integration, tells us that overall there is a uniform energy density of B2/8, as we expect. However, this can best be interpreted by saying that the energy supplied to the gap comes essentially from the ferromagnet whereas the energy supplied by the magnetizing winding merely tops up the energy around the whole magnetic circuit to make up for the energy drained into that gap from the ferromagnet. This leaves us now with a new perspective. The energy supplied to the magnetization winding should not be assumed to transfer to the gap. Instead we should study how the ferromagnet, which delivers energy from the aether by the quantum priming processes that keep it ferromagnetic, can deliver some excess energy which we can use in running our motor. It is intuitive to examine how the H-dependent energy component is supplied. There are four components of energy of the forms: HP, HH, PH and PP. The first two are power input from the magnetizing winding and the other components are power supplied from the aether. We see that the third term tells us that by applying current to set up the field H we have tapped some aether energy. Now, so long as P and H are linearly proportional, the deployment of energy into the air gap will be approximately equal to the total energy stored by the first component. Also the first and third energy will represent equal amounts of energy when integrated. Note that the four energy components are pooled and distributed over the whole core-cum-gap length D, but it just so happens that H-dependent energy seems to be mainly deployed into the gap. It is then of interest to consider what happens owing to the non-linearity of the B-H curve. At higher flux levels PH will exceed HP and the difference escalates the nearer one gets to magnetic saturation. The consequence of this is that the H-dependent energy being pooled is drawn progressively more and more from the aether as H is increased. It follows from this that the reluctance motor power that can be drawn from the air gap will be contributed more and more by the aether as we take the level of magnetization to higher H levels. The strict assumption that the energy supplied by the magnetizing coil all goes into the air gap is clearly incorrect. The energy is lost as heat, but we can recover it from the aether owing to the inductance effect and the half-field reaction explained above. More than this, however, we can recover energy well in excess of the amount supplied to the magnetizing coil because, owing to the curved higher range of the B-H relationship of the core, the aether sets up a stronger inductance field than applies for a linear B-H characteristic. It will now be understood why a high level of magnetizing current and the use of a superconducting winding can make this technology commercially viable. It will also be understood why the energy in the air gap exceeds that supplied to the magnetizing winding, as was shown by the experiments reported in Energy Science Report No. 1. Remember in that connection that, whereas Professor Moullin had measured the magnetic flux in the core legs conveying magnetism to the air gap and found that the current needed to drive a given amount of flux across the gap reduced in relation to the gap thickness, I have argued that was not due to magnetic leakage. I say it is attributable to the aether
25
feeding, in effect, its own magnetizing current to keep that flux on track through the gap. I proved this in the experiment I reported by testing the level of flux reaching the bridging yoke. In summary, therefore, there can be no doubt that what has been disclosed above explains how aether energy can be tapped by astute design of a magnetic reluctance motor and the use of superconducting windings to avoid I2R heating. There is good reason to expect a machine of such design to operate with at least a 5:1 power gain by polarization bias to a basic flux density of 1.5 tesla (15,000 gauss) and operating over a cyclic flux density range between 1.5 tesla and 2 tesla in the ferromagnetic core. Note that such flux densities are commonplace in superconductor magnet technology where there is no ferromagnetic core to assist in developing that level of magnetic flux.
To underline the point just made it helps to consider what is shown in Fig. 9. Readers who are familar with the general curved form of the B-H magnetization curve will realise that the curve has been ìdealized' in a straight-line form to facilitate analysis. The B-H relationship is shown to define four separate areas a, b, c, d which represent, respectively, HB and BH over a range of low flux density and then HB and BH over a range at higher flux density. It can be verified by geometrical analysis that the areas a and b are equal. This is because the straight line which separates them passes through the origin at O. However, the area c is between 4 and 5 times smaller than the area d, because the slope of the straight line separating those areas is much reduced and the line intercepts the B ordinate at a high B level. The difference is of vital significance in our òver-unity' motor design. First of all do keep in mind that B and H are not different physical effects acting at right-angles to one another. They act in the same direction. Secondly, note that our forebears who coined the B and H expressions really deceived us. They disguised the formulation by writing it as B equals H plus 4I, where I was stated as being the ìntensity of magnetization'. Yet all that was meant by this was that H is the effect of the ampereturns per cm that we apply to develop the state of magnetization and B!H or B!4I is the
26
effect of the ampere-turns that the ferromagnet itself contributes to the state of magnetization. That source of I in this latter expression is current sustained by the quantum activity which keeps the ferromagnet alive as a source of magnetism. Now, if you were an electron sitting in the core of that ferromagnet or some aether charge form positioned to absorb energy as inductance in the pole gaps associated with that core, you would not know the difference between the ampere-turns producing H or the ampere-turns producing B!H. So, since those areas a, b, c, d are really energy expressions, as we have seen from the above analysis, you confront the evidence that at low flux densities, where a equals b, the equal sharing of energy between core and air gap offers you no power gain helping to drive your motor. However, over the higher flux density range, where d exceeds c by a very substantial margin, that equal sharing of energy puts more power into the air gap between the motor poles than you supply to the magnetizing winding. That is why it is possible to design and run an electric motor which extracts power from the aether. It is simply a matter of understanding your a, b, c and d alphabet as applied to what is shown in Fig. 12! The only problem you have in designing such a motor is one of devising a machine that does not run away with your input power in setting up the strong currents needed to reach the near-to-saturation level of magnetism. It is not the input power needed as inductance energy that is the problem. That is the energy a or c just mentioned. No, it is simply the ohmic heat loss that arises from the resistance of the magnetizing winding, but that is a loss we can eliminate as superconductive windings come to be used more and more in the design of electrodynamic machines. Machines have been devised in the past using superconductive windings, normally in the rotor of an alternator, but the object is to produce the d.c. magnetic field and that application has no bearing upon the òver-unity' machine proposed in this Report. However, the feasibility of using superconductivity in a multi-megawatt machine is established and the way forward towards power generation using the òver-unity' performance of the electrodynamic machine described in Part II of this Report seems now open and welcomes development.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
27
PART IV: Commercial Development of the Invention Readers will now see that I have introduced the expression ìnvention'. This is because the technology is the subject of patents involving the author as inventor. The chances are that the corporate industrial world which has the capacity and the duty to replenish our power generating equipment will not heed the new technology represented by these patents. That world does not yet recognize that òver-unity' is a realistic possibility. So, it seems likely that the patents will serve only the primary purpose for which they were originally filed, namely to show to future historians that we 20th century mortals are part of society which, in spite of its vast knowledge, has still much to learn, but is unwilling to ùnlearn' false doctrines to make way for truth. We belong to a world which was created and which evolves as it is recreated and as energy is recycled. The machine described in this Report can capture energy as it is being recycled by the processes which underlie the aether. I have explained how the end-product of that recycling activity is the creation of electrons and protons throughout space using energy shed as radiant heat and lost to what we term èntropy'. That was the reason I wrote Àether Science Papers' [1996a]. In this Report I have sought to prove that we can intercept energy as it meanders through that process and capture it through the quantum coupling that sustains ferromagnetism in steel cores. The high energy physicist stands aloof from such proposals, even though the physics involved is clear and conclusive in showing how the precise value of proton mass is determined in relation to the fundamental constants of the space medium. Accordingly this Report is offered as a way forward to those in search of a non-polluting new source of power and the patent rights, so long as they stand in force, may have some commercial value in support of that prospect. Otherwise, as the rights lapse, their specifications stand of public record in testimony of missed opportunity in a technological era when we could ill-afford to turn our backs on such inventions. That said, I will now revert to the onward design details pertaining to the multi-megawatt machine, making reference to a patent which relates to what has been disclosed. As will be appreciated, the commercial viability of an 'over-unity' power generator does not just depend upon whether it can operate with a saving on the cost of fuel. It depends upon the investment, the scale of the machine and its reliability. Therefore, it seems appropriate to evolve the design by taking the existing technology of the turbo-alternator power unit as a basis for reference. The future technology proposed here will involve those same alternators as the electrical power generator. They run at 3600 rpm when developing 60Hz. The prime mover, the turbine, however, is replaced by a dynamoelectric machine such as that described by reference to Figs. 5 to 8 above. It needs no nuclear heat source to generate the pressurized vapour powering the turbine. All it needs is an electrical input to excite its pulsed operation and that can be produced regeneratively once the system is set rotating at its synchronous speed. Thus, whereas in a conventional power plant the alternator is brought up to its synchronous speed by starting the turbine, we do need, in this new technology, to provide some kind of drive motor or small turbine unit which can initiate operation. Otherwise, one needs to look to the output alternator or exciter alternator of the system as serving a motor role during start-up. The exciter alternator generates the pulses for the main winding on our machine, as we shall see from Fig. 13, but the overall function, given
28
over-unity performance, is that the exciter alternator puts, say, one unit of electrical power into the winding of the main machine and the latter generates, say, four units of mechanical power, one of which feeds back to drive the exciter alternator and the other of which feeds the output alternator or applies mechanical drive as to a ship propeller.
The patent covering what is here proposed does not require use of a superconductive winding and can avoid that requirement by sacrificing efficiency, but it is assumed that future technology will use the new warm superconductors. In this respect, it should not be assumed that superconductivity is used as a substitute for a ferromagnetic core, that being the normal objective in existing machine technology. The problems of developing very high magnetic fields in warm superconductors not yet overcome. Fortunately, in the technology considered here, we need only moderate fields of a few hundred ampere-turns per cm. to penetrate the superconductor, because the primary magnetic flux that drives the machine is confined to a ferromagnetic core. Our objective here is really one of avoiding unwanted loss, both the VR loss in that main winding and any inductive power loss in exciting the machine. The objective of the patent is specifically directed to the recovery of induction energy and overcoming commutation problems. By having the magnetizing winding on the stator at the outermost position around the rotor of the machine it is easier to keep it cool enough to assure the superconductive state. The primary design problem arises from the high induced voltage per turn of the winding, which could be 1,000 volts in a 100 megawatt installation. For this reason and to provide thermal isolation for the magnetizing winding, owing to its superconductive state, a transformer having a ferrite core is needed. This has one primary winding and several secondary windings, each serving just a few turns of the superconductive winding on the machine. Referring to Fig. 13, the main generator, denoted MG, is coupled to an exciter-alternator A, which feeds a commutated sinusoidal a.c. to the primary winding of
29
the transformer T. this has superconductive secondary windings feeding the turns of the superconductive helical winding on MG. Cooling is via the transformer tank housing T, where the primary winding is thermally insulated, as the metal of that winding can be cooled owing to its conductive connection with the exciter-alternator A, where normal features can be incorporated to cool that machine. The d.c. power supply S connected to sliprings on MG provides the low power input needed to polarize the core, though this may prove unnecessary in practice because of the unidirectional current surges in the winding of MG. The rather special feature of this design, as covered by the patent, is the way in which the a.c. input to the transformer is chopped into complete full-wave cycles, say one in three, in order that the EMF fed to the superconductive winding is pulsed in a timed phase with the stator-rotor pole positioning in MG. In an ideal case, where there is no magnetization loss in the machine (current in phase with EMF) as opposed to just inductive reaction (current in phase-quadrature with EMF), the superconductive winding will allow the magnetic flux change to conform with the a.c. time-integral of the voltage waveform. It will be pulsed unidirectionally with a simple harmonic profile and if this is timed according to the position of the poles so as to assist pole closure, then the machine will operate in the manner already described. Note that the magnetization loss should be much smaller than it is in a normal alternator of similar size and so, having regard to the current strength supplied to pulse the superconductive winding, the phase should not differ too much from the zero-loss condition. There is no electronic commutation or switching in the superconductive circuit. The only commutation is in the exciter-alternator A which supplies the chopped waveform shown in Fig.13 and interrupts the current flow to the primary of the transformer only at moments when the current is zero. It is important to note again that, although there is extensive reference to the prospective use of superconductivity in the main windings of the generator described, it is not essential to over-unity' operation. It is, however, an inevitable development, once warm superconductivity comes to be used in standard design of main power generating equipment. The above technique of using the chopped a.c. waveform with a magnetic reluctance machine biased to polarization close to saturation, all with the objective of running a machine with 'over-unity' performance is already the subject of the author's U.S. Patent No. 4,975,608 dated December 4 1990. The design features involving the single helical winding have evolved since and are the subject of independent patent applications. The abstract title page and claim pages of that U.S. patent were reproduced in the Appendix attached to the first version of this Report published in 1996, but since such the full copy of that patent specification can be see by accessing the U.S. patent office website, http://www.uspto.gov/ , it is not included here in these pages. This Report was first published on November 6, 1996 by: DR. HAROLD ASPDEN SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, S016 7RB, ENGLAND
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT No. 4
Page 1 of 31

This Report was first published in 1994 at a time when the author was involved in experimental research aimed at seeing if one could tap energy from the vacuum medium. This might seem to be an absurd pursuit but there were certain anomalies in experimental findings and debatable issues of a theoretical nature that needed resolution. As this Report shows, the author was not alone in seeing the need to clarify some of the mystery which clouds our understanding of magnetism. This version of the Report now published on Internet some nine years on from its printed publication in 1994 is an unamended copy of that original text, made available here for historical record of the author's efforts........... Harold Aspden, 18 June 2003
POWER FROM MAGNETISM: THE POTTER DEBATE HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents
Introduction
http://www.aspden.org/reports/Es4/esr4.htm
25.4.2005
Page 2 of 31
Preliminary Background The Kilmister Introduction The Rotating Magnet in a Cyclically-Exited Solenoid Axially Reciprocating Magnet in a Cyclically-Excited Solenoid Preliminary Remarks Step-by-Step Analysis of the Problem Onward Experimentation COMMENTARY ON APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Letter from Frank Potter APPENDIX B: Potter's Reciprocating Magnet engine Proposal APPENDIX C: How Flux Develops EMF in a Solenoid APPENDIX D: EMF Generated in Solenoid by Rotating Magnet
****************
POWER FROM MAGNETISM: THE POTTER DEBATE Introduction This Energy Science Report is written at a time when a surge of activity has developed on the 'free energy' scene concerning the prospect of tapping energy from the quantum action of the vacuum state - the aether. The research claims of New Zealander Robert G. Adams have become the focus of attention owing
25.4.2005
Page 3 of 31
to his disclosure of the design of a motor which performed anomalously and which was said to deliver more mechanical power than was supplied as electrical input. This has been mentioned in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1 in this series and more on the motor topic generally will be reported in later reports. The scenario developing at the present time has become one of contention amongst different proponents working in this field as the struggle for recognition begins to cloud the interpretation of the evidence and results in the withholding of information. The 'free energy' prospect is still an issue of debate awaiting the clear demonstration of a working machine that can withstand all tests and scrutiny by experts. It had been hoped that the Adams motor would have featured in such a demonstration at the Denver, Colorado symposium in May 1994 organized by the Institute for New Energy, but, at the present time, April 1994, that is no longer in prospect for reasons totally unrelated to the technical merits of the Adams development. This author seeks by this Report to draw attention to what, in a sense, has been a 'behind the scenes' secret debate pursued by Frank F. Potter of Croydon in England who has aroused the interest of a few physicists in British universities. His topic is that of calculating the interactions and behaviour between magnets and a magnetizing solenoid. His concern is to get an answer to the question of how the energy involved can be formulated theoretically in a way which allows experimental testing. Potter's intuition has, it seems, followed for many years a track not too different from that which may have inspired Robert Adams and others, including the German, Hans Coler, whose experimental work, after confirmation, became the subject of a secret government report dating from the World War II era. What is so fascinating about the Potter interest is that, although it dates from many years past, it has not surfaced hitherto in a way which has become known to those now interested in the 'free energy' field. It is especially interesting because Potter's correspondence indicates that academics skilled in mathematical physics, though showing diligence in their efforts, have been unable to provide answers that satisfy Potter. The Potter debate provides a new perspective and a new starting point for resolving the 'free energy' issue concerning magnets subjected to solenoidal fields, bearing closely upon the theory of operation of the Adams motor. It is timely to discuss openly the answers to the questions raised.
Preliminary Background It may interest readers to know the background of how it was that this author came to hear about Frank F. Potter. For several years there have been annual meetings held in September at Cambridge University in England by an organization named ANPA, the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association. One theme pursued with great interest by many members of this association is that of calculating the basic physical constants, such as the proton-electron mass ratio, by mathematical techniques involving what is termed a 'combinational hierarchy'. This author has long been interested in the creative activity of the vacuum energy field in producing protons and that research had led to published work on the calculation of the proton-electron mass ratio by methods distinct from those of special interest to ANPA. A spin-off from that research was the theoretical derivation of the measured properties of the deuteron. The author had been especially interested also in the electrodynamic properties of these particles and electrodynamic actions within metal conductors and so, with the advent of 'cold fusion', there was purpose in extending the research with the 'alternative energy' scene in mind. A particularly interesting development was the extension of the theory to the theoretical derivation of the properties of the third isotope of hydrogen, namely the triton and it was the simple derivation of
25.4.2005
Page 4 of 31
the lifetime of triton, which the author saw as confirming his theory, that gave reason for an initiative to attend the 1993 ANPA meeting in Cambridge to present that theory. That latter subject warrants its own Report in this series of ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS and will be dealt with separately. Now, in attending that September ANPA meeting, the author had very much in mind the fact that he had earlier, in April 1993, attended the Denver, Colorado symposium on New Energy and become very interested in the reports on the Adams motor. Also, in August, the author had attended a meeting in Atlanta, Georgia to report experimental progress on energy conversion technology in which magnetism affecting electric free charge carriers in metal can convert thermal energy into electrical output. In a sense, this is magneto-hydrodynamics at work within a solid metal. This is the subject of ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT No. 2 and No. 3. Therefore, although in Cambridge to talk about protons, deuterons and tritons in a theoretical context, the author had become more preoccupied by his interest in the extraction of power from magnetism, as evidenced by the Adams motor technology and as researched somewhat superficially by the author in his own earlier work. It was the Adams situation that gave stimulus for new experimentation, and it was a question of being patient and waiting for Adams himself and others to take that work forward or whether to divert effort into one's own experimental programme. One thought had been to build a kind of recriprocating engine, resembling a steam-engine pistonand-cylinder action, there being a soft-iron 'piston' member moving inside a solenoid and interacting with a permanent magnet to open and close an air gap. Indeed, owing to the fact that there was a corner shop at the junction of Trinity street and Bridge Street in Cambridge, located between Trinity College where the author was lodging and the college venue of the ANPA meeting, the author had pursued enquiries in that shop with the experiment in mind. It had a model steam engine in the window. So it was later that morning that, in a side discussion with Professor Clive Kilmister during a coffee break at the Cambridge meeting, the author mentioned the growing interest in USA in 'free energy', centred on the Denver, Colorado event. Specifically mentioned were the claims made by Adams in his description of the motor as reported in the Australian magazine NEXUS. Surprisingly this evoked the comment from Professor Kilmister that for several years he had been exchanging correspondence with a person named Frank Potter who had been suggesting something very similar. He resolved to tell Potter about my interest in the subject and it was this which gave the basis for this Report. Extracts from some of Frank Potter's letters to this author are to be found in APPENDIX A and B. Having promised Potter a full reply, on the basis that what was said would be published in some way, that reply is documented here as the subject of this Report. It was intended to allow this to evolve with a view to presenting a summary account at the September 1994 ANPA meeting and in the hope that Professor Kilmister might participate in the discussion, but in view of the surge of criticism that is currently affecting the Adams motor project the author has brought this version of the Report forward so as to have it in hand at the May 1994 New Energy Symposium in Denver, Colorado. The reason for this is that it is better to address the basic physics of the subject from a new starting point, one that has background in U.K. and has involved some discussion in academic circles, rather than building a physical account which relies on a version of a motor for which there is no authenticated performance data.
25.4.2005
Page 5 of 31
It could well be that different implementations of the Adams-type motor may function differently, some operating 'over-unity' and some not, this being owing to a lack of design understanding of the basic physical factors that are at work. Hence, a first-principle analysis has merit, especially if it meets Potter's objective of providing what hopefully is a reliable theoretical model on which to base experiment. Finally, as further background, it should be mentioned that research reported by Stefan Marinov is relevant to the subject under discussion and no doubt Marinov will contribute to the later debate which this Report initiates. However, as the sole object here is to answer Frank Potter's questions the commentary below will be confined to that pursuit. The Kilmister Introduction The following is a confirming letter dated September 18, 1993 sent to the author by Professor Clive Kilmister. "Dear Harold, It was very interesting hearing your talk at ANPA and even more so hearing what you say about magnetism. I have for a long time been exchanging letters with someone who is convinced that there is something odd about the energy of permanent magnets and has devised mechanical devices (a bar magnet suspended entirely within a large solenoid for example) to show this. I have taken the liberty of suggesting to him that you might be able to give him some references to other work. Sorry about the handwriting - I haven't been home since ANPA. The man's name is Frank Potter. Yours, Clive." Readers familiar with the 'free energy' research involving magnets, research which is seldom mentioned in the orthodox scientific literature, will understand how it is that there can be questions in this field that really do need answering in open debate but seldom surface for fear of the 'perpetual motion' issue that pervades the subject. There is, it seems, something lacking in our world of education when the doctrinaire background of physics sets up a barrier in the form of statements of physical law, without involving discussion in a tolerant, patient and in-depth way of the factors that govern ferromagnetism at its energy frontier with the sub-quantum world. This is not just a question of classification of what is observed as a hierarchy of quantum behaviour of electrons in atoms; it is really the issue of how the action we associate with such quantum theory delivers energy able to sustain the properties of a ferromagnet. How is it that permanent magnets can suffer fluctuating field influences continuously for decades, if not centuries, whilst keeping their magnetic vitality? The word 'permanent' has meaning, as does the word 'perpetual', but scientists accept 'permanent magnetism', which is, in a sense, 'perpetual magnetism', whilst showing amusement and derision at the idea of 'perpetual motion', even though 'permanent motion' or motion at a uniform velocity is countenanced in mechanics. There is a case to answer and it is hoped that this Report will serve in making that case, if not the answer, clear enough for the scientific community to take this subject seriously.
25.4.2005
Page 6 of 31
The intention in the pages which follow is to follow standard physics to give prediction of what is to be expected in the Potter experiments proposed. We will not restrict ourselves to the short-cut of the doctrinaire route, not because one sees merit in challenging doctrine and discrediting established physics, but more with a view to directing experimentation at what potentially is the key area that has been neglected for too long. Only the subsequent experimental investigation can give the final answer to this probe into energy matters, but we must not allow a restrictive interpretation of energy conservation doctrine, as such, to stand in the way of such experiment. The subject of a new energy source is far too important for us to allow any stone obstructing our path to remain unturned and, even if the 'thought' experiment which is our starting point might not have practical application in the form presented, it is worth scrutiny. The Rotating Magnet in a Cyclically-Excited Solenoid One can conceive building an electric motor by mounting a magnet to rotate inside a large solenoid, so that the plane of rotation of the magnet lies along the longitudinal axis of the solenoid. Then by reversing the current in the solenoid periodically the magnet should turn at the same rate and so be driven as the rotor of a motor. A schematic illustration of such a system is shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1 Solenoid excited rotating magnet motor Readers may say that this is only a special, and rather poor, form of a class of motors known in standard technology where permanent magnet rotors interact with the commutated excitation of a stator winding. Such motors are known to comply with energy conservation principles and perform in accordance with well-established design practices and pose no anomalies. Indeed, their performance efficiences are clearly set out in the commercial literature used to market them and it might, therefore, seem absurd and pointless to even consider the theory of operation of the motor system shown in the figure. However, Frank Potter has a way of putting his question logically, if not concisely, and guiding us into a state of doubt (See Appendix A). To put this in context it is not just a question of observing a real motor performing overall on a duty cycle averaged over a complete revolution of the rotor. Like a tight-rope walker who stays on the rope, one may well perform a balancing trick by which the energy books are kept in balance, but this does not preclude a tendency for that tight-rope walker to fall off the rope and draw on gravitational energy in the fall. If he does not fall off, he is nevertheless constantly exchanging energy with the quantum world that powers gravity, drawing on that as his centre of gravity drops and giving that energy back to Nature's store of gravitational potential as he recovers an erect posture. The overall equilibrium performance disguises the fact that he is a kind of human 'free energy' machine at least for about half the time he is on that rope. So it may be that, if we study the energy action step-by-step as the motor rotates, conceivably the magnetic energy can cause a 'fall-out' which we can use beneficially. Remember that the magnet keeps its magnetic polarization even though it may have done some work and it has its own way of recovering naturally. Our task is to work out how to exploit the energy released in a way which allows us to refuse to give it back, or renders us unable to give it back because the energy has been
25.4.2005
Page 7 of 31
spent, whilst leaving the motor magnetism to recover its equilibrium by drawing on its own reserves in what is known as a 'magnetocaloric' thermal action! It is not easy and not normal practice to calculate energy deployment step-by-step in a real motor without begging the question and assuming non-thermal energy conservation. Designers only think of heat problems in relation to I2R losses and hysteresis loss and do not factor into their design the magnetocaloric effects which are intrinsic to actions where the strong fields of permanent magnets play a special role. Being blind to this possibility they would have little patience with the questions raised by Frank Potter, but his approach is to present a design configuration which, though still far from posing an easy calculation task, nevertheless is one that is amenable to definitive calculation. It is this that characterizes the Potter approach. If the calculation can be done, it should be done and the energy deployment traced step-by-step. There is, as already noted, something special about a permanent magnet. It has an endurance when confronted with moderate demagnetizing fields and not enough is said in textbooks about the real action that underpins that endurance. Giving reason for what is known as 'coercive force', is not tantamount to explaining how a magnet sustains its polarization, even though one can draw a line through a stable state represented in a quadrant of a B-H magnetization loop. Indeed, harping back to the Adams motor, and noting that Adams has used Alnico magnets, one will find that textbook authority on the understanding of the high coercive properties of that particular material reveals some uncertainty as to the physics involved. This author is especially interested in this aspect of the problem, because the thermoelectric conversion devices with which the author is associated as inventor use a laminated structure of nickel and aluminium and exhibit anomalous behaviour in converting heat into electrical action, including the heat-driven internal generation of powerful magnetic polarization. So, it may be understood why the line of reasoning adopted by Frank Potter in his communications in Appendix A has interested the author. Our task is to perform the necessary calculations. One aspect of interest to Frank Potter concerns how a rotating magnet inside a long solenoid of large radius can couple inductively with the windings of the solenoid. There is the question of how a back EMF is generated in that solenoid as the magnet rotates. Potter realises that without a sufficient back EMF there is no adequate way in which energy can be fed into the rotor motion and yet there is a cyclic magnetic field which sets up the forces turning that rotor. Accordingly this leads him to ask for calculations applied to a practical structure of a large solenoid of reasonable length to radius ratio. As will be seen, this author feels obliged to separate that issue concerning back EMF calculation and the large radius solenoid from the more important underlying energy balance question which involves ferromagnetic properties, whether those of a rotating electromagnet or a permanent magnet. However, before entering the calculation phase on that lesser issue, Frank Potter's question which relates more to the practical prospect of an operating Adams-type motor will be introduced. Axially Reciprocating Magnet in an Cyclically-Excited Solenoid If one has a permanent magnet and a soft iron core of an electromagnet mounted coaxially side-byside in-line within a solenoid and the soft iron core constitutes an electromagnet which can reciprocate axially to open or close a gap between it and the permanent magnet, so one can imagine a
25.4.2005
Page 8 of 31
motor which operates by magnetizing the electromagnet on the closing half-cycle of the motion and demagnetizing it during the opening half-cycle of the motion. This is depicted in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2 Reciprocating magnetic reluctance motor In an Adams-type motor the action just described is reversed in the sense that there is no electromagnetic excitation during the closure half-cycle but there is magnetization of the electromagnet in opposition to the field direction of the permanent magnet during the opening halfcycle. However, the calculation task posed by Potter is much the same for both of these configurations. Preliminary Remarks In approaching the question of calculating the actions in which Frank Potter has expressed interest, the author is mindful of the mathematical analysis which he has prevailed upon others to perform and Potter's problem of understanding the methods they used. A valid and correct answer expressed in a 'bottom-line' formula is not convincing to someone who has approached the problem along a different intuitive route and hopes to match the result with that personal perception of what is involved. Yet, one can perform calculations in electromagnetism by using magnetic potential techniques or by routine calculation of inductive couplings or by methods involving systematic field calculation and flux linkage rates of change to determine EMFs. All of these methods give the same results because electromagnetic theory is self-consistent and its techniques are well-established. It is just a question of deciding what form of answer one seeks, whether in terms of energy, force, EMF or whatever. Also, in performing calculations one either has to adopt special finite element methods of computation and pursue rigorous computer analysis or make simplifying assumptions, such as apply, for example, to uniform current excitaton of infinitely long solenoids or solenoids of finite length with simplified geometry for the component acted on within that solenoid. The object of the exercise, however, is to present a case which Frank Potter can understand and verify from his own position, directed essentially at the key issue of the energy deployment. Frank Potter has expressed a desire to see calculations which derive EMFs in terms of field actions and motion affecting field rates of change. In energy analysis he wishes to see inductance energy calculations rather than magnetic potentials. He further insists that the calculations conform with orthodox physics, meaning that the basis of communication has to be that generally accepted. The latter, of course, is the only way in which one can develop a valid basis for any research in this field, but the concern is understandable because the author has given reason in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1 for interpreting energy storage by inductance as a vacuum field reaction. However, that development concerned causal features underlying theoretical physics, a topic touched upon in APPENDIX C, and it in no way affects the proven principles of physics as applied to calculating closed circuital interaction which is the subject now under study. Within these constraints, this author offers the following sequence of argument to set out the scope
25.4.2005
Page 9 of 31
of the investigation here reported. The text used is written as if addressed directly to Frank Potter. Note that the question of the effect of expanding solenoid radius will be dealt with before the primary issue of the basic motor operation. It should be read after some scrutiny of the subject of the Potter correspondence as set out in Appendix A and Appendix B. Step-by-Step Analysis of the Problem 1. Since your ultimate objective is to determine whether energy is conserved rather than determine EMFs or forces, the logical method of analysis is to work directly in terms of deployment of field energy density. This does not preclude calculation of back EMF generated in the magnetizing solenoid, especially if there is intention to perform an experiment to rotate a magnet inside such a solenoid and measure that EMF. However, some general conclusions from this analysis need to be developed first and this is best done in terms of energy as such. I intend to avoid what is known formally as 'magnetic potential' but will need to distinguish energy of a form that seeks to decrease from that which involves a tendency to increase. Thus I will need to refer to the former as having a 'potential' character and the latter as having a 'dynamic' or 'kinetic' character. The way to look at this is to say that if one pushes a ball up a hill it will have a higher potential energy at the top of the hill but as it rolls back down the hill that potential energy reduces as energy transfers into a kinetic form. Magnetic field energy is energy of motion. If we try to describe it as having a 'potential' then we need to bring in a minus sign to convey the message that it tends to increase in magnitude. This is a subterfuge of modern physics. If one seeks to work with equations and wishes energy change to relate to force it becomes a problem if energy of different kinds has to be put on opposite sides of the equation. One wants all the energy terms to be on one side so that the other side is left clear for symbols relating to force action. By making magnetic energy 'negative' it can be deemed to have a 'potential' alongside electric field energy, but one does see a perplexing anomaly in this area when applying Maxwell's equations to a propagating electromagnetic wave. Here there are no forces on empty space and so, given that energy is assumed to propagate with the wave, physicists need to think of magnetic energy as positive in a real sense. The alternative to this is not something we should discuss here, but if that energy were seen as 'negative' in potential terms or as exchanged with electric energy when expressed by real, positive and dynamic terms, so an electromagnetic wave would, in theory, not transport energy by waves as such. Indeed, one would then have to think of the momentum transfer by photons and see the waves as the catalyst in conveying information about the energy activity in a universal standing vacuum energy field. All this is a little complicated but there is an underlying consistency with the prospect of there being a standing energy background. I refer to it because you have urged a need to comply with Maxwell's equations and, if taken literally, that may put the argument in a straight-jacket. I will proceed therefore without further mention of Maxwell's equations but I will comply with the standard teachings on the subject of electromagnetism because, as you may know, most electrical science textbooks adequately cover the basic ground that applies to power circuits before worrying about wave propagation and bringing in the Maxwell wave formulations. 2. Remember now that two magnets attracted into close proximity will exhibit strong field interactions. They have a way of increasing the strength of the magnetic field and, in energy terms, to make sense of this, one must see the action as a dynamic effect arising from charge in motion.
25.4.2005
Page 10 of 31
I will address first the problem of the magnet mounted to rotate within a long solenoid excited to produce a uniform internal magnetic field of intensity H which is reversed cyclically so that the system works as a motor. 3. If the magnet has an intrinsic strength that is constant and independent of the field H and is orientated with its north-south poles producing a field opposed to H, the magnetic energy of the system will be lower than for the pole orientation the other way. The potential energy will be higher. The energy difference between the two orientation directions is simply a measure of the amount of energy fed into the solenoid every half cycle as needed to run the motor. There is no reason whatsoever to suspect that there can be non-conservation of energy. For example, if the magnet itself produces a field component H' at a point in the solenoid, outside the body of the magnet, the energy density there will be proportional to (H'-H)2 and when H' reverses as the magnet rotates to a corresponding reversed position this will be (H'+H)2. The difference 4H'H, when summed within the space bounded by the solenoid, is a measure of the work fed into the solenoid as the magnet is primed to reverse direction. 4. Now, it might seem that I have made this assertion blindly, based on the principle that energy is conserved and not by proving my case, as by calculating the back EMFs induced in the solenoid and then merging this with solenoid current over the half-cycle period to evaluate the energy input. However, let us examine what happens to the mutual interaction component field energy term 2H'H when we reverse H. Note that this applies to the permanent magnet rotor situation. 5. At the point in the field under study, H' is constant and so all the mutual action depends upon the reversal of the current in the solenoid. This current change occurs with no back EMF attributable to induction produced by change of H'. Therefore, in theory at least, there can be no power input surge accompanying that current reversal in the solenoid. How then does the solenoid drive the motor? The answer lies in the fact that H', as a component in the H field direction, increases in that forward direction of H as the magnet turns through 180 degrees. This increase in the H' component, as seen by an imaginary loop circuit at the field location, develops a back EMF which interacts with the now-constant field H to put all the work action onto the power supplied to the solenoid. Note that the ampere-turns comprising the solenoidal excitation operate to produce a uniform magnetic field H within that solenoid and so can be said to comprise numerous contiguous loops of current all having the same current strength per unit length of solenoid. Any back EMF in each component loop which tends to resist the setting up of the field by the current is overcome by the forward EMF transmitted from the solenoid through contiguous imaginary current loops that fill the space within the solenoid. Without such action there would be no basis for explaining how it is that a uniform field component H can be produced and sustained within the solenoid when current is fed into it. I have enlarged on this theme in Appendix C so as not to detract here from the flow of the argument. 6. Consider now the electromagnet rotor. Here, at the point under study, when H reverses, so it is that H' also reverses, but in this case the mutual energy density in the field becomes proportional to H2 because H' is proportional to H. We are assuming that the core has a constant magnetic permeability over the range of magnetization used. In order now to operate the device as a motor we must cause the rotor to turn through 90 degrees with H zero and then switch the power on for the next quarter turn to bring the rotor into line with the solenoidal axis before repeating the action and having a quarter turn with power off followed by a quarter turn with power on. See Fig. 3.
25.4.2005
Page 11 of 31
Fig. 3 Here, the same argument about back EMF applies, because H' is Hcos, where is the angle between the rotor axis and the solenoidal axis. At the moment when is 90 degrees we switch on the current, but the H' component is then zero and so there can be no surge of power drawn from the solenoid or the rotor core at the moment of switch-on, at least so far as feeding the mutual interaction field energy as opposed to the self-inductance field energy. What then happens is that the rotor turns so that the magnetic interaction field energy density increases, but this again sets up the back EMFs in those imaginary current loops that make up the whole solenoidal field and put load on the forward EMF applied to that solenoid. The back EMF is proportional to the factor used to express the added field strength attributable to the magnetic properties of the rotor core. 7. It would seem therefore that the electromagnet rotor case just discussed is one that requires all the motor operating power to be fed in as current overcoming a back EMF induced in the solenoid. It is pertinent to mention that an electromagnetic rotor core can, in theory, be regarded as one of infinite magnetic permeability without changing this argument. The field action in the free space around the rotor is what is governing and that magnetic core will only accept the H' polarization governed by H if H does all the work of overcoming the back MMFs (magnetomotive forces) that apply in the demagnetizing sense in the pole regions. 8. To this point, therefore, there seems no case for suspecting any non-conservation of energy in motor operations for either forms described, but it is stressed that we have not gone out of our way to design a motor that makes unusual demands on the magnetic core and have applied basic physics to proving the case based on back EMF argument, as requested. Although those actual EMF values have not been calculated they are readily deduced, given the necessary design parameters and by working backwards from knowledge of the solenoidal current and the principle of energy conservation. See, however, the alternative treatment in Appendix D. 9. The next question at issue is the problem of how the motor functions with H being the same regardless of whether we use a solenoid that is very large in radius relative to the dimensions of the rotor. The thought that it might be impossible to justify the back EMF and solenoidal power drive coupling if the wire comprising the solenoid is far removed from the rotor is certainly thoughtprovoking. I would certainly expect the motor to run with the same performance regardless of the radius of the solenoid, if one could ignore I2R losses, as you assume. However, though it might seem questionable, I hold to the view implicit in the above argument, namely that the back EMFs in those imaginary current loops in the solenoidal field are propagated back to the solenoid proper so as to prevent the vacuum field from becoming one turmoil of eddies and vortices responding to local EMFs induced in space. Again, I refer to Appendix C. I stress here that it is an experimental fact that EMFs can be induced around loops which are not bounded by wire. A closed circuit through a conductor is not essential to define the action of an EMF. One can have partial EMFs acting around parts of circuits and these can vary in two identical halves of a circular wire loop embracing a varying field. The experiment is one discussed on pages
25.4.2005
Page 12 of 31
119-120 of my book MODERN AETHER SCIENCE. 10. The suspicion that the EMF needed to power the solenoid has to be weaker because the wire is removed from the magnet cannot be supported. The reason is that the physics of the probem is governed by energy supplied to the solenoid to meet the field requirements. The minute back EMF in each cm length of each turn of the wire in the solenoid is balanced by the inversely proportional increase in the overall circumferential length of that turn. 11. The question raised about calculating the actual EMF conditions in a system having a fixed ratio of solenoid radius to length, but on an increasing scale in relation to the rotor size, is one that I aim to avoid because I see no end purpose of value. I will, however, argue the case for a limiting situation, which applies regardless of the extended dimensions and shape of the solenoid. Refer to Fig. 4 and imagine (a) that the rotor magnet and its field H' are confined to a spherical volume of fixed radius in which it interacts with the uniform solenoidal field H and (b) the separate remaining region of a non-uniform field H within the solenoid of bounded extent.
Fig. 4 The total field energy in the latter region (b) will not vary with change of orientation of the rotor magnet whatever the solenoid radius, whereas the total field energy of the former region (b) will so vary but will not vary with solenoid radius. Accordingly, the back EMF induced in the solenoid will not depend upon that radius and the motor will operate at the same power rating set by H and its reversal frequency. 12. There is, therefore, no valid basis for suspecting that the change of radius can cause nonconservation of energy and any calculation by EMF or magnetic potential methods is bound to give the same result, because the latter are based on magnetic induction principles which derive from the changing values and disposition of the field energy density. Of course, owing to self-induction effects, the cyclic switching of current will prove more difficult with the much larger solenoid, but that is a practical consideration not relevant to the problem under discussion. 13. The important point so far as the permanent magnet rotor is concerned, however, is that the magnetization-demagnetization sequence has been symmetrical in its action and energy has merely been 'pumped' from the solenoid current source to the motor output in both half cycles of this sequence. The scenario can be entirely different if the solenoid closely embraces and contains the permanent magnet fixed in a coaxial position with an air gap interfacing with a coaxial soft iron core that can reciprocate mechanically to drive a motor steam-engine-style via a connecting rod and flywheel. 14. However, let us first discuss a situation where the solenoid, as before, contains a rotating magnet but in addition also a non-rotating soft iron core or, alternatively, a rotating soft-iron core and a fixed permanent magnet.
25.4.2005
Page 13 of 31
Here we are looking at the prospect of using the primary solenoidal magnetic field H to produce a controlled magnetic field in the soft-iron core which then regulates the interaction with the permanent magnet resulting from rotation. The problem becomes that of a three-part interaction. 15. Now, contrary to the prior situation, where the electromagnet had to turn through 90 degrees without power input and then be driven by power input over the next 90 degrees of motion, we can have here a situation where the permanent magnet does all the work in driving the motor in one quarter cycle and the input power operates to weaken the electromagnet in the next quarter cycle. This brings the problem closer to the Adams motor principle. The question then at issue is the calculation of the energy needed to be supplied as input in relation to that of the drive generated by the magnet, bearing in mind that rather special interactions between two ferromagnetic cores are now at work. This is not a proposal raised by the correspondence but it warrants consideration as part of the analytical treatment of the question that has been raised, because the same analysis applies to the reciprocating machine of Appendix B. 16. The key mathematical exercise is that of calculating the energy fed by solenoid current in setting up H in the system shown in Fig. 5.
Fig. 5 The magnet is itself equivalent to an air-cored solenoid carrying a constant current Io and the soft iron core defines a region of constant permeability . The field action of the primary solenoid current upon the permanent magnet can be ignored in this analysis, at least initially, because the coercive force of the magnet material is so high that a relatively weak magnetic field could hardly affect its action. The soft iron core can, therefore, itself be replaced by a solenoid carrying a current times that in the solenoid proper and we can dispense with the solenoid for the purpose of calculation. We are left simply with the analysis of the interaction between two coaxial solenoids spaced by a gap width d, one carrying current Io and one carrying current I. It is assumed for convenience of preliminary analysis that the radii of these solenoidal representations of the magnet and the core are the same and that the turns per unit length are also the same. 17. Our problem has reduced therefore to that of working out the mutual inductance between two coils which can move relative to one another along the common axis.
25.4.2005
Page 14 of 31
However, we must be mindful of our objective, which is to see how energy conservation principles apply to this problem. If the only question at issue is whether energy is really conserved we do not need to work out the rigorous mathematical solution giving precise values for the inductances involved in terms of the finite lengths of the magnet and core. 18. As a function of the air gap width d and the radii and lengths of the two solenoids, we could calculate the following quantities Lm, Lc, Mmc, where L represents self-inductance and M mutual inductance and the suffix terms m and c apply to the magnet and the core, respectively. The magnetic energy of the system is then expressed as an energy quantity stated in potential terms as: - LmIo2 - Lc2I2 - MmcIoI This means that if we were to reduce the current we would recover energy because a time differential of - Lc2I2, for example, becomes -L2dI/dt and dI/dt is negative so that the energy change as measured by potential is energy returned. When seen from the viewpoint of the exciting solenoid the factor applies rather than 2 but there is return of energy according to such formulae when current is switched off. 19. Note now that, if d were to remain constant as I varies, the energy fed into or out of these inductances with cyclic change of I is the same on the up-cycle as on the down cycle, so to that extent energy must be conserved by the electromagnetic system. Io is constant. Therefore, if d changes, only the mutual term depending upon d need be considered. This leaves only the term in Mmc as a subject for detailed analysis. 20. Now, we can presume that the magnet and the core, though of finite length are very long in relation to the small gap width d. In this case we can follow standard magnetic circuit theory, where a long magnet has very small demagnetization effects due to free poles at the ends, but we will still develop this to allow for a finite valued ratios of length to radius for both the magnet and the core. Here we are advancing the argument towards a point where we can calculate inductance attributable to an air gap in a magnetic core solely in terms of the field energy known to be stored in that gap. This is a valid proposition in accepted theory because leakage flux is deemed to be minimal and because the gap-dependent inductance energy is nothing other than the sum of the magnetic field energy in the system, this being a quantity that has a negligible component inside iron of high magnetic permeability. However, as that may seem to be an easy way of escaping from the more difficult task of calculating the actual mutual inductance and proceeding from there, I will address the latter problem. 21. First, however, I emphasise that the reason a calculation of air gap energy offers a more direct route to a solution is that the flux density across the gap and through the interface between the magnet and the soft iron core will involve far greater energy density in a unit (vacuum) permeability zone than in the soft iron. The energy density is proportional to B2/ and in the soft iron will be very much greater when is unity. Also, it must be remembered that even if a saturation level of magnetism in the permanent magnet implies a low differential permeability, the fact that it is saturated has predetermined the Bdependent energy density value and so it cannot contribute terms that are d-dependent in any
25.4.2005
Page 15 of 31
significant measure when judged alongside the energy in that gap. 22. Now, having decided to represent the action between the permanent magnet and that of the magnetic core as notional solenoids carrying high currents, one might expect that the mutual inductance between two such solenoids will be very high. A small gap between two sections of a single solenoid does not affect its inductance to any significant degree, but a small gap separating two solenoids that happen to carry very high current can involve energy change in substantial measure. The energy of the self-inductance intrinsic to our notional solenoids is really that of the intrinsic ferromagnetic condition of the magnet and the core and that energy is beyond our reach as it is locked into the atomic quantum behaviour of the atoms of the ferromagnetic material. The mutual inductance energy is what is amenable to our control in our experiments. 23. To provide an interim summary of the purpose of this discourse, it is noted that, whilst aiming to show how the general problem can be analysed mathematically, we are scrutinizing energy conservation processes where we draw motor power from a magnet as the gap closes, then switch on the current I to oppose the magnet's field action across the gap so as to allow the core to be pulled away from the magnet with little energy demand. We expect, on basic physics teaching, to find that we must do work against a back EMF to achieve this condition, work exactly equal to that available from the magnet upon closure of the gap. However, we want to be sure that the accepted theory, when worked out in detail, does sustain this standard energy conservation assumption. Our hope, of course, if we are minded to probe new ground in the search for new energy conversion discoveries is that the energy books will not balance and that we might tap some of that thermodynamic energy resource which powers ferromagnetism at its quantum atomic level. 24. To proceed, the route to determining the mutual inductance will start from the formula for self inductance of a single solenoid which we will then divide into two sections. By way of reference the author will take as a base the textbook 'Electrical Measurements and Measuring Instruments' (3rd edition) by E. W. Golding. It was published in London by Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons Ltd in 1946. It happens to be the university textbook used by the author in his early studies and similar reference data is probably available in other and more recent works, though there is a secondary reference to 'Nagaoka Factors' which feature in a paper by Nagaoka, Journal of College of Science, Tokyo, Art. 6, p. 18 (1909) and the data from the latter may be difficult to trace. In any event the calculations pose no problems to modern computer analysis, but it suffices for the present purpose to rely on the textbook authority which is home-based in U.K. and dates from the era when we were both introduced to electrical engineering studies. 25. The self inductance of a solenoid of circular section and diameter a having N turns uniformly wound over a length D is: L = K2N2a2/D nano-henries. This is given at p. 178 of the Golding book and K is the Nagaoka factor plotted in graphs on page 179 as a function of the diameter/length ratio of the solenoid. For the onward calculation we now need to specify that ratio a/D and I will choose here three ratios for which D/a is 20:1, 10:1 and 5:1. The Nagaoka factors are, respectively, 0.98, 0.95 and 0.91. Now, suppose we chop the solenoid in half, notionally, and see it as two coaxaial solenoids arranged adjacent one another with no gap in between. The overall inductance is then the self inductance of each half plus the mutual inductance between the two halves. Note that in energy storage terms, with
25.4.2005
Page 16 of 31
a current I, the self inductance energy of each half is LI2 and the mutual inductance energy is MI2. So, regarding this as a self inductance energy of a common single solenoid, L of the double length solenoid is 2(L+M) of the two-part configuration. Thus, if D/a is 20 for the overall single solenoid and 10 for each half, N being double and D being double in the above formula gives 2K, where K is 0.98, as equal to 2(K+M/L) with K as 0.95, making M/L equal to 0.03, where L is the inductance of the half-solenoid of D/a of 10. Alternatively, if D/a is 10 for the overall single solenoid and 5 for each half, we find that 2K with K as 0.95 equals 2(K+M/L) with K as 0.91, making M/L equal to 0.04, where L is the inductance of the half-solenoid for D/a of 5. 26. We have now determined the mutual inductance between two sections of solenoid of equal length and, as this holds regardless of the currents in the two sections, we can say that the mutual inductance energy is MIoI, where, according to the choice of D/a ratios, M is 0.03 or 0.04 times the value of L as given by the above formula for the separate sections. 27. This is the amount of energy that can be expected to be extracted by the mechanical pull as the core is attracted from a well separated position to close the air gap between it and the magnet. The formidable question now faced is that of deciding how energy is deployed if we decide to alter the current excitation so as to demagnetize the core before separating it from the magnet. 28. To proceed, we need to enter the territory of field effects from free end poles of a magnet. Suppose that the magnet exists at rest inside the solenoid and no current I is fed to that solenoid. The core is initially at rest spaced from that magnet by the gap distance d. The magnet, unaided, will assert an attractive field which pulls the core into contact. This field will be deemed sufficiently strong to impart substantial polarization and set up a fairly strong level of magnetism in the electromagnetic core. Thus, even with no external exciting current present, there is an effective polarization current in the core of the order of Io/, because the magnetic flux traversing the air gap will be the same on both sides. On this basis we can confine our study of power input to the task of demagnetizing the magnetic core once it has closed into contact with the magnet. We divert therefore to the study of this problem. 29. We have, in effect, a magnet and we have put, as an extension of its length, a soft iron core in contact with it. This means that the magnet will transfer an end pole from itself, and through the core to its outer extremity. The magnet with a D/a ratio of 10:1 becomes, say, an extended magnet with a D/a ratio of 20:1. The question at issue now is that of contriving to drive that pole back to the original position in the magnet proper and before we separate the core from the magnet. Here, we need to keep in mind that a soft iron core needs very little field to determine the direction of its magnetization. The reaction owing to demagnetization effects set up at the free end poles is what makes the demand on any applied field. So, if we look to a mid position inside the core and ask how the adjacent magnet and the pole demagnetization effects and any external field cooperate in deciding a direction of magnetization, we can begin to see what is needed. 30. The demagnetizing field effective on a magnetized bar and equivalent to the offset needed in a magnetizing solenoid is known from data of demagnetization factors found in textbooks. The Golding book referenced above shows such data at p. 360.
25.4.2005
Page 17 of 31
For D/a of 20 the demagnetizing field intensity is 0.5% of the flux density and for D/a of 10 it is 1.6% of the flux density. Now consider what this means in terms of controlling the magnetic flux density through an air gap between the magnet and the core. Firstly, those demagnetizing factors apply to specimens that are not permanent magnets, so response to externally applied magnetic fields cannot be predicted so far as action within that magnet is concerned. Secondly, the soft iron core will respond to net field action and if it were replaced by air we see that the additional demagnetizing field effect that comes into play is about 1.1% of the flux density in the magnet, this being the difference between the two demagnetizing factors. This suggests that, even if the soft iron core were left in position, the additional application of a back field of the same amount, or possibly more corresponding to the 1.6% factor, would drive the pole back into the magnet. If this were so, the energy needed to be supplied to the demagnetizing winding would be of the order of LI2 which compares with the mutual inductance energy of 4% of LIoI. Remember then that Io is of the same magnitude as I and that as it applies here is the magnetic permeability of the soft iron expressed in gaussian units, meaning that it is of the order of 103. Very clearly, on this basis, it needs far less energy to demagnetize the core than we have available as mechanical work from the action of the magnet in closing the air gap. The above figures suggest an energy ratio of the order of 1:100. But are we right in this argument? 31. Firstly, let us assume that we have a correct analysis. What does this mean in terms of energy conservation? Since energy has to be conserved in any physical process it simply means that the magnet can stand up to the demagnetizing field set up by its free poles by calling upon its atomic quantum-powered sources to keep it ferromagnetic, meaning that it gets energy from a thermodynamic interaction with the quantum world. Alternatively, if it owes its permanent magnetism to some internal thermally-related activity, it may simply cool to sustain the magnetic requirement. That may be speculation, but one fact we do know is that the magnet has a way of recovering once we pull away the demagnetized core using very little effort and prior to switching off the demagnetizing current. Secondly, let us assume we are wrong, but then how do we know? We set out to calculate the effect of a magnetizing field on a magnet and a soft iron core and we encountered the problem of deciding how the field set up externally from the free poles of the magnet affected the soft iron core. We had to estimate the back field needed to counter that influence. We know that the free magnet sets up its own back field and have used that as a measure for our calculations. If this is wrong how else can we proceed? 32. The only sensible way forward from this position is by experiment and already it should be said that I would never have begun this exercise had I not heard of experiments that purport to involve permanent magnets and reveal anomalous gain of electrical/mechanical power. However, I have accepted your challenge to perform calculations which might give you some
25.4.2005
Page 18 of 31
satisfaction in your pursuit over so many years to find an answer to your questions and although I think I have gone far enough in that theoretical endeavour I will go one step further. 33. We have considered above how two solenoids having a 10:1 length to diameter ratio, one representing a permanent magnet and one a soft iron core, interact magnetically. A question of interest is that of determining what equivalent current strength I would suffice in an external magnetizing solenoid closely embracing the soft iron core to offset and cancel, at the centre of the soft iron core, the magnetic field set up by the equivalent current Io of the magnet.
Fig. 6 Referring to Fig. 6, the task is to calculate the axial field at a point P set up by a current of i ampere turns per unit length of solenoid. We consider an elemental section i(dx)(d) of the energized solenoid and note that this angular element ( radians) of ring form, of diameter a distant x from P along the axis, will set up a magnetic field at P given by the formula (a/2)(idx)/z2, where z2 is (a/2)2+x2. This field is directed at an angle to the axis, where x is (a/2)tan and (a/2) is zcos. Then, since dx is (a/2)sec2d or (a/2cos2) d, the component field at P attributable to idx over the = 2 range of the ring element is: (4/a)cos3(idx) and, as dx is (a/2)sec2d, this reduces to: 2icosd
This can now be integrated to obtain 2isin and so determine the axial field intensity at P attributable to the whole length of the solenoid representing the magnet, namely from an angle for which tan is 10 to one for which tan is 30. With tan as 10 this gives sin as 0.995037 and with tan as 30 this gives sin as 0.999445 so the difference is a factor of 0.004408. In contrast the same current in the solenoid centred on P would develop a field at P given by the same formula applied between limits for which tan is 10 and -10, respectively. This gives a difference of twice 0.995037 or 1.990074 as the comparable factor representing axial field intensity at P. The ratio of these two field strengths is 451:1, meaning that the field developed by a powerful current Io in the solenoid representing the magnet could be cancelled at P by an opposing current in the magnetizing solenoid of the soft iron core that is only 1/451 of the strength of Io.
25.4.2005
Page 19 of 31
34. It is submitted on the basis of this analysis that it is not at all unreasonable to contemplate that a small current supplied to a magnetizing coil around the soft iron core and directed in opposition to the polarity of the magnet can serve severely to curtail the attractive force between the magnet and the core. This being so there is every reason to expect the motor contemplated to operate by drawing drive power from the magnet and using a relatively small amount of input power to restrain the braking action as the motor reestablishes the gap between the magnet and the core. [This ends the author's formal response to Frank Potter] Onward Experimentation The above discourse has probed the principles of operation of a device which can possibly serve us as a new means for generating power. Machines testing these principles must now be developed to verify what has been suggested by routine application of established scientific principle. The only departure from established physics has been an awareness that there might be a hidden thermodynamic source of energy which could feature in the energy balance calculations, which has meant that we would not rely on taking the short cut of working out our answers by assuming that the only energy action is electromagnetic or mechanical in form. So often, physicists who set out to calculate a result A assume a conservation rule by which A + B = 0 and then calculate B instead. That may well prove to be a very costly mistake that has had a damaging effect on progress in the energy field. One is thereby relying on assumption, albeit accepted doctrinaire assumption, and using inadequate knowledge of the range of the energy components that must be considered. Thermodynamics, meaning the realm of heat energy in some form, even the heat latent in atomic electron activity, is a subject of relevance to electromagnetic machine design that ventures into what seems hitherto to have been forbidden research territory, because, as already stated, researchers fear the stigma of addiction to 'perpetual motion'. Given the kind of question asked by Frank Potter and his persistence in seeking answers after decades of effort, given the motor developments championed by Robert Adams and given the reports of the research of Hans Coler and others on solid-state magnetic devices posing energy anomalies, this author can but share their frustration and this is why this ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT is necessary. One can do experiments, as others have done, but even that will not convince the skeptic who wants to adhere to principles of disbelief. Without a theoretical base moulded around the existing framework of physics one cannot get a hearing, far less attract the interest of those who will advise funding sources to invest in the 'free energy' field. Furthermore one needs a basis on which to understand why those who try to get 'free energy' machines to work may fail. One cannot just throw a pile of magnets together and hope to work magic. It is pointless to take this discussion theme much further, until the necessary experiments have been performed by the author and are duly reported in a sequel to this ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT. Commentary on the Appendices In winding up this introduction to the 'Potter debate', a few points outstanding from the
25.4.2005
Page 20 of 31
correspondence initiated by the Potter letter of 15th October 1993 warrant comment. That letter is reproduced in Appendix A. By letter dated 21st October 1993, Potter, by the following words, acknowledged my expression of interest: "I think I will begin with the phrase in your first paragraph "what you say is right!", which caused me to rub my eyes in astonishment, because it is the first time that any reputable scientist has ever said that to me; not even Professor Kilmister who, although he has been most generous indeed in helping me literally for years past, and has acknowledged that I have been right on some points, is like all mathematicians and scientists extremely dubious about anything touching Conservation of Energy." Later in the same letter: "I was particularly interested in your phrase about a "hidden source that sustains the electron 'spins' in a ferromagnetic material". That is precisely the sort of thing that has been at the back of my mind for a very long time indeed (though I know little technically about 'spin' theory), in fact gradually since 1956. I really got going about 11 years ago with the ideas about which I wrote to you. That was in 1982, which also seems quite a long time ago now, when I approached Professor Kilmister on these matters." In his 15th October letter, Potter had mentioned four issues of debate but disclosed only two. His letter of 7th November began with the words: "Thank you for your further note and the extracts from New Energy News that you kindly sent enclosed. Before going on to some comments upon this very interesting material I would like to present the other two ideas that you said you would be willing to comment upon." "The first one .... involves an experiment. I took a very good quality permanent magnet and wound a close-wound wire coil around it, and then passed a current through it in the opposite direction to that of the current that would have magnetized the magnet. At the start of the experiment, before the current was switched on, there were a number of soft iron tin-tacks adhering to the magnet. I got the result that I had anticipated. On increasing the current there came a point where the tin-tacks flopped off; and on increasing the current still further they jumped on again. All fairly obvious I suppose the two fields cancelling one another. But the puzzle was this: Energy is supposed to be in the 'field' surrounding the magnet (or the coil), and yet, since the tin-tacks were not attracted at the particular level of current there must have been no field there to magnetize them. But there is energy inside the permanent magnet, and the energy must also have been put into the coil in the build-up of its own energy field, this energy coming from the battery. Where have these two energies gone to? On switching off, pretty obviously these two energies come back, though I was not able to check practically the restoration of the energy of the coil to its surroundings. The magnet appeared to be unaffected afterwards." "The last of the four ideas (two in my earlier letter) depends upon the one just given, and concerns a small machine that I had an idea to build, but the practicalities of doing so were difficult with the tools or apparatus available to me; and also later on a possible snag in the idea occurred to me (which I will mention in a later paragraph); so, after doing practical work upon it, I gave it up for the time being and went over to the two ideas in my previous letter to you.
25.4.2005
Page 21 of 31
The machine was this ...." This next portion of the Potter letter is in Appendix B. It is a description of what the author has referred to above in the context of a reciprocating steam-engine-style movement of a permanent magnet cum soft iron core combination. As already mentioned, it is what this author had in mind before that first discussion with Professor Kilmister at the Cambridge meeting. However, whereas the opening letter from Potter had concerned the mathematical task of analysing what could be said to be thought experiments bearing upon the conservation of energy issue, here was a third 'idea' raising questions of energy disposition based on an experiment with a magnet and a fourth 'idea' which concerned a machine that resembles the Adams motor. The difference is similar to that between the early reciprocating steam engine and the four-cylinder rotary engine. In the above discourse, the author has already dealt with the themes Potter raised by his first, second and fourth 'ideas' and wonders now whether to comment on the magnet experiment of that third 'idea'. The disposition of energy when work is done to 'demagnetize' a magnet has already been discussed in this Report. We are talking here about the physics of the process at room temperatures, temperatures well below the Curie temperature. In this situation one never demagnetizes a ferromagnetic substance, whether it is a permanent magnet material or soft-iron. All one can do is to 'depolarize' the specimen under test. Its intrinsic minute magnetic domain constitution becomes randomly directed amongst the axes in the crystals of the material and it merely appears to be demagnetized. So, the primary energy is always trapped by the ferromagnetic state and any modest change that does occur involves, to some extent, that which can occur at the limits of transition as one takes the magnet through its Curie temperature. There is a thermodynamic energy exchange involving that hidden field we associate with quantum theory. As to why Potter's magnet recovered its polarization after undergoing the 'opposed' current effect, as tin-tacks fell off and were picked up again, that is not easily explained without knowing precisely the properties and state of the magnet and the sizes of magnet, demagnetizing coil and current in that coil. If the magnet reversed its polarity it is perplexing if it could reverse back again when the current was switched off. It could not have been one having a high coercive force if a small coil carrying current available from normal domestic sources could perform that polarity reversal function. If, however, the coil wrapped around it did extend, in its influence, to the tin-tack region, we may have here precisely the evidence that shows how a weak field on a soft iron core can affect the attraction of a magnet. In the latter case the commentary above and the calculations which show how a small field action can limit the influence of a magnet interacting with a soft-iron core are very relevant to Potter's tintack experiment. By letter to the author dated 23rd March 1994, Frank Potter acknowledged certain book references that I had sent him showing methods of calculating mutual inductance and included the comment: "The interesting, but to me difficult, calculations that you sent (though, as you say, routine for engineers) are in particular for self-inductance and a lot about mutual inductance. The specific problem that I and my friends have struggled with for so long is
25.4.2005
Page 22 of 31
not that, but rather the induction of EMF by a rotating permanent magnet --- in other words 'back EMF' in a rather special form of motor. This EMF is the thing that seems so difficult to get an exact answer for in this case; and the specific problem is whether the EMF does depend upon the ratio of the length of magnet to the radius of the solenoid. I think it does. I have, as you know, been hankering after a calculation on the basis of the Blv formula; but I shall be most interested in your own calculation, when you can do it, and I can only hope that it is as 'routine' as the ones you kindly sent me." Upon reading this this author wondered about the emphasis placed on the ratio of the length of the magnet to the radius of the enclosing solenoid. In earlier communications the question had been understood to relate to the problem of using a solenoid of realistic (not infinite length) proportions, whilst increasing the radius of the solenoid, but at all times the magnet itself has to be 'within' the solenoid. In other words one should not just imagine something approaching a ring coil with a magnet mounted to rotate about the centre of the coil and having its poles sweeping through an arc protruding from the plane of the coil. Accordingly, it was assumed that Frank Potter was primarily interested in calculating the EMF induced in a solenoid by a rotating magnet having a length that is small in relation to solenoid radius, but yet the length of the solenoid is large enough for it to be said that the solenoid encloses the magnet fully. In other words one seeks to rely on the assumption that the field produced by the solenoid and acting on the magnet is essentially that applicable at the centre of the solenoid. On this basis, of course, one must surely agree with Frank Potter that the back EMF induced in the solenoid owing to rotation of the magnet does depend upon the radius of the solenoid. As to the calculation of this EMF, this poses no real difficulty, but in view of Frank Potter's concern about method of calculation and his apprehension about mutual inductance formulae, the author has deemed it appropriate to provide the additional analysis set out in APPENDIX D. No doubt there will be others who read this Report that have interest in the general problem but are not too familiar with the various methods of calculation that can be used in electromagnetism. Between 7th November 1993 and 23rd March 1994, and later, Potter wrote many further letters to the author prior to completion of this Report, mainly to be sure that his questions were fully understood and revealing his anxiety that, having found someone willing to resolve the issues raised, the main points would not be missed. The other letters bore the following sequence of dates: 26th December 1993 and, in 1994, 14th January, 16th January (two letters), 19th January, 8th February, 26th February, 1st March, 7th March and 7th April. The 23th March letter was followed by one dated 2nd April. All related to the general topic of the four 'ideas' that have preoccupied Frank Potter for so long and all were written before any of this author's response, as provided by this Report, was conveyed to him. It will, therefore, be appreciated by the reader that this question of whether a magnetic machine can be operated in a way which breaches the Principle of Conservation of Energy, as interpreted in the realm of electro-magnetism and mechanics, is one very close to the heart of this 83 year old gentleman. His letters, as quoted, should show the reader that Potter is not a 'crank' experimenter who believes in 'perpetual motion'. No doubt, much that has been said in this Report will not be easy to digest and there will be more that has to be said. The author has suggested to Potter that he should await events and see how the 'free energy' world that is now addressing similar issues progress with the experiments on new machines. Not surprisingly, Potter wants to keep involved and contribute to the momentum of something affecting his brainchild. However, there are limitations in what one can do in a disbelieving world that is competitive in matters scientific and so this Report can only serve to introduce Potter's interest to those few who may read what is said here.
25.4.2005
Page 23 of 31
It is hoped that the 'Potter debate' will arouse interest and lead to progress on the alternative energy field. In bringing a different perspective to the present scene, perspective which complements the ongoing debate that now centres around the claims concerning the Adams motor, hopefully something of benefit will emerge from what this author is contributing by issuing this Report. This author acknowledges Potter's kindness in allowing this material to be presented in this Report form, with text from his correspondence, and ends by wishing him well in his further endeavours, coupled with the hope that he will see feedback as others now take up the debate. 10th April 1994 HAROLD ASPDEN
APPENDIX A LETTER DATED 15 OCTOBER 1993 FROM FRANK F. POTTER Dear Dr. Aspden I hear from Professor C. W. Kilmister that during a discussion with you at Cambridge some weeks ago he mentioned to you my name and my interest in Magnetism and particularly in Conservation of Energy. He did not know your address at the time, but a few days ago he found it and sent me a most interesting letter stating that he had heard from you that some experiments with permanent magnets in USA appear to indicate that energy may not be conserved in some of the phenomena involved --- very remarkable news! He also said that Magnetism is a subject in which you are an expert, and that he thought you would be willing to hear certain ideas that I have upon these matters concerning Conservation of Energy, particularly in relation to Magnetism. So these are the reasons for my letter. For myself, I have (very unfortunately) had no formal training in Science or Mathematics beyond school days 66 years ago, my work having been mainly in other fields, though I was a sergeant wireless mechanic on Ground Staff of the RAF during the War. Some of my main interests have been in Physics and Electricity and Radio and Mathematics and I have dabbled in these, though all at a rather low level in which I have regrettably had to be largely self-taught, though with some help from a few kind friends such as Professor Kilmister in particular. I am now 83. There are two problems in relation to Magnetism and Conservation of Energy that I have discussed with Professor Kilmister for a very long time; or even three or four separate such problems, but it is two of them in particular that I would like to put to you. In fact, in this letter I will concentrate mainly upon one of them, which I think is much the simpler to discuss, but I will give a brief account of the second one at the end of this letter. I would be most happy to tell you full details of this other one (in fact all four) if you were interested to hear and pursue them later on. But in this letter I am keeping mainly to the one, as I do not want to burden you with a mass of material in which you might not be interested; nor do I want to go to unnecessary trouble myself.
25.4.2005
Page 24 of 31
Now to the one main problem: Suppose that an electro-magnet is rotating inside and at the centre of a fairly long (i.e. large length/diameter ratio) current-fed stationary solenoid, the plane of rotation being that of the long axis, the cause of the rotation of this electro-magnet being the magnetic field of the solenoid inside itself. In other words, this is a rather special form of electric motor, in which Motor/Generator theory and 'back EMF' will apply. For mathematical simplicity let it be assumed that I2R heat dissipation can be ignored, since that is energy-conserved and 'wasted' only from an engineering point of view; and in particular let it be assumed that both solenoid and electro-magnet each have their current maintained constant by a separate 'extra battery' in series with the one heating the coils, these extra batteries in this 'thought-experiment' being infinitely and instantly adjustable to oppose exactly the EMFs that will be induced into both solenoid and electro-magnet by the fact that each is moving, relatively, in the magnetic field of the other. This will maintain constant current in both. (To ignore the I2R heat dissipation one could imagine super-conducting circuits). Now suppose, as one would be expected to do, that in this electro-magnetic arrangement (really a special type of motor) energy is exactly conserved. I found it more difficult than I had thought to work out just how this would be, partly because at the end of each half-cycle of rotation the constant currents (or anyway one of them) would have to be switched off for reversal of direction, and the energy 'stored' in the magnetic fields of the two coils during the momentary build-up at the start would need to be 'recovered' from the collapsing fields (or one of them anyway), and whether to switch off both or only one current, and if both in what order or together, and in particular the fact that at the end of the half-cycle the electro-magnet coil would be physically the opposite way around from what it was at the beginning. I found this all rather confusing to try and think out; so let it be assumed that these are just two of Maxwell's interacting currentfed circuits in which energy is conserved overall if everything is accounted for. One important point of my argument revolves around the fact that both of these currentfed circuits are moving in the magnetic field of the other, and as such (a) both coils will experience a force from the other one, but, the solenoid being stationary in the laboratory, the free electro-magnet will be accelerated and will gain kinetic energy from the arrangement; and (b) both coils will induce an EMF (countered by the two 'extra batteries' in order to maintain constant currents) into the other coil, so these two 'extra batteries' will lose chemical energy; and since Conservation of Energy is being assumed, these energy losses from the two batteries will be exactly matched by the kinetic energy gain to the mass of the magnet; and moreover, this will not be only over a period, but pari passu, step by step at every moment of the motion. And the energy 'stored' in the two magnetic fields is assumed to be 'recoverable'. As said, all this is really just ordinary motor and 'back EMF' theory in this special case. Now the really essential part of my non-Conservation of Energy argument is this: It is well known that a long cylindrical permanent magnet can be exactly simulated by a piece of soft iron of the same dimensions with close-wound coils around it, fed by an appropriate constant current --- i.e. an electro-magnet such as in the foregoing paragraphs; and if the two, electro and permanent magnets, were put each into a 'Black Box' it would not be possible to distinguish between them, either in their capacity to attract soft iron, or in their capacity, when moving to induce EMFs into surrounding conductors --- provided of course that the current in the electro-magnet were maintained constant against EMFs induced into it by reaction from outside. So the final step in my argument is to replace the electro-magnet in the paragraphs above by a permanent magnet and repeat the experiment. Everything will be exactly the same, except that the permanent magnet, being self-sustaining, will not need to have
25.4.2005
Page 25 of 31
energy taken from an 'extra battery' to maintain constant current as in the case of the electro-magnet. Hence, Conservation of Energy (whether true or not) having been assumed for the case of the electro-magnet, there is an energy difference here for the permanent magnet, and in fact an unbalanced energy gain. So, how can energy have been conserved in this case? I suggest that energy is not conserved here, and that there is a nett energy gain. Finally, here is a brief account of the other similar but separate problem, about which I am not sending you details (though there is a large amount of it), parallel to the problem described above: The one above was actually the last of the four in time, and arose directly out of the one I am about to mention. But they are in fact two quite separate (though closely allied) problems on their own. Suppose one has an electro-magnetic arrangement exactly the same as above, with a permanent magnet (or maybe it could be an electro-magnet, but let's say a permanent magnet), with as before a solenoid with a large length/diameter ratio. Now the force field formula inside the coils at the centre for such a long solenoid (theoretically an infinite one) is o4nI, which is independent of the radius of the solenoid. Now, keeping everything the same, including the shape of the solenoid, i.e. its length/diameter ratio, vary the radius of the solenoid, let's say, make it larger. What will be the effect upon the EMF induced into the solenoid and opposing the battery voltage and taking energy from the battery? The formula above for the force field H acting upon the mass of the magnet and thus imparting energy gain to it is independent of radius as above. If the EMF induced into the solenoid (still the same shape), despite this increase in radius, is still the same, then the drain on the battery and consequent energy loss for a given current will also be the same as before. Then one can say that this energy loss is independent of radius, just the same as the energy gain is independent of radius, and one would have no reason to suppose that energy is not conserved. However, 'common sense' is not always right (!), and the answer is by no means clear. It is a lot more difficult than it looks. A lot of work of various kinds has been done on this (mainly by Professor Kilmister and myself, but one or two others as well), and there is as yet no conclusive proof, either way. One difficulty, a mathematical one, is the absence of exact integrals in working on the problem. I think, on all the evidence available, that energy is not strictly conserved, and that there is the possibility of an uncompensated gain in energy; but I cannot prove it absolutely. As said at the beginning, I would be very happy to send you a lot of detail about this, if you are interested to pursue it, and especially if you could advise or help in the matter. The other two problems of the total of four are related to both of the above, but are each really an independent problem, three of the total indicating the possibility of non-Conservation of Energy, the one other being simply a puzzling electromagnetic problem. I would be most interested to hear from you, and particularly whether you can give any answer to, or throw any light upon, any of the above matters, or help in any way. Thank you for allowing your name to be passed on to me by Professor Kilmister. If in your reply you include any calculations, particularly calculus, would you please set out the steps in full, since my maths is at a rather low level, though I can often follow the simpler calculations, more or less, provided they are set out in detail. I hope I am not bothering you too much over this. No hurry, of course. With best wishes, Yours sincerely, Frank F. Potter
25.4.2005
Page 26 of 31
APPENDIX B POTTER'S FOURTH PROPOSAL: THE RECIPROCATING MAGNET ENGINE The following is an excerpt from Frank Potter's 7th November 1993 letter to the author: "The machine was this: A good modern permanent magnet has a close-wound coil wound around it in such a way that current can be passed in the direction opposite to that which magnetized the magnet. Standing at a short distance from one pole face of the magnet is a piece of soft iron, which is allowed to be attracted by the magnet while no current is flowing in the coil. The (potential) energy taken from the soft iron and imparted to its acceleration can be taken from it by some means, say by attachment to a crank and flywheel etc. like an old-fashioned reciprocating steam engine. When the piece of soft iron is stopped at the pole face switch on the current at a magnitude that will oppose and exactly balance the magnetism of the permanent magnet. There will be a momentary build-up of stored field energy in the coil, which can be 'recovered' later. But also, there will now be no field outside the permanent magnet and hence no magnetization of the piece of soft iron and no attractive force upon it, and in particular no loss-producing EMF induced by it into the coils by its motion if it is now drawn away from its starting position, and so no electromagnetic energy changes will take place. The mechanical energy used in accelerating it away from the pole face can be conserved by the flywheel. So, draw the piece of soft iron away to its starting position. There will be no magnetic force restraining it and hence no expenditure of electrical energy (i.e. induced EMF) or mechanical energy (which the flywheel has taken care of) in thus moving it away again. Then switch off the opposing current when everything has returned to its starting position and recover the 'stored' energy in the field of the coils (say by discharging into a condenser or by other means), thus at the same time automatically restoring the soft iron to its original condition of being attracted by the permanent magnet. Repeat the operation continuously, using the flywheel to smooth things out mechanically. It appears that on each completed cycle there is a nett gain of energy, so energy is not conserved. Is there anything wrong with that? I did work on this idea, both theoretically and practically, on and off many years ago in the late 1950s, in between many other calls in a very busy life. But I had to give it up, in favour of the other two ideas recorded in my earlier letter, partly due to the lack of time, but more particularly for two other reasons. The lesser of these was that I was by no means a good enough mechanical engineer to get the thing going, and doing it at home anyway. The greater reason, which was the one that really finally stopped me, at least for the time being, was that a possible theoretical and practical snag in the whole idea occurred to me, and I had not the necessarly theoretical and mathematical (particularly mathematical) ability to deal with it. It concerns the 'recovery' of the 'stored' energy in the solenoid coils surrounding the permanent magnet, and it is this: What is the nature of the whole solenoid itself? Clearly it is not a soft iron cored solenoid, in which self-inductance L would be very much larger than that for the coils alone, because in this apparatus its core is a good modern permanent magnet, in which presumably the billions of molecular iron magnets composing it would have little if any room for motion under the influence of an applied field; and as I understand the matter it is this very freedom to move of the molecules of the soft iron that causes the great increase in self-inductance of the soft-iron cored
25.4.2005
Page 27 of 31
solenoid over an air cored one. So, in effect, the coils are an air cored solenoid, because the permanent magnet inside them would be virtually unaffected by the current; or even slightly more than that, a vacuum cored one because the volume of the permanent magnet would replace the air. What all this boils down to is that the self-inductance L of the coils would really be rather small, whereas I had I think been viewing it, more or less automatically, as quite large (like a soft-iron cored electromagnet). Now, what follows from this is the relationship of the piece of moveable soft iron into the solenoid. If it were really a soft iron cored solenoid with high L then the position of a relatively small piece of soft iron just outside it would make little difference to its large self-inductance. But in the case of the virtually vacuum-cored solenoid there might be quite a significant relative difference between its rather small self-inductance, say L1, when the piece of iron is at the pole face, and its also small self-inductance, say L2, when drawn away. Hence, keeping the current I constant during the whole half-cycle of withdrawal of the soft iron, and the formula for 'stored' energy of self-inductance being LI2, there would be some difference between the energy put in at the start and that recovered at the end of the second half-cycle, i.e. I2(L1 - L2). So, there would actually seem to be some energy loss here, insignificant if the solenoid were really soft-iron cored (as I had been more or less assuming), but possibly significant as it actually was constructed. So, the final question was whether it were possible and, indeed, likely that this energy loss would exactly balance out the very evident kinetic energy gain that would be obtained on the first half-cycle by the permanent magnet attracting and moving the soft iron? I did not think the loss would be sufficient to balance out completely the gain, leaving Conservation of Energy valid; but I could not be at all sure. So the real difficulty came down to a question of theory, and in particular mathematics, in default of laboratory proof one way or the other. And I had no idea at all what the relative magnitudes were, i.e. whether the figures would be significant or not, and how this difference could be calculated, even possibly by a mathematician, let alone by myself, since obviously it would not be a very easy problem, even for an expert; and I think for many people it would come under your own "sweeping under the carpet" principle (!), assuming Conservation of Energy and thus conveniently forgetting all about it. Naturally enough really; though I would not have been happy about that, but did not know what to do. As said, much later, after a difficult period with other work etc. in my life, I went over to the other two ideas of my previous letter." Though this led into the remark "that explains my four different ideas" this letter from Frank Potter went on for a further four pages on issues such as whether Clerk Maxwell's theories had extended to permanent magnets.
APPENDIX C HOW CONCENTRATED FLUX DEVELOPS EMF IN AN ENCLOSING SOLENOID One needs to explain how a magnetic flux change concentrated in a central core region of the space within a large solenoid can develop induced EMF in the solenoid.
25.4.2005
Page 28 of 31
It is not a sufficient answer in the quest to explain the nature of magnetic phenomena and induction to say that the EMF is simply the rate of change of flux d/dt enclosed by each circuit loop (or winding turn) of the solenoid. In practice, space itself is, in a sense, a 'perfect' conductor [See footnote at end of this Appendix] in that elemental regions of empty space can be said to be bounded by a closed flow path and any d/dt action in that bounded region will also produce a circuital EMF. Since there is current flow, essential to develop a field reaction, and since no I2R energy loss is involved, we know that either R applicable to the loop is zero or something else is effective to set up a cancelling EMF in opposition in that loop of space. That 'something else' is the circuital component of an EMF set up in an adjacent loop region of space, which, for the purposes of this discussion, is deemed to be subject to its own d/dt magnetic flux exchange process. For there to be current flow in this adjacent loop and a negligible EMF driving that flow, the R factor applicable to space must be virtually zero as if it were a superconductor, and yet this is not a strict analysis because the space medium is able to sustain oscillations of electromagnetic field. The current flow in the adjacent loop corresponds to a net zero EMF comprising a component EMF adjacent the inner loop that balances the d/dt-related EMF and a component EMF now in the outer section of the outer loop that keeps the balance. In mathematical terms, imagine a sector of the space within the solenoid to be that of an arc of angle bounded between inner and outer radii r and R, respectively. See Fig. 7.
Fig. 7 Elemental arcuate sectors of a solenoidal field The EMF induced by d/dt in the central core sector with a segment of inner radius r will be: (d/dt)/2 The EMF induced in a closed loop sector between r and R is zero, because all the flux is deemed to be concentrated within radius r. In order that the EMF acting within the inner core sector should not do work on the 'nothingness' of space, the outer loop responds by setting up a back EMF in the arc segment of radius r which is exactly cancelled by a forward EMF in the arc segment of radius R. It is therefore the response of regions of vacuum space in developing circuital loop reaction currents in a non-resitive medium that is the cause of a transfer of action outwards to the winding of the solenoid by virtue of the back-to-back EMF response in contiguous sections of adjacent reaction current loops. Once the EMF finds itself trying to develop current flow in the wire of the winding of the solenoid, then it does meet resistance and normal circuit theory applies, but the action could not occur without the buffer response of virtual current activity in the intervening space. It is essential that this very important point should be well understood as, otherwise, we are left with experimental mathematical formulae that convey no explanation of the true energy activity involved
25.4.2005
Page 29 of 31
in magnetic inductance. The explanation here is provided because Frank Potter has questioned whether the enlargement of the solenoid radius to realms far removed from the seat of the flux change activity d/dt can result in a restriction on the induced EMF, meaning the back EMF, if the power supplied to the solenoid is what causes rotation of the magnet developing the d/dt flux change. Footnote: Note that each element of a 'perfect' circuit could have inductance L and capacitance C and develop finite currents and an EMF even if resistance R were zero. Each cell of space must be regarded as a parallel-connected LC circuit and, as applied to the vacuum medium with its non-dispersive properties in wave propagation, one also needs a self-tuning resonance effect in response to rates of change of signal disturbances in transit. However, as back-up for this, there is the further property that steady reacting current flow is possible owing to the orbital motion of the vacuum charges in their quantum states. Readers interested in this should refer to the author's article 'The Ether an Assessment', in the U.K. magazine Wireless World, 88, pp. 37-39 (1982), which discusses the self-tuning property of the vacuum medium. The steady-field reacting current flow has been discussed in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1.
APPENDIX D EMF GENERATED IN A SOLENOID BY A ROTATING BAR MAGNET
Fig. 8 Reference is made to Fig. 8. The calculation of induced EMF in a coil is based on the rate of change of magnetic flux linkage through the area of that coil. Thus, if the 'coil' is really a rectangular loop with one side of length l expanding outwards at a speed v in a plane perpendicular to a steady field B, the EMF will be proportional to Blv. Alternatively, if the loop area A is fixed so, the EMF induced will be proportional to A times the rate of change of B. The 'linkage' is what is meant by 'mutual inductance', in the sense that, whatever circuit or source produces B, that will have a mutual inductance vis-a-vis the circuit loop of area A. Suppose, for example, that B is produced by a current Io then the EMF induced in the loop of area A will be proportional to the time rate of change of MIo, where M is mutual inductance. To calculate M for a particular interaction one really is doing nothing other than working out how B produced by Io links with an area A. Now, there are two ways of going about this calculation. Because the action is 'mutual' it has a
25.4.2005
Page 30 of 31
certain recriprocity and one can take either component of the system as the generator of a field B and work out how this links the area of the other component. Obviously, since both must give the same answer for M, by symmetry of action, it is logical to choose the easier of the two possible calculations. In the case of a bar magnet rotating inside a solenoid it is not difficult to proceed in either way, but there is sense in taking the solenoid as the field source. The reason is that the field produced by a bar magnet is that of its two poles and is a rather complex function of magnet length and distance from the centre of the magnet, whereas the field acting on the magnet and produced by the solenoid is a uniform field in the case under analysis. Having in mind that this Appendix is written to meet the concerns of Frank Potter, it is stressed that 'mutual inductance' means just that: the mutual action by which energy can be transferred by induced EMF between two interacting circuit elements is one that works either way with no nett gain or loss of inductance energy. Indeed, if the mutual inductance favoured one or other of the circuit components in this exchange of energy, so one could design a transformer or oscillator that would be nothing other than coils of wire in air and yet would generate electricity continuously without the aid of any external agency. Whilst we do have in mind the issue of energy conservation with the bar magnet itself being a prospective coupling with such an external agency, the problem at hand is one of orthodox electrical engineering calculation of mutual coupling between two circuits aimed at deriving an EMF value. Hence, the logical route to finding that answer is the calculation of mutual inductance M in the problem under study and we shall do this by working out the field linkages from the solenoid to the magnet, rather than the other way around. That said, and referring to Fig. 9, we shall now substitute the rotating bar magnet by a small coil of area A carrying current Iosint so as to produce its field along the central axis of the solenoid and a similar small coil of area A carrying current Iocost arranged at right angles so as to produce its field along a radius vector from the centre of the solenoid.
Fig. 9 Note that this represents a circuit having a magnetic moment IoA which is chosen to equal the magnetic moment of the magnet, the latter being its pole strength times its length. The eventual EMF to be calculated will need to be expressed in terms of this magnetic moment. The action described represents a magnet rotating with an angular frequency . Now, first, looking at the effect which the current Iocost has in inducing an EMF in the solenoid, we can see by symmetry that this is zero, because the field diverges in opposite directions in each half of the solenoid and so the flux linkages will be such as to develop a clockwise EMF in one half of the solenoid and an anti-clockwise EMF in the other half of the solenoid and these will back against one another to sum to zero nett EMF. Therefore, that tells us that the mutual inductance for the configuration including the cost component is zero.
25.4.2005
Page 31 of 31
The task next is to calculate the field produced by the solenoid that links with the other notional coil of area A. Let the current in the solenoid be denoted I. If the solenoid were of infinite length then, assuming vacuum permeability o, the axially-directed field intensity in the solenoid is oNI, where N is the number of turns per unit length of solenoid. Note that in the gaussian system of units used elsewhere in this Report the permeability would be unity with a 4 factor added. The flux linking the area A is then A times this quantity and the flux per unit current I is simply AoN, which therefore is the value of M, the mutual inductance. Now, by the reciprocity argument concerning the 'mutual' nature of this inductance, the same value of M applies if we regard the rotating magnet as the source inducing an EMF in the solenoid. EMF is rate of change of flux linkage or M times rate of change of Iosint, which is M times Iocost. The EMF produced in the solenoid is therefore (AIo)oNcost. Had we assumed that the solenoid has a finite length D and a diameter a, then the field at the centre of the solenoid is reduced by the factor D/(D2+a2)1/2, and the EMF is accordingly reduced by the same factor. The derivation of this latter factor can be confirmed from the analysis given in section 33 above. The sine of the angle is the factor just mentioned. It is unity for a solenoid of infinite length. It follows, therefore, that if the radius of the solenoid is progressively increased to a very large value, then provided the length of the solenoid increases in proportion, so the EMF induced in it by the rotating magnet will be unchanged. However, N, which is the number of turns on the solenoid per unit length, must be the same so that the total number of turns must increase in proportion as well, otherwise the EMF will be reduced. In effect, one is here seeing the fact that the field from a bar magnet drops inversely as the cube root of distance, whilst the area of a solenoid turn increases as the square of distance, so unless the number of turns increases in proportion to distance the flux linkage rate will not be sustained with change of scale. Note that this Appendix is added purely to answer a question raised by Frank Potter. It has no relevance to the prospect of building a motor that can conceivably perform anomalously in energy terms, because the interaction under study is the standard interaction between a magnet and a current in a winding. As explained elsewhere in this and other ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS on magnetism, the prospect of generating what is termed 'free energy' is one that comes into sight where we have a magnet and a ferromagnetic core interacting under the control of a current in an external winding. That is a scenario where the third party to the action disturbs the 'mutual' reciprocal action which otherwise implies symmetry extending to energy exchange processes and it is that which brings a new dimension into energy research.
25.4.2005
Page 1 of 34
POWER FROM MAGNETISM
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents Introduction 'Free Energy': Defining the Field of Investigation 'Over-Unity' Power Generation The Power Converter Ferromagnetism Air Gap Reaction Mystery Energy Source: The Energy Balance Sheet Magnetic Leakage Flux and the Adams Motor Breakthrough on a Thermoelectric Route to 'Free Energy' The Solid-State Energy Probe Experiment Appendix A: The First Law of Thermodynamics Appendix B: Analysis of the A-Field Reaction Appendix C: Magnetic Core Drawing from U.K. Patent
POWER FROM MAGNETISM Introduction This is the first of a series of reports which are intended to serve as a technical briefing helpful in the evaluation of invention rights by expert opinion more familiar with conventional technology. It is, of course, not to be expected that technical experts, however, skilled in their own research field, have the necessary in-depth training that applies to discoveries extending beyond what is currently taught in academic institutions. The specialists of the world of 'invention' are really those who are professionally skilled in patent matters, whose approach is not that of 'peer review' in a scientific sense but rather one which embraces, without bias, what an inventor claims to have created and then judges on novelty and merit with attention focused on the prospective practical implementation and the technological significance.
25.4.2005
Page 2 of 34
The purpose of these ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS is to bridge the gap between the disclosure of invention, the province of the patent specification, and a few misconceived but established scientific doctrines that might otherwise make it difficult to understand the new science involved. Without such a briefing, technical advisors called upon to comment on the commercial viability of a 'new science' invention, especially one that is at the 'drawing board' stage, could not undertake a meaningful assessment. No doubt, this report will be read by individuals who are enthusiastic on the 'free energy' front and are searching for new experimental ideas to take that interest forward. Those readers should, however, understand that the intention here is not to communicate project details aimed at the 'free energy' movement generally. The intention, very simply, is to provide the reader with enough technical and scientific educational insight so that he or she can grasp the significance of what is represented in the patent cover that will later be associated with this report. In short, this report is intended as a marketing aid preliminary to presenting invention rights for prospective exploitation by corporate or entrepreneurial interests. It follows therefore that this report should in no way be deemed to confer any implied right of use in connection with what is disclosed, as all possible proprietary rights are reserved, consistent with this report being made available on a non-confidential but restricted circulation basis. 'Free Energy': Defining the Field of Investigation The words 'free energy' used in the introduction need explanation. This is an expression which has come into use in an international communication network. It simply means a prospective source of clean energy that is in abundant supply and not subject to territorial or climatic limitations, but one that has yet to emerge on the industrial scene. In a sense one can imagine that engines running on 'free energy' would be classified as 'perpetual motion' machines, but here one needs to clarify terminology and concept. 'Perpetual motion' may be defined as that which, owing to a cosmic influence communicated via the action quantum named after Planck, results in a sustained energy activity in matter which arises from an equilibrium state as between matter and a 'field' medium in space. Thus, there is perpetual motion in us all. The human body comprises atoms in which electrons move ceaselessly with quantized motion. Even if we die and our bodies are cooled to absolute zero of temperature, to a temperature below the 2.7 K of cosmic space, that motion persists, because those electrons never stop moving. The atoms with their electron motion have perpetual life unless transmuted by the E = Mc2 rule into a pure energy form that then dissipates into space. There is, evenso, a regenerative process in Nature by which forms of matter can be created and the secret of all this activity lies in the understanding of: (a) the nature of gravitation (b) the nature of magnetism (c) the nature of the photon, and (d) the nature of the aether. The scientific establishment has not, as yet, provided any accepted explanation for any of these physical phenomena. For example, until there is an accepted and valid derivation of the measured quantity 137.0359, the 'over-unity' version of the fine-structure constant, which is the key to the photon action and the energy quantum already mentioned, those 'experts' cannot deny energy transfer from vacuum to matter via the quantum process. Any such denial would only amount to a declaration that obtaining energy from space to serve a useful end is 'contrary to experience', meaning no more than that the fruits of future invention implicit in this pursuit have not yet come to market. As to gravitation, all that has been offered by those who claim authority on that subject is that it arises from the distortion of space-time, which is another word for 'aether'. Yet, the aether is the
25.4.2005
Page 3 of 34
space medium that is alive with energy, and the relativistic philosophy avoids the vision of the aether as an energy source and gives us instead Einstein's four-dimensional space-time as something that is 'distorted' in a way that leaves us completely in the dark on the energy front. E = Mc2 is, by the way, merely a formula derivable from classical pre-Einstein electrodynamics and representing the fact that every individual electric charge comprising a body's mass contributes to the inertial property of that mass by resisting acceleration in just such a way as to preclude loss of its intrinsic electric energy by radiation. In short, every elementary component of the universe resists change of motion in an effort to conserve energy. Einstein did not understand the real nature of gravitation, meaning its essential electrodynamic connection, nor did he ever conquer the mystery of inertia. The question of primary concern in this Report centres on 'magnetism'. Here, even though you, the reader, might think that scientists understand magnetism, the sad truth is that the phenomenon of magnetic induction which was discovered by Michael Faraday, and which is at the heart of the whole of electrical power engineering, is not understood by the 'experts'. The simple question of how the energy we feed into a magnetised solenoid is stored by that process has no adequate answer, at least in the standard teaching curriculum of academic establishments. Yet the answer to this question is crucial to the research to be described in this Report. So, I begin by making a statement about the energy involved in magnetic induction and I challenge any scientist to refute what I say. When an electric current is supplied to a solenoid the energy stored by induction, which is a mutual action set up between between numerous electric charges in motion, is dissipated into the thermal background of the aether itself. However, the action of that current in the solenoid is to deploy the motion of some of the aether electricity that constitutes that thermal vacuum background in such a way that an opposing magnetic reaction is established inside that solenoid. When the current is switched off it is as if this magnetic system is then a transformer with that reacting vacuum field becoming, in effect, a primary winding and the solenoid itself becoming the secondary winding. Energy is then fed back to the solenoid drawing on the thermodynamic state of the aether, which is left in a cooler condition, until, by a process of thermal equilibrium, energy commensurate with that originally dispersed migrates back through the aether to restore the status quo. The reader should not think of this as a transformer action depending upon alternating current effects. It is an action that applies also with d.c and, of course, with electromagnets and permanent magnets, where the atomic electron activity that polarises the magnet is that of atomic solenoidal current effects. There is no question that this is a correct description of the phenomenon of induction. We see here an action by which the aether has the ability to transfer its energy to matter. Magnetism provides the means for tapping into the vast sea of energy that fills space. However, the 'temperature' of that aether is not something we can measure by a thermometer, though one can sense it indirectly by its spectral effect on the radiation background. The experimental work to be described has been founded on the author's insight into the physics of magnetic induction as outlined in his book MODERN AETHER SCIENCE (see particularly pp. 113124). If the reader prefers instead to be guided by orthodox textbook teaching, which is different, then a word of caution is appropriate. There are many excellent textbooks and they will tell you about the laws of Faraday and Lenz. Not all will be 'truthful' in the sense that they will tell you that scientists lack knowledge in this field. The book that stands out in my mind as a very readable text is that entitled 'THE NATURE OF PHYSICS' by Peter J. Brancazio (City University of New York); publisher Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc., New York. On page 328 one reads:
25.4.2005
Page 4 of 34
"At the present time there is no real understanding of why charges are set in motion by a changing magnetic field. Thus electromagnetic induction must also be regarded as an unexplained law of nature." The reader will see that a choice has to be made. On the one hand, there are the sterile teachings that accompany acceptance of Einstein's theory. These eradicate belief in the reality of an electrical energy-active medium in space that transports electromagnetic waves. On the other hand, we have the alternative of an aether that accommodates to our energy needs by storing inductive power in its abundant low temperature heat sink. If the reader seeks an independent way forward on the question of induction that reader could come to terms with the facts expressed, as recently as December 1993, in the Engineering Science and Education Journal issued by the Institution of Electrical Engineers. The cover of this journal shows (a), as the past, the statue of Michael Faraday in the IEE's headquarter building in London, (b), as the present, two students who face an uncertain energy future and (c), as that future, an illustration of a lightning discharge set alongside one showing a battery 'farm' of wind-power generators. The relevant article of reference is one on pp. 273-280 by John Carpenter entitled 'Understanding Electromagnetism'. Here are some quotes from Carpenter's article: "A great many electrical engineers, when challenged on such matters, confess to a considerable unease with their grasp of electromagnetic fundamentals." "One of the most familiar 'consequences' of a magnetic field is the property of inductance...What do we mean by 'inductance'? We define it by the voltage which is caused by a change in current, and 'explain' the voltage in terms of flux linkage, part of which represents the magnetisation (i.e. the electron spins). It is these spins, acting like the electromagnetic equivalent of little flywheels, which interact with the conduction charges in the wire, and increase inductance. That is, they increase the electromagnetic inertia of the conduction electrons. But, we account for the voltage by some rather mystical quantity, denoted B, in empty space, and this is nothing whatever to do with electron spins. We represent B by lines on a diagram, provided with arrow-heads, and argue that B is the 'cause' of inductance. The type of student who always makes a nuisance of himself (or herself) may ask 'what is meant by B?' The student can be told to shut up, but the teacher may have been given pause for thought. Electromagnetic theory might be characterised over the last 100 years, as a progressive retreat from the idea of the aether as some form of 'medium' needed to convey the electromagnetic interactions." Such, indeed, is the sorry plight of education in electrical science, bearing in mind that that 'aether' is the fountain from which flows all the energy that we see in our universe. Even though Carpenter discusses the question of inductance in such a critical way, he does, in developing his own thesis about the nature of inductance, avoid bringing to bear that full-bodied aether that is essential to resolving the problem. He too gives way by falling into line with that spirit of retreat from the aether concept. The Carpenter interpretation depends upon current 'interactions' as between currents in matter, disregarding current flow in the aether itself. This is at the very heart of the problem. Does induction energy, the magnetic energy we know is stored when current flows in a coil, reside in the inertial motion of the electrons which carry that current or is it 'stored' in the aether in the sense that it is held captive at the seat of the action? We are all familiar with storing money in a bank. That money we deposit is not kept in a box waiting for us to come back and withdraw the same money. Once deposited that money dissipates into a sea of action that is pooled and spent, just as energy dissipated as heat spreads itself through space. Banks rely on equilibrium which means a return on investment, an inflow balancing an outflow and
25.4.2005
Page 5 of 34
compensating for what is spent. We get our money back because the bank has kept a record which 'polarises' the bank's money 'field' in our favour. That record is something left in that bank, that is not the actual money we deposited, but which can be triggered to release money to us from the limited part of the money pool kept by that bank. Inductance is a property by which energy transactions occur in an aether, replicating, in effect, the way in which money transactions occur in a bank. Understanding how the aether 'record' registers an energy transaction is the challenging question and, if we can understand this, with our energy future in mind, we might unlock Nature's energy secret and then be seen to be, as they say, 'laughing all the way to the bank'! Whilst students, therefore, engage in the mysteries of understanding B and not then understanding how energy is stored by inductance, the task of harnessing inductance to provide an entry route for tapping energy from that aether is one warranting our attention in this Report. I must now assume that the reader is ready to accept that magnetic inductance may have some important energy secrets to disclose and now trust that we can move directly to the experimental evidence without the reader feeling that in talking about 'aether' I am leading that person along a blind alley.
'Over-Unity' Power Generation A brief word is necessary on the theme of 'over-unity'. Readers will have seen this expression used above in connection with the fine-structure constant. This is a fundamental dimensionless physical constant as used by atomic physicists. In that 'over-unity' context it refers to the version of in its reciprocal form 1/, a quantity that is slightly greater than 137. In dealing with atomic situations and spectral analysis, the 'below-unity' form for which is 0.007297 is more familiar to physicists. This digression does have a connection with aether energy, as the reader may see by referring to this author's contribution entitled 'The First Law of Thermodynamics', which has appeared at pp. 340342 in the November 1993 issue of the U.K. Institute of Physics Journal 'Physics Education' (See Appendix A to this Report). The expression 'over-unity' has come into general usage by researchers interested in 'free energy'. For a device to be said to operate 'over-unity' its power input (usually electrical) must be exceeded by the power output, whether the latter is electrical or mechanical or thermal. This reference to 'thermal' should not be confused with the 'heat pump', by thinking that conventional heat pumps operate with 'over-unity' performance. It may be that one joule of electrical energy can transfer 10 joules of room heat from a lower to a higher temperature, but that is not an 11 to 1 'overunity' performance since the true input then is 11 joules and the output is also 11 joules. The reverse Carnot efficiency factor of merit or 'coefficient of performance' applies to such a process. By 'over-unity' in this report what is meant is the output of more useful energy than is supplied as useful energy input. In this context, those 11 joules of heat output are not as 'useful' as that 1 joule of electrical input and so the heat pump is not an 'over-unity' device. If, however, we run a device or a machine and it produces an excess of electrical output or an excess of heat at a temperature so elevated in relation to input heat that the Carnot criteria are surpassed, then we have 'over-unity' performance. Our energy future is secured once we have the technology for this latter kind of operation. These Reports are being written because that technology is now in sight and there are, indeed, several alternative routes to that objective, all warranting our attention. There are versions of the motor developed by Robert G. Adams of New Zealand, which have already
25.4.2005
Page 6 of 34
been demonstrated in 'over-unity' operation, measured strictly in electrical input and electrical output terms. The Nexus magazine published in Australia has pioneered the news on the Adams machine and the Editorial in their January 1994 issue said that in 1993, since the Adams story had appeared: "Nexus has been contacted by hundreds and hundreds of people from all over the world, and, yes, quite a lot of people have now successfully duplicated the device based on the information we published. In other words, there are now quite a few small-scale free energy machines running successfully out there, in the process of being made into large-scale devices. If you have shares in oil companies - get ready to sell soon!" The Adams machine will be discussed briefly in a section of this Report and in much greater detail in a later Report in this series. However, at the request of Robert Adams, and in order to deal with a troublesome question that has emerged, I need to comment here on claims of 'over-unity efficiency'. It was said in one early text about the Adams motor that it had a 270% efficiency and 700% was mentioned in a recent magazine report. The question posed concerns proof of such claims by evidence not relying on calculated interpretation of current and voltage measurements. The crucial and usual question is whether the output from such a machine has been fed back as input so that the machine, once started, runs and delivers output power with no input, at least until some component or connection ruptures or otherwise fails. That would be a 'perpetual motion machine' demonstration. With such performance it is then absurd to discuss an efficiency measure because the efficiency becomes infinite. Therefore, the expression 'over-unity' has meaning as a classification rather than as a measure and the question is more related to the amount of 'feedback'. It is suggested, therefore, that 'over-unity with 20% feedback' could be one way of saying that 4 units of useful output are generated from one unit of internal feedback. Such a machine or device made available commercially should not be rated by its 'efficiency' but rather by its net power generating capacity, its power rating being its ability to deliver net power continuously. It is also of relevance here to report that, on present experimental indications, yet to be fully researched, the Adams machines are delivering power which fluctuates with time of day. It is as if whatever is providing that coupling with the aether energy source is dependent upon the orientation of the device in relation to a spin axis characteristic of that aether. This latter subject is rather special and it too will be covered by a later Report in this series. However, it is noted here that this 'discovery' was, in fact, anticipated by the author, based solely on aether theory, and became the subject of a preliminary patent filing lodged even before the news of the phenomenon was communicated by Robert Adams. This is an appropriate point at which to interject the statement that, whilst Robert Adams has become the focus of attention, and deservedly so, we owe it to NEXUS magazine for initiating the tidal wave of action that will soon deluge the electrical engineering community. The wave of action will bring with it news of inventions, many of which are already covered by granted patents, but lie unappreciated amongst the dust-gathering information records of our technological age. One very relevant example of this is the U.S. Patent No. 5,227,702 (Inventor: Peter M. Nahirney), dated July 13, 1993, and drawn to my attention by Toby Grotz, the President of the recently formed INSTITUTE FOR NEW ENERGY, the professional society which was created in Colorado in April 1993 when we had, amongst other developments, debated the Nexus article publishing the design details of the Adams motor. This Report will now deal with experimental results showing how magnetism provides an aether energy access route. In this, our attention turns away from 'free energy' motor developments, as such, and looks at steady-state devices. U.S. Patent No. 4,687,947 (Inventor: Melvin Cobb) is relevant to
25.4.2005
Page 7 of 34
the theme developed next and warrants the reader's attention after digesting what is now to be described.
The Power Converter An established technique used in d.c. power supplies involves using electronic switching to chop an input signal into pulses at an audio frequency and feeding those pulses through a ferrite-cored magnetic inductor coupling to transform the voltage before merging the output pulses into a smooth regulated d.c. output. This process is highly efficient and the power systems are compact in construction and offer high power rating in relation to bulk and weight. The question now addressed is that of exploiting such technology with a view to incorporating the secret that will allow us to tap aether energy so that we get more electrical power output than is supplied as input. The point to keep in mind is that the above-described technique will be assumed to be of a form which operates with a 'flyback' coupling in that it uses the inductance to store input energy in a time period separated from that in which the inductance releases energy to the output. Also, what is to be described experimentally is not based on the use of a ferrite core but rather on a laminated sheet steel core, inasmuch as it is only the principle of operation that needs experimental demonstration for the purpose of this Report and it so happens that a convenient non-ferrite core assembly kit was available. We are not therefore, in this Report, going to get into the details of product design and the related costing of materials and specification of a proposed product. Readers will appreciate that if we can gain some 'free energy' each time we drive a magnetic core through its magnetization cycle, the faster we can do that, the more energy we gain. The ferrite core permits higher frequency operation and, based on use in existing variable voltage regulated power supplies, there is good reason to expect that what is described below, and which works for laminated steel cores, will be eventually implemented in ferrite-cored systems as a preferred product form. The following disclosure is also more concerned with the structural form of the magnetic core and its function energy-wise rather than the detailed way in which magnetizing coils are wired into an electronic control circuit. There are many variants and design possibilities for the latter, and such design does not pose unusual problems, but the core design depends upon the secret of that energytapping function and that does involve us in some new physics. I also remark that there are many who have wondered about the effectiveness and indeed the purpose of using bifilar-wound coils, with currents in the respective portions of the winding that merely cancel each other electromagnetically. The word 'flyback' used above bears upon this question and I leave the reader to ponder on that as a puzzle that I shall answer in a subsequent report. To proceed, we need first a brief lesson in simple ferromagnetism as it applies to a magnetic core having an air gap.
Ferromagnetism Ferromagnetism is Nature's way of giving us something for nothing in energy terms. Build a solenoid which has a non-ferromagnetic core and measure the inductance energy which has to be supplied in a.c. current and a.c. voltage terms and then, with the same voltage, see what magnetizing current is needed if the core is replaced by one that is ferromagnetic, say soft iron. For the same
25.4.2005
Page 8 of 34
voltage, that magnetizing current is proportional to power in reactance terms and so to the energy stored at times of maximum current. With the ferromagnetic core present we need far less current to secure the same voltage. The reason for this is that the ferromagnetic core itself is making up the energy difference by virtue of the 'perpetual motion' of those atomic electrons in the iron that endow the core with its ferromagnetic state. Now ask how a power transformer works. We have two coils on an iron core. The object is to put energy into one coil and take energy from the other. By using the iron core we find that we can transfer energy between the two coils using a far smaller magnetizing current than would otherwise be needed. That current flowing in a copper coil means a loss owing to the resistivity of the copper and so, to reduce weight and cost, and assure efficient operation with minimal loss, one really must have a ferromagnetic core linking the two coils to assure minimal magnetizing current. Now, rather than being satisfied that we know how a power transformer works and so have little to learn from that technology, let us ask how that transformer works if the two coils are separated at a distance along the length of a core or are on different sides of a square core, as depicted in Fig. 1. We find that, somehow, that iron core has the ability to carry energy from A to B. Without the iron core very little of the energy supplied to A would be recoverable from B. Now, it is a fact connected with the nature of ferromagnetism that, if one could see inside the iron looking at microscopic sections, the iron would everywhere be seen to be fully magnetized to saturation. Inside each crystal there are what are termed 'magnetic domains' in which the magnetism is directed along one of the three mutually orthogonal crystal axes each of which is an 'easy axis of magnetization'. The intrinsic miniature solenoids that represent the magnetic state of such domains each carry the maximum equivalent current associated with the related atomic electron motion and the normal process of magnetizing the iron macroscopically is one of causing these solenoids to reverse direction.
Fig. 1 It needs very little externally applied magnetizing current to promote the reversal of magnetism in a magnetic domain. Essentially such current as is needed is used to overcome the back reaction effects of non-magnetic inclusions in the iron or of the thin boundary wall regions separating domains or any air gaps built into the core as a whole. These 180o reversals occur with very little work being done and, as the level of overall magnetization builds up owing to overall domain magnetism becoming predominantly in one general direction, so one approaches the stage where the magnetism exploits the possibility of a 90o transition between 'easy axes of magnetization'. This needs a stronger magnetizing influence. Thereafter, from about 70% of saturation onwards, any further increase in polarization has to involve a very demanding action where the domain 'solenoids' are literally forced to turn to come closer into line. However, in this process the externally applied current finds itself assisted by the mutual action of the domain solenoidal effects and this is now a stage where the underlying energy which feeds the
25.4.2005
Page 9 of 34
motion of those electrons is contributing very substantial amounts of energy to bring about that increased state of magnetism. Saturation occurs only when all the solenoidal effects intrinsic to the domains are forced into a common direction and each, like a spring under stress, has a will to revert to a position along one of the 'easy axes of magnetization', but is held in place only by that externally applied current. Now, when this is summed up, we see that, provided the level of magnetization in an iron core with no air gaps is moderate, there is very little external energy needed to control the magnetic flux which is present in the core. Therefore, a primary coil at A can assert its influence in transferring magnetic action to a secondary coil B without too much of its magnetizing force being used to overcome the back reaction of those non-ferromagnetic inclusions and domain boundary walls. It is better if the primary winding and secondary winding are wound around each other, meaning that A is at B or vice versa. However, 'better' in this sense means better from the viewpoint of avoiding the reaction that goes with harnessing the intrinsic power action of the core. In our 'free energy' pursuit that is not the 'better' course, since it means that we have deliberately avoided the source of that 'free energy'. It is only by making the inductive coupling process difficult so that the intrinsic ferromagnetism of the iron core has to work harder in its 'flyback' role that one can tap into its 'free energy' potential. To proceed further, we now need to ask how an air gap in a core interferes with the ability of a magnetic core to carry the magnetic flux. Air Gap Reaction Effects Suppose (Fig. 2) that a magnetic core has a quite large cross-section in relation to its loop length but a very small width of air gap in the vicinity of B, say 0.1% that of the core length. One would think that all this would mean, as a loss of 0.1% of the iron present, is that the magnetic flux set up by a given current excitation in a coil at A would be reduced by 0.1%.
Fig. 2 This is not the case. Indeed, by taking that 0.1% of the iron away, even for iron which is very poor in terms of its magnetic properties, meaning it does not have large crystals and does have impurity inclusions, it can easily be that the magnetic flux is halved in this situation. It seems obvious, on reflection, that this is not just a question of actions occurring in that iron core. If the magnetism developed by that iron, thanks to a current in coil A, sees nothing to resist it in that air gap, then it should have no difficulty traversing that air gap, especially as it is has still 99.9% of its original strength. Common sense tells one that the air gap is extremely active in its own right, as if an enormous current is flowing in an imaginary vacuum coil at B directed in opposition to the influence of the coil at A. The vacuum devoid of aether cannot, however, be something in which current can be said to flow, especially a d.c. current - or can it? The way in which to decide this is to replicate that flow of aether current at B by tests involving a
25.4.2005
Page 10 of 34
coil placed at B, very close to that air gap, and see what is involved in neutralizing the magnetic reaction effect in the gap. When this is done, the simple truth is that we discover that there is an asymmetry in the following sense. We establish a state with a given magnet flux traversing that air gap, regarding coil A as primary and see what current is needed in A to set up the flux with no current in identical coil B. Then with coil B as primary acting to set up the same magnetic flux across the air gap in the same direction we find what current is needed for this purpose. It is found that less current is needed in B than was originally needed in A. Now look at this from the viewpoint of inductance energy storage. To power a coil at A we need more inductance energy input than is needed by one at B to achieve in the air gap the same magnetic condition. What accounts for this discrepancy? The answer is that for both conditions there is actually a current flow in the aether at the air gap, which current is virtually equal and opposite to that in coil B. Therefore the aether reaction current and the current in coil B complement one another in terms of their role in setting up a store of inductive energy. It needs very little discrepancy between the two currents to stimulate the magnetic polarization in the continuity of the iron core and so, what is represented by this situation is a magnetic flux condition in the air gap with no leakage flux around that gap. Virtually all the energy supplied to coil B is stored in that air gap. With coil A excitation and no power on coil B, a greater input of energy is demanded by the inductance of the system, because the energy state represented by the air gap proper is supplemented by that of flux leakage, as depicted in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3 However, the question at issue here is how the energy gets from coil A to the gap, given that it needs very little action to influence, either create or suppress, the magnetic polarization in the iron. If all the action is by virtue of those 180o or 90o domain transitions any reaction field from the gap region would preclude a change in magnetic flux when coil A is energized. This poses no problem for the coil B excitation because there is nothing around the iron circuit path to resist a change in magnetic flux, but it is a major problem if the coil A excitation has to work against an air gap in a remote section of the core. The answer lies in the need to set up an internal magnetic field inside the body of the core between A and B and this means that there has to be at least some domain flux rotation, necessitated by the direct action of the coil A current in urging flux rotation by domains which do not have their host crystals with easy axes of magnetization orientated along the coil axis. Once this scenario develops we are entering the realm of 'free energy' and so it is of interest now to report an experiment which involves an accounting of an energy balance sheet. We shall see that we need to bring into account some energy from that mystery source we have called 'the aether'. Mystery Energy Source: The Energy Balance Sheet
25.4.2005
Page 11 of 34
I invite readers to perform the following simple laboratory experiment, one which I feel should be part of a teaching curriculum for anyone who aspires to understand electromagnetism and its energy implications. All one needs, in addition to a voltmeter or oscilloscope, an ammeter, and a variable voltage 50 Hz or 60 Hz power supply is a standard inexpensive transformer assembly kit, some cardboard and a little wire. A suitable 100 VA transformer kit is one available, as distributed in U.K., from RS Components U.K. (P.O. Box 99, Corby, Northants NN17 9RS). Stock Ref. No. 207-734. There will be a corresponding source of supply available from the local distributers in many other countries. The transformer has an E-shaped core and a bridging yoke as shown in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4 The experiment involves assembling the kit several times, using a different number of card layers to form an 'air gap' or rather a 'pole gap' of 10 different widths, ranging from 0 to 9 card thicknesses. I used card of 0.25 mm thickness. The object of the experiment is to compare the reluctance energy or inductance energy stored in the air gap at moments of maximum flux density with the integrated reactive volt-amp measure of energy input to the magnetizing winding over a quarter cycle period. Standard teaching requires that the input energy represented by that volt-amp-time measure is necessarily greater than the energy stored in that gap. The latter is a measure of the mechanical work potential attributable to the mutual attraction of the magnetic poles, as available if they were allowed to move to close the gap. The wire is used to wind a search coil or secondary on a part of the transformer core adjacent to the gap where it can provide a measure, given some flux leakage, of the actual magnetic flux traversing the pole gap. One can, as a physics exercise (see energy balance analysis below), calculate the pole gap energy in terms of the flux density, area and width of the gap. One can also calculate the reactance input energy for the quarter cycle over 1/200 second at 50 Hz or 1/240 second at 60 Hz and compare the two. That is straightforward physics, but the beauty of this experiment is that no such calculations are needed. For each of the several tests one measures the current supplied to the magnetizing coil, which is the standard primary coil supplied with the kit. The current capacity of the coil is the limiting factor on the flux density so one is obliged with this test apparatus to operate well below the knee of the B-H curve. This current is adjusted by the variable a.c. voltage supply so that the same voltage is induced in the search coil for each test. This means that the gap flux density, and so the force across the gap,
25.4.2005
Page 12 of 34
is the same for each test. Therefore we have two variables. One is the input current and the other is the number of card thicknesses defining gap width. We plot a graph of current against gap width (Fig. 5) using the data in Table I. TABLE I cards 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 gap mm. 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 amps 0.038 0.162 0.221 0.279 0.338 0.382 0.421 0.472 0.516 0.538
Fig. 5 If we input more energy than is needed to set up the mechanical potential energy of the gap then the plot of current versus that number of card thicknesses will show an upward curve, inasmuch as there will be progressively increasing flux leakage with increasing gap width. However, assuming (a) energy conservation, (b) no loss and (c) no flux leakage, by our standard physics principles, we expect no discrepancy and that means a straight line relationship. If there is flux leakage, increasing with gap width, but still no energy loss, the inductance energy stored by that leakage will demand more current as input and so the current curve observed will climb away from the ideal linear relationship. That is, unless the 'free energy' source is so overwhelming in its power that it can pull that curve down below the linear norm. What one finds, in fact, is that, even in spite of leakage effects, the relationship between current and the gap width curves down well below that linear relationship. This means that, with increasing gap width, the reluctance energy in the gap becomes progressively greater, indeed far greater, than the energy supplied as input. This evidences a clear and direct breach of the law of energy conservation unless we can embrace the concept that the ferromagnetic core has a way of borrowing energy from a source not contemplated by our textbook teachings. To determine the energy gain and so a measure of the 'free energy' potential, one does need to work
25.4.2005
Page 13 of 34
out the reluctance energy input. We can then draw the straight line expressing the theoretical reluctance energy as a function of current versus card thickness in Fig. 5. I calibrated with 3 card thicknesses and found that a primary voltage 76.9 V gave a search coil induced voltage which had an arbitrary amplitude suited to a chosen grid range on the oscilloscope screen. The above current readings were plotted by using the same test amplitude to set the input voltage for all card thicknesses. The voltage signal sensed in the series-connected coils B, each of 20 turns, shown in Fig. 4, had a peak value of 1.5 V for this test. Note that the effect of an air gap is to cause the inductance of the primary winding A to become linear in the sense that the non-linear distortion by signal harmonic components often found when the hysteresis of the iron governs the core response is virtually obscured by the dominant air gap reluctance effect. This means that we can reasonably assume a sinusoidal variation of voltage and current. It is also feasible to ignore the phase shift which occurs owing to resistance in the primary winding, at least for the immediate purpose of proving that there is a very substantial 'free energy' anomaly. This can be justified by keeping track of the proportionality of the relationship between primary and search coil turns ratio in relation to voltage induced and voltage supplied. In any event the ohmic resistance effects can be allowed for in the analysis since primary current is measured and the primary resistance is known (17 ohms). Such considerations do not affect the substance of the analysis presented below. The inductance energy for a current I is expressed as LI2/2 which, becomes LI2 if I is the root mean square current value and the inductance energy is that at moments of peak current strength. We therefore shall calculate the energy in the air gap for the flux density Bmax corresponding to a sinusoidal a.c. current I. Note that the root mean square value of the voltage V applied to the magnetizing winding is represented by LI so that the inductance energy supplied to the gap at peak current times is VI/, where is the angular velocity corresponding to the power frequency. In the reported test the central core area or total cross-section sensed by the combined search coils was 8 sq. cm. but, owing to the flux return, the total pole face is 16 sq. cm. Each 20-turn search coil embraced a 4 sq. cm. cross-section. The magnetizing winding specification was rated at 240 volts and 3.7 winding turns per volt. The magnetic flux density needed to produce the 76.9 V is, therefore, about one third of the normal operational flux density of the transformer. At 50Hz this corresponds to a maximum flux density of 0.4875 tesla or webers per square meter. However, this is the flux density in the part of the core at the primary winding location. With that three card thickness air gap of some 0.75 mm there is a substantial leakage of flux not reaching the pole faces and so traversing the gaps. We know this because the central core flux density at its maximum amplitude is that giving a 1.5 V signal in 40 turns embracing half the 8 sq. cm. area of that central core. This, at 50 Hz, is 0.2985 tesla. Bear in mind that this 0.2985 tesla is the flux density that governs the energy stored between the pole faces across a 16 sq. cm. or 0.0016 sq. m. cross-section and it applies over the full current range shown in Fig. 5. Note further that this flux will be non-uniform across the area of the pole faces, which means that the stress energy we calculate as the mechanical potential of that gap will underestimate substantially the true energy potential should we rely on that 0.2985 tesla as being uniform. Our energy balance sheet must now take as, energy input, the quantity VI/ and decide how much of this inductance energy input is stored in the leakage flux zone, where the flux traverses long paths through air, to bridge the legs of the E-shaped core, and how much of this inductance energy goes directly into the small-width gap between the pole faces where it can be 'seen' as part of that 0.2985
25.4.2005
Page 14 of 34
tesla field. Our calculation will be based on unit card thickness of 0.25 mm. The card has a permeability which is virtually that of the vacuum, namely 4x10-7 H/m. B is 0.2985 tesla. The energy density is B2/2 and so the total energy the gap between the pole faces is then 0.0016x0.00025 times this energy density. This works out at 0.01418 J on a per card thickness basis. If there are N card layers in the test giving the data in Fig. 5 so we have stored inductance energy in the pole gaps given by (0.01418)N joules at instants when the flux density peaks at the level set by the tests. In fact, the energy stored and available for doing mechanical work is much greater than this, because the flux density has to be non-uniform and the root mean square value needed for energy conversion is so much larger than the mean value. Now, what energy have we supplied? The energy supplied is VI/, where I is the primary current and V is that portion of the primary back EMF which can be said to relate to magnetic flux linking the search coil. The rms primary voltage that corresponds to that 1.5 V maximum is 76.9 V and, for 5O Hz, as the angular frequency of the power supply, is 314 rad/s. There is analogy between EMF in a resistive circuit and the effects of primary current in producing magnetomotive force (MMF) in a magnetic circuit. The magnetic flux is analogous to electric current and what we term 'reluctance' substitutes for resistance. By this analogy, our inductance energy input is apportioned to the pole gap region, as if the supply current develops the magnetomotive force which sees a reluctance component that allows a peak flux density of 0.2985 tesla, whereas 76.9 V corresponds to 0.4875 tesla. Therefore, 47.1 V is a measure of V that applies to the primary current in determining reluctance energy fed to the pole gaps. This energy quantity is (47.1)I/ or, for 50 Hz and as 2(50), (0.1499)I J. This applies to a test with three card thicknesses and the energy then known to exist in the pole gaps is (0.01418)N J, where N is 3. Therefore, the corresponding value of I for a perfectly balanced energy account, is I = 3 (0.01418)/(0.1499) A or 284 mA. Table I shows that the current measured was, in fact, 279 mA. Accordingly, in choosing the pole gap width of 0.75 mm or three card layers, we have fortuitously demonstrated a calculation that applies at the departure threshold where the energy does, in fact, balance. The point now of relevance is that, in progressing in the Fig. 5 tests to values of N above 3, the pole gap energy component increases linearly, whereas the input energy reduces in relative terms. With N of 9 the primary input has increased to 100 V and the primary current is 538 mA, but the component supplying the pole gap region is still that 47.1 V. In effect, therefore, the input power feeding the pole gaps has doubled but the energy stored in the gap has trebled. The downward curve in Fig. 5 tells us that, if we cause the magnetic circuit to require more MMF, so the ferromagnetism of the core becomes subject more and more to domain flux rotation and then it sheds energy and makes it available as a form of inductance energy we can tap mechanically by closing the pole gaps. We do, therefore, have here, in this experiment, the means for probing the 'free energy' resource afforded by ferromagnetism. This account, under the title 'Mystery Energy Source', was offered for publication to "Physics Education". It ended with the following quoted text:
25.4.2005
Page 15 of 34
"I therefore see this experiment as a standard experiment which will be used to show future generations that the ferromagnet is a catalyst which gives us access to a new and plentiful source of energy tapping into the vacuum energy source that determines the Planck action quantum. However, that is too taxing a concept for physics teachers to absorb in view of its startling technological implications, so I will end by simply challenging readers to do this experiment and to try to reconcile what they find with what is currently taught about energy conservation principles. I add that, for those who lack the pioneering spirit and prefer to rely on the authoritative work of others, it is appropriate to refer to Fig. 113 at p. 173 in the 'Principles of Electromagnetism', 3rd Edition, Oxford, Clarendon Press 1959 by Cambridge Professor E.B. Moullin. Such an experiment is there reported and for a 7mm gap in a rectangular core 4 times larger in linear scale than the one I used, and so corresponding to my 7 card thicknesses, the data presented show that the reluctance gap energy is then twice that supplied as inductance energy. However, Moullin kept the applied voltage constant and did not use a separate search coil. Professor Moullin was not averse to the 'aether' concept but, in discussing leakage flux effects, he missed the full significance of his experiment. Only a discerning reader, having reason to suspect the intruding hand of something akin to the Maxwell Demon, would have cause to give special weight to Moullin's statement: "We have seen reasons for supposing the leakage flux does not change very much with gap width". I only became such a 'discerning reader' after nearly 30 years possession of this book, when I heard of 'crank' claims that certain forms of homemade switched reluctance motor, which, when the magnetization was switched on only for a period before pole closure, could deliver more power output than is absorbed as power input. It was no easy task to turn one's formal education around. I therefore urge readers to pay attention and repeat the experiment I describe. My earlier communications on 'The Law of Perpetual Motion' and 'The First Law of Thermodynamics' were not based on ignorance or philosophy but were intended to pave the way forward to something of major importance now developing on the alternative energy scene. This 'energy from magnetism' theme, as it evolves into technology, need not take those who teach physics by surprise, especially when so simple an experiment can put one's physics education back on track." ___________ Although my comments on the possibility of 'Perpetual Motion' and energy conservation as needing an aether to avoid breach of 'The First Law of Thermodynamics' were accepted and published in the July and November issues of Physics Education, my 'Letter to the Editor' entitled 'Mystery Energy Source' was rejected by the 'peer review' process. The reasons given in the referee report may interest the reader: "Aspden presents his results as evidence of a fundamental flaw in the accepted theories of physical phenomena. These have proved so widely and exactly verifiable that something more than a few simple tests is needed to shake one's faith. It is necessary to show that no reasonable theory will account for the observations, and nothing like enough has been done to justify his ambitious conclusions. One needs careful measurements of current and voltage, observations of phase angles, as well as such simple things as remove the yoke altogether, or at least increase the number of cards
25.4.2005
Page 16 of 34
until the limiting behaviour is clear. Until such tests have been made it would be mischievous to publish his letter." The implication of this is that I must be wrong and that my measurements are subject to question. I am told that I must show that no reasonable theory will account for the observations, even though I quoted the Oxford, Clarendon Press treatise of Professor Moullin and that text shows that the nearest one can come to explanation by accepted theory is not satisfactory. Moullin did extend his tests to removing the yoke! My answer, therefore, as a physicist, is that I have made my contribution to the world of learning and have not been heeded and so, my task now is to concentrate as an engineer and develop the technology of this 'free energy' opportunity, leaving the physicist to the comfort of an erroneous and stagnant, but 'acceptable' world. I believe that the 'free energy' experiment I have described above will eventually become a standard experiment which will be used to show future generations that the ferromagnet is a catalyst which gives us access to a new and plentiful source of energy by tapping into the vacuum energy source that determines the Planck action quantum. Magnetic Leakage Flux and the Adams Motor It is not intended that this Report should provide any details about the design of the Adams motor, but some comments are necessary. Firstly, it was said in connection with the transformer experiment already described that, to get ferromagnetism to supply that 'free energy', we had to weaken the coupling between the primary winding and the part of the core in the vicinity of the pole gap. Secondly, it was said that our experiment was limited in the flux density that could be generated across the pole gap, because the 100 VA transformer kit only allowed primary magnetizing currents that could sustain 0.3 tesla and this meant operation well down on the B-H curve, where the 'free energy' was not forthcoming in great measure. Both of these factors are crucial to the successful design of an Adams motor. The latter problem is overcome by using permanent magnets to replace the action of the primary winding and the former feature is built into the Adams prototype machines by an open core soft iron stator design, with control windings mounted on the stator pole members near the pole gap. The motor operates with 'over-unity' performance, showing that the 'mystery energy source' is contributing to the pole gap energy and much of that energy is then used to provide output power by being prevented from reentry to the ferromagnetism of the permanent magnets. The underlying concept is to operate the motor in a way which transfers intrinsic ferromagnetic power to the gap between the pole faces, where it is stored by inductance and held for 'flyback' return when output coils are switched into circuit after pole closure, but in advance of pole separation. The pole gap and leakage flux around that gap are key to the Adams motor operation and it is therefore appropriate to comment on that remark by Professor Moullin: "We have seen reasons for supposing the leakage flux does not change very much with gap width". A small gap in a magnetic circuit can have an enormous effect on reducing the magnetic flux in that circuit. It should, by accepted theory, not produce any significant amount of flux leakage, in the sense that flux escapes from the circuit. Yet, our experiments suggest otherwise, depending upon the core configuration used.
25.4.2005
Page 17 of 34
Consider a simple small-width gap in an elongated section of a ferromagnetic core (Fig. 6). Tha gap adds an enormous capacity for storing inductance energy using a winding on that core and yet the inductance is decreased, not increased. The ferromagnet sets a limit on flux density but the gap allows the core to accept a much greater magnetizing current at that limit of flux density. The LI2/2 energy is related to a flux density proportional to LI and so energy capacity increases linearly with current I, whereas, if L decreases, the energy can increase for the same LI value.
Fig. 6 The energy stored in that gap is represented by a very powerful reacting current flow in the aether in the gap. This current is powered by the aether energy sea. It is a kind of diamagnetic thermodynamic reaction state polarised by the presence of the primary magnetization of the main iron core. This is not a flux leakage phenomenon but one by which the composite magnetic flux, that from the main core and the circulating flux induced locally around the aether current reaction, is effective in appearing as a diversionary agency. The main core flux is partially diverted so as to jump through air external to the main core path whilst the remainder crosses directly between the pole faces. Now, of course, this reacting aether current flow is what serves in the Adams motor as the means contributing to the weakening of the direct attractive pull between the two core sections, whilst at the same time augmenting the 'flyback' action and serving to deliver energy should the output be taken off electrically rather than mechanically. The point made here is that Professor Moullin had drawn attention to the curious fact that a small air gap in a ferromagnetic ring core could drastically affect the flux traversing the gap and could cause significant flux leakage around that air gap, but yet by the standard principles of electromagnetism that he knew so well, that should not be. The solution to his problem was unknown to him when he wrote the referenced book in its third edition in 1954, but it was discovered by this author shortly after graduating Ph.D. in that very year for research on ferromagnetic reaction currents, research conducted in Professor Moullin's laboratories. There is what the author terms a 'half-field' reaction effect set up inside metal or in air gaps or in vacuo when magnetic fields are present. This is the way the aether reacts at the equilibrium interface between aether and matter in the energy exchange that we are here discussing. Physics that does not countenance the 'aether' is physics that has turned its back on the sea of energy in that aether. An electrical engineer of the stature of Professor Moullin had to deal in unsolved mysteries in energy technology because his professorial associates disciplined in physics and mathematics had created a climate of opinion that would not allow aether science to develop. It was, of course, such frustration that caused this author to write and publish "MODERN AETHER SCIENCE" in 1972. And it is now, following decades of frustration, that technology is ready to take us forward on the track of ferromagnetism to a world which affords access to that energy in the aether. At this stage, and to underline the importance of the 'half-field' reaction theme, the author could even go further back in years and draw attention to his first printed publication that discloses the way in which the vacuum reacts to store a magnetic field. Chapter 9 of 'THE THEORY OF GRAVITATION' dated 22 November 1959 discusses the gyromagnetic ratio of the aether itself and explains the anomalous factor 2 found in gyromagnetic phenomena. The reaction energy of the magnetic field in vacuo is the thermal kinetic energy stored by the aether.
25.4.2005
Page 18 of 34
Some few copies of that printed text are still in the author's possession and are available to those who wish to study the history of these aether developments. This is also mentioned here because, as many readers may know, an initiative launching a 'free energy' company seated in Rapperswil in the vicinity of Zurich in Switzerland in 1993 and offering shares to the public has been based on the aether of a deceased researcher named Oliver Crane. This venture Raum-Quanten-Motoren AG which plans to produce 'free energy' generators in the very near future is associated with the publication of a magazine MAGNETIK which declares itself concerned with electromagnetism and gravitation. In the January 1994 issue there was a 'Focus' (Brennpunkt) editorial entitled: 'Erdmagnetfeld ist Ein Gyromagnetischen Effekt' and mention of Barnett's research and the linking connections with Monstein's experiments and Oliver Crane's 'quantum-space' motor developments. The aether connection between the gyromagnetic ratio and the Earth's magnetic field, and the intermediating quantum-of-action in space were the starting points for this author's theory, as can be seen from the following photocopy of the 'Contents' page of that 1959 'THE THEORY OF GRAVITATION':
THE ABOVE IS THE TABLE OF CONTENTS OF H. ASPDEN'S 1959 BOOK, 'THE THEORY OF GRAVITATION' (48pp BOOKLET) For readers who wish to see a more up-to-date disclosure of the 'half-field' gyromagnetic reaction effect, a mathematical analysis analogous to that Chapter 9 in the 1959 work, showing the way the aether vacuum reaction is translated into a reaction inside a metal, has appeared in a very recent patent specification. APPENDIX B at the end of this report reproduces the mathematical appendix which was at pp. 2528 of the author's U.K. Patent Specification No. 2,267,995 published on December 22, 1993. That invention is entitled 'Thermoelectric Heat Transfer Apparatus' and it concerns a development relating to the thermoelectric topic below. Breakthrough on a Thermoelectric Route to 'Free Energy' This Report is written following publication of an article launching the author's entry into 'free energy' experimentation. In the work "Three Experiments on Free Energy" the author announced that more details would follow in this first ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT. I must honour this commitment. Having dealt with the first of those experiments, we will now address the second, even though it departs from dependence on aether technology and there is so much yet to disclose on the developments of solid-state magnetic 'free energy' devices on that aether front. The latter will feature in further ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS which will begin to issue in the near future.
25.4.2005
Page 19 of 34
The author has been involved in developing a new technology by which heat and electrical forms of energy are mutually convertible by solid-state methods operating with extremely high efficiency. It has been realised for some time since the first prototype was demonstrated that there had to be some new physical principles at work in this technology, or at least a very special application of existing physical principles that had come about fortuitously and had not been fully understood. The 'second' experiment which I will now discuss is one performed expressly with the object of a diagnostic testing of a possible principle concerning the physics of that thermoelectric device. In the event it has revealed a regenerative energy process which, when developed and implemented in one of the forms originally contemplated in the granted patents, promises to be one we can classify as 'free energy' and 'over-unity' operation. Ferromagnetism provides the catalyst for tapping thermodynamic activity in the vacuum medium and generating useful electrical output from the heat input. In contrast, where we draw heat from a material source, a magnetic field, which need not be enhanced by ferromagnetism, can serve as the catalyst by which that heat is converted into useful electrical power. The well-known power generating technology involving this latter action is that of magnetohydrodynamics, where a hot ionised gas flows along a channel (x axis) a magnetic d.c. field acts transversely (y axis) and an electric potential supplying current is set up in the mutually orthogonal direction (z axis). The magnetic field deflects the ions one way or the other in the z axis according to electric charge polarity. The heat, as the kinetic energy of the ion motion, is thereby diverted to produce a voltage which supplies current output. A solid-state implementation of this occurs in a steel lamination to set up a potential between its opposite surfaces (z axis), provided there is a temperature differential in the plane of the lamination (x axis) and the lamination is magnetized in the other planar direction (y axis). The electrons carry heat and in so doing, being ions in motion in a transverse magnetic field, that intrinsic to the internal ferromagnetic state of the steel, they are deflected to set up that voltage potential between the opposite surfaces of the lamination. When current of an externally-connected circuit is allowed to flow in the z direction, the lamination cools as the EMF so generated delivers power. The advantage of using the steel lamination or nickel, as in the main prototype experiments, is that the strong intrinsic magnetic polarization of the domains in the metal avoids the need to provide externally-powered magnetizing windings. Thus one witnesses a very efficient technique of refrigeration using a solid-state technology, provided, that is, that one can (a) assure that heat flow in the metal and (b) a transverse current flow that does not provide for a concomitant loss of heat in that transverse direction. As part of the research effort involved in this thermoelectric project, the author has experimented with a magnetic core comprising bimetallic laminations composed of steel and nickel, meaning steel film plated with a layer of nickel on one surface. The principle of the experiment is to induce magnetization loss in the laminations which produces heat. The heat is conducted away by flow confined within the laminations. A transverse current flow exists near both edges of each lamination, being that of the circulating eddy-currents associated with the induction. That z-axis flow at the edges, plus the y-axis effect of the intrinsic domain magnetism on the x-axis heat flow carried by electrons, combine to offer flow paths through domains which serve to set up a forward EMF augmenting that current flow. In effect, one can hope to set up a negative resistance which allows the device to become regenerative as heat input produces electrical power, which, in turn, unless we can tap into it and take some away, will dissipate as ohmic heating in the central portions of the laminations.
25.4.2005
Page 20 of 34
The question addressed by this experiment is whether this scenario can be demonstrated experimentally as a basis for onward development. Note that what is being considered is a process for converting heat into electricity with no Carnot limitation, that is, we are contemplating a heat to electricity conversion that potentially is 100% effective. It would operate as an 'over-unity' device because waste heat at ambient temperature could be converted into useful electricity to result in overall cooling. The breakthrough resides in the fact that the experiment does show the regenerative action. Where the thermoelectric EMF plays a role we are not here dealing in energy stored by inductance, but rather with energy loss or energy gain by resistive effects causing heat dissipation or negative resistance effects causing heat energy recovery. Imagine then an electrical transformer core wound with a primary winding and a secondary winding used only to sense induction and consider the eddy-currents induced in the core laminations. It is as if the laminations themselves form the effective secondary winding. A 50 Hz or 60 Hz a.c. current is fed through a resistor connected in series with the magnetizing winding (Fig. 7). The resistor feeds the X plates of an oscilloscope with a signal proportional to its potential drop, giving an oscilloscope trace measure of H. The secondary winding is connected as shown with the Y plates receiving a signal from a 2 F capacitor in series with the 100,000 ohm resistor. This provides a time integral of the time rate of change of the magnetic core flux density B and so the oscilloscope indicates also the B measure.
Fig. 7 For normal transformer operation this circuit will provide a normal representation of the B-H hysteresis loop, which develops into an ellipse as the eddy-currents increase (Fig. 8). However, suppose that there is something special about the laminations by which the resistance of the eddycurrent path becomes predominantly negative in one section owing to heat being converted into an EMF acting in a forward sense around that eddy-current path.
Fig. 8 In this case, provided that action is strong enough, the effective secondary winding provided by that eddy-current path can, conceivably, take over the action and become the primary power input source, energized by input heat. To feed power to the circuit including the resistor used to measure H, the induced EMF would need to derive from a B flux varying in antiphase with H. Accordingly, the B-H
25.4.2005
Page 21 of 34
loop would convert to one of the form shown in Fig. 9.
Fig. 9 It follows, therefore, that the regenerative heat-to-electricity conversion potential of the device under test is easily inspected, simply by examining the B-H loop as the current in the magnetizing winding is progressively increased. Now this is exactly what was found to happen in preliminary tests on a transformer assembled with its main limbs comprising steel laminations plated with nickel. This means that there was here sight of a new technology by which bimetallic ferromagnetic laminations can serve to convert heat into electrical power. Before describing what was observed, by adopting the same text as was presented in my article 'Three Experiments on Free Energy', I have to explain that, upon rebuilding the experiment using a more powerful current source aimed at driving the circuit to a higher power level, the staged trigger action of the flip between the Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 B-H loop forms did not occur. Instead, the action was as if there was an enormous activity confined to the Fig. 9 state, characterized by a very wide elliptical form of loop and, on analysis, showing that the power energy action per cycle was extremely high in relation to what could otherwise represent magnetization loss. Note that with the earlier situation and the loop change from Fig. 8 to Fig. 9 as current excitation increased, one knew that there was regeneration. I now suspect that the test core, which originally exhibited bistable operation, has become conditioned by internal thermal activation, that may have resulted from coupling a capacitor to form a resonant load circuit, so as (this being speculation!) to become locked in its state which precludes Fig. 9 operation. In my urgency to complete this Report before reworking the apparatus with new laminations, I shall leave this particular issue open for clarification in my next Report on this subject. I am bearing in mind that the power of the B-H loop and phase angle measurements show really enormous magnetization loss per cycle if the device is not acting regeneratively. There are certain other fascinating aspects linking with hitherto unexplained experimental phenomena which will be reported in due course, and which give good reason to interpret the action as regenerative. Special test rigs have now to be built to prove this beyond doubt by extracting that power as output, notwithstanding confinement to the Fig. 8 state, and here we have the leading evidence from the basic experiments on the prototype devices which used films of bimetallic coated polymer. They demonstrated regeneration of electricity from heat convincingly by showing an electric motor running from the thermal effects of ice melting in a room temperature environment. The experiment now under discussion is part of a research programme aimed at improving and simplifying that technology whilst aiming to convert to power delivery accompanied by energy-balancing refrigeration action via a magnetic rather than a capacitative circuit coupling. ______________ The following text comprises paraphrased sections quoted from 'Three Experiments on Free Energy: "At the mountain retreat where we had a private brainstorming session involving many of the speakers, I mentioned the thermoelectric project in which I was involved and
25.4.2005
Page 22 of 34
showed a video demonstrating the quite remarkable speed at which ice can form with very little electric power input and how electricity is regenerated with high efficiency drawing on the energy of melting ice. That Colorado meeting was a landmark event in the history of new energy developments as it marks the beginning of an escalation which will lead to a bonanza on the energy front. In the intervening period, since we met in Colorado in April, I attended, in August, the 28th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference in Atlanta, Georgia. I presented an update on the thermoelectric project, emphasizing its mode of operation as a very powerful solid-state technique of refrigeration avoiding CFC pollution. That Atlanta conference lacked the excitement of the Denver event, but it has opened doors that can help in onward progress. From a personal viewpoint I felt at a disadvantage in that I have, for the past five and more years, been following the new energy movement from a theoretical standpoint. The 'jewel in the crown' that inspired me from a patent and business motivation viewpoint was my interest as co-inventor in the thermoelectric technology that my associate Scott Strachan was working on in Scotland. His work has been funded and my hope has been to see that venture become the revenue earner that could take the other energy research forward in a business sense. However, funded only by my pension income and savings, as we older 'free energy' enthusiasts usually are, I did find myself at the meeting in Atlanta, with no update technical input to report from Scott Strachan, and wondering why I was there with no recent personal hands-on experimental facts at my disposal. Indeed, in talking to Patrick Bailey at that Atlanta meeting, I vowed not to attend another such conference unless I could report on my own experimental work. So, having exercised my professional skills and established a patent position on several energy inventions that I was unable to demonstrate as working devices built by myself, I set to last month and began my experimental program with a very limited funding resource. I say this because I feel that some of your readers will wish to repeat the experiments I report below and I simply wish to stress that very little outlay is involved. My object is to demonstrate the scientific basis and technical feasibility of three 'free energy' projects. I direct my comments at those who profess to pass on knowledge to future generations. I am not here going to explain how what is described can be implemented in a practical machine. That will follow later when I progress to that stage. I know what I say has a practical end product because my sole objective is to bridge a knowledge gap to cover the true science lying in that zone between orthodox doctrinaire belief and the working 'free energy' machine. The target objective for the first of my three basic experiments is: The curious fact that our thermoelectric refrigeration device is built with an inherent functional symmetry and yet it always cools on its exposed test heat sink surface, it being noted that the electrical operating unit is mounted on the same panel that constitutes the second heat sink surface. The latter gets hot as the former cools, but, unless Scott Strachan builds a version that separates the electrical operating unit from the second heat sink we shall have to await the clear experimental evidence that, in truth, both surfaces are cooling as the device delivers electrical power! The idea that one can build a power transformer which draws in heat and so cools a
25.4.2005
Page 23 of 34
housing in which it is enclosed and at the same time converts that rejected heat into electricity fed along wires leading from that housing is one that seems beyond belief. It defies the second law of thermodynamics, but that should not deter a pioneer who has in his possession the device mentioned above. The object of the experiment is to test a suspicion that current circulation within a bimetallic lamination can, under certain circumstances, result in cooling for current flow across the thickness of the lamination. The experiment acknowledges that such cooling would produce an EMF and put electrical power into increasing the current flow in the plane of the lamination, unless deflected from the lamination, transverse to its width. This means extra heating and anomalous loss augmenting the eddy-current loss, but such an anomaly is direct evidence of that underlying cooling and electrical generation. The prototype devices all used thin film bimetallic layers of aluminium and nickel and involved that transverse 'deflection'. The 'circumstances' stated are that the lamination includes a ferromagnetic layer of thickness less than the 100 micron dimension, the size of a magnetic domain formed within the larger crystals of the material. In the subject experiment, there was no transverse deflection but the other condition was met. Commercially available steel foil (known in the trade as 'shim steel') of 2 thousandths of an inch in thickness was obtained and an electroplating firm was asked to coat one face with nickel using an electroless plating process. The nickel coating was 0.7 thousandths of an inch in thickness. It was found that this could be cut into small rectangles for assembly in a 100 VA transformer core, supplied in kit form (eg. R.S. Components in U.K.). Thin card placed between the laminations was used to insulate them from each other. The arrangement was as shown in Fig. 10, with legs A and B being formed by the bimetallic pieces. Primary and secondary windings, respectively series-connected in pairs, were formed on each of the legs A and B. The test involved observing on an oscilloscope the changing shape of the B-H magnetization loop as primary current input increased. To present the B-H loop on an oscilloscope screen the secondary winding was connected across a 100k resistor in series with a 2 F capacitor and the Y input to the oscilloscope was taken across the capacitor terminals. The H input was provided by incorporating a series resistor in the primary feed circuit and taking the X input from the potential drop across that resistor. What I was intending by this experiment was to estimate the eddy-current loss resulting from the bimetallic lamination feature. Having done Ph.D. research studying anomalous eddy-current losses experimentally I was particularly curious as I had never heard of anyone ever before testing a transformer built using bimetallic Fe:Ni laminations. Moreover I knew that I was using laminations that were much thinner, though more conductive, than is customary in transformers. Added to this, I knew from my Ph.D. research days, during which I measured the loss factors in different elemental sectors of the B-H loop, that there was a particularly high and inexplicable loss in a part of the loop where it was least to be expected.
25.4.2005
Page 24 of 34
Fig. 10 In the event, what I found was astounding in the light of my experience. I did not have to do any calculations. With such thin laminations magnetized well below saturation at mains power frequency, the B-H picture on the screen at low current was a straight line angled to represent the magnetic permeability. The fact that it was a line meant that there was negligible loss, which is what I expected until a certain threshold was reached. My reasoning was that the transformer action would introduce heat into the core and that heat would be conducted away. I had planned to arrange for the heat to flow one way so as to set up a temperature difference across the laminations and then my presumption was that a d.c. current would circulate thermo-electrically and affect the form of the loop. Indeed, a d.c. bias would displace the position of the loop on the screen both in the X and Y directions. Note that a B-H loop with little eddy-current has a rather special shape representing hysteresis effects. An over-dominant eddy-current effect makes the loop elliptical and the width of the loop, in tending to fill more and more of a bounding geometrical parallelogram form, is a measure of the loss portion of the reactive volt-amp input. Remember that magnetic energy is stored as inductance energy and, in oscillating, this energy sheds the loss which is represented by that loop. Now, what happened was astounding because, upon bringing the current input up to near mid-range, the B-H loop became very wide and quite elliptical. Furthermore, as expected, it shifted laterally by a small but very apparent amount (about 15%). However, the ultimate surprise was that, as the current input increased, the loop began to topple and turn clockwise until, with a greater current, it actually went over so far as to lie in the 'top-left-to-bottom-right' sector of the oscilloscope screen, whereas it began at low current in the conventional 'bottom-left-to-top-right' orientation. This means that the transformer core having the bimetallic laminations has either become a capacitor, which it is not, or the phase governing the power and magnetomotive force reaction has inverted through 180o. This is an obvious indication that the core wants to act as a generator by which heat sustains a current producing its magnetization and, instead of demanding input current to set up the reaction to the changing magnetic flux, it produces current in a forward direction augmenting that magnetic condition. In the experiment, of course, all that extra current drawn from heat goes into enhancing the eddy-current losses enormously. This is why the loop gets so wide. So, here was confirmation that there is a process involved in the magnetization of bimetallic laminations that enhances energy transfer productive of anomalous current flow. The source of energy is heat input, but if we dissipate the electricity before taking it off for useful purposes, so we see nothing abnormal in the overall energy action. What we see in this experiment is that toppling B-H loop! There is the clear evidence and
25.4.2005
Page 25 of 34
here, at last, from this experiment, emerged the confirmation of my suspicion of the secret as to why our thermoelectric device works in its incredibly powerful refrigeration mode. That device has its own a special way of taking off that electricity before it develops those very high eddy-currents. Here, in fact, was a new development, a discovery which had eluded the author's Ph.D research and which could have enabled the author to build a 'free energy' device decades ago, had this insight been apparent in those early years. But who would have thought that a transformer built from laminations of iron and nickel bonded in layers could tell us anything new about electromagnetism? It must be said, however, that the 'special' way of taking electrical energy from a stack of bimetallic laminations, as used in the prototype devices, involves building those laminations into a parallel plate capacitor. That is not an easy task and to take it from the demonstration prototype to the commercial world needs the support of a major semiconductor partner. The task is much easier with this new understanding of the physics involved and attention is being given to the possibility of drawing the power off by magnetic induction. It is in this regard that Scott Strachan, the Scotsman who has built the three prototype devices to date, did become preoccupied by a new discovery not yet published by which the thermoelectric action can be controlled with negligible power input, much as a grid in a thermionic valve can control the current between anode and cathode. However, progress on that is extremely slow and, as the need for a new refrigeration technology cannot await Strachan's solitary endeavours, so I am disclosing by this letter my own experimental findings to arouse interest and expedite onward development. I see the experiment just reported as one that very clearly indicates that heat can be converted into electricity to provide refrigeration technology which, at the same time generates electrical power. The one step essential to the completion of this picture is the verification that if Scott Strachan, or others who now replicate the device, builds a fourth prototype device in which the electrical power circuit is not mounted on the 'hot' heat sink, then that heat sink will also cool. The above is also my message to those companies now expressing interest in researching this project. This, together with a copy of a specification I can supply to interested parties, points the way forward in a research venture that should provide the best and most effective method of efficient refrigeration and bring, miracle though it might seem, the added bonus of being self-powered electrically." __________ The Solid-State Energy Probe Experiment This was the section title under which I introduced the third experiment in my article "Three Experiments on Free Energy". The article was written as an open letter addressed to Don Kelly, Editor of the Space Energy Association's Quarterly Space Energy News, where it was duly published in December 1993. It is also scheduled to be published in Nexus Magazine early in 1994. It seems appropriate to reproduce first the relevant text from that article: "The third experiment which tells me that I am on the verge of a breakthrough in penetrating the barrier giving access to 'free energy' in a solid-state device has yielded its own surprises. Here I built a form of transformer that is intended to serve as an exploratory test rig. I shall, owing to the developing length of this communication, curtail the constructional details and leave something for future reporting.
25.4.2005
Page 26 of 34
The test involved setting up a d.c. magnetic bias in the x direction and an a.c. transverse magnetic oscillation in the y direction. Again I used the above-described technique of studying the shape and form of the B-H loop developed by the a.c. flux. The a.c. excitation was of low magnetic flux density amplitude so that the eddy-current losses should be negligible, as should hysteresis loss. I was operating in the flux rotation zone and above the B-H knee where rotational hysteresis loss diminishes rapidly to zero. I expected the B-H 'loop' to show as a line on my oscilloscope and, indeed, such a line did appear. I had to expand it off the range of the screen by increasing the x deflection sensitivity substantially in order to trace the small capacitive contribution of my circuit for integrating induced EMF to derive the B signal. I could find no trace of a loss. Moreover, the line was not curved; it was very straight, which meant that the incremental permeability effective in the direction transverse to d.c. polarization was virtually constant. This was as expected from my theoretical reasoning, but there was a surprise in that the transverse permeability was smaller than I expected, by a factor of ten. Now, if you are wondering what this means, note that my object is to store 'reluctance' energy by that transverse excitation, meaning energy that goes in as inductance energy and is recovered without loss on the down quarter cycle. By making that transverse oscillation stronger and stronger the object is then to deflect the primary polarization so that the intrinsic ferromagnetic power develops flux oscillations in the axis of the primary coil. The aim is to tap energy from that deflected 'reluctance' energy source, most of which is powered by the atomic spins in the ferromagnet, and use that energy on the up quarter cycle. This process then allows the polarizing bias, which could be that provided by a permanent magnet, to reset as the tranverse current diminishes, but the short-fall in the stored 'reluctance' energy given back to the magnetizing coil in that transverse direction has then to be made up by the magnet. The experiment I report here goes no further than showing that the transverse excitation is a pure, virtually loss-free, inductive process which involved a characteristic magnetic permeability indicating a 30:1 ratio of ferromagnetic power input compared with external power input. That is the starting point which will, I am sure, lead to the fourth experiment in which that energy is diverted and used without affecting the input magnetization circuit. Then the recovery of energy upon demagnetization of that latter circuit will occur, but as it cannot take used energy back from a load, the polarizing magnetic source simply has to do the work and so leave the quantizing vacuum field in a cooler state. Rather than wait until I am ready to report such further progress, I thought it appropriate to inform you and via you the readers of your Newsletter at this stage." ________ I now intend in this Report to extend my disclosure on developments from this experiment but, since this particular project promises the best route to tapping aether energy by solid-state apparatus, and there is much research now needed before the patent cover is secure, I will limit what is said. My object here is to attract sufficient interest from major corporation research laboratories based on a non-confidential disclosure by pointing the project effort in the right direction, whilst withholding enough to give basis for mutually beneficial negotiation adequate to reward my contribution. This may be an untimely step to take, but there is urgency and 'free energy' development must proceed with all speed, in order that the pollution by our existing energy generation methods can be minimized. If others who read this Report decide to pursue the R&D also, in their independent ventures, that can
25.4.2005
Page 27 of 34
but be for the common good, but again it is stressed that this Report should not be taken as granting any rights under what may be proprietory and subject to patent protection. Copyright in this report is also preserved. As to the principles of the experiment, firstly, the object is to work a ferromagnetic core in such a way that its windings do not cancel the action and so defeat the purpose of allowing the core to contribute some of its intrinsic energy to our output circuit in each successive magnetizing cycle. Secondly, the core has to work hard in this effort and so it must operate at a level of magnetization above the knee of the B-H curve or even close to saturation. Thirdly, as much of the core as possible should be involved in this exercise, not just a small portion in a large magnetic circuit. Fourthly, our technique for accessing that energy is to contrive operation so that the input circuit responds as a pure linear inductance whilst the ferromagnetic core acts as a catalyst to feed thermodynamic power to the output circuit electrically. The drawing in APPENDIX C illustrates a core structure that serves this purpose. The illustration of Fig. 3 should be self explanatory. It is an extract from an early U.K. Patent No. 855,907 dating from April 1956 and of which the author was inventor in his employee capacity with a major U.K. electrical company. However, though there are technical features of that development which the author has called to mind in developing this 'free energy' application, the specific mode of excitation needed to tap that 'free energy' were not disclosed nor, indeed, thought of at the time of that early invention. A spiral wound steel film coated with insulation has a cylindrical form and is wound around an axially central conductor. A solenoidal winding encompasses the core. Current I in the solenoidal winding produces a magnetic field parallel with the core axis, whereas current I' in the central conductor produces a magnetic field in a circumferential sense. The thin steel film constituting the cylindrical core is everywhere subjected to the cross-field magnetization effects of two fields acting at right angles to each other. The currents I and I' must, acting together, be sufficient to set up a near saturation condition in the core. The central conductor winding is d.c. biased and excited with a.c. of smaller amplitude to function as an inductance setting up a circumferential field with energy cycling in and out and subject to very little frequency-dependent loss. There is some I2R loss in the winding. The intrinsic ferromagnetic energy that corresponds to the near saturation state is represented by a spin state that precesses, in effect, during the cyclic reorientation. In so doing, it induces an EMF in the solenoidal winding and this puts output power into a load connected to that winding during both half cycles of the a.c. oscillations. That output power taps the ferro-magnetic spin energy that the aether supplies by thermodynamic cooling in keeping the ferromagnet its its low minimal energy potential state. The way in which one should see this is that, looking in any direction of strong magnetization, with the precession moving away from that direction, the BH component is reducing without returning all that energy to the aether system. Instead it transfers some to the load circuit. With the precession moving into that direction, the BH energy component builds up by input of aether field energy accompanied by thermodynamic aether field cooling and, at the same time, sends some of that energy to the load circuit. A normal transformer runs solely on the HB energy transfers that are conservative in the material system. The 'free energy' future transformers will conserve energy too but will extend the conservation territory to that of the space medium. The author intends to say no more on this subject until the time comes when a design specification can be disclosed with operational performance data.
25.4.2005
Page 28 of 34
On the general issue of 'free energy' from 'aether' reaction in responding to magnetism, there are a few experimental indications now emerging which suggest that the 'free energy' input can be dependent upon orientation of the apparatus in the inertial space frame. Researchers who find performance variations that can change with time of day, as the Earth rotates about its axis, should be alert to this possibility. The underlying scientific reason for such effects and the evidence will be covered by a later Report in this series. The reader may now find APPENDIX A interesting, as a 'peer-reviewed' November 1993 communication published in the U.K. Institute of Physics journal 'Physics Education'. It has not been presented in its full printed version for copyright reasons. The substantive content of the author's original text only is reproduced and certain sections are presented in bold type, the emphasis being added specially for this Report. 20th February 1994 DR. HAROLD ASPDEN ENERGY SCIENCE LIMITED c/o SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB ENGLAND
APPENDIX A THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS: PHYSICS EDUCATION 28, 340-342: 1993 Whilst strongly supporting the view expressed by Moore (Physics Education, 28, pp. 228-237; 1993) that greater emphasis should be given to non-equilibrium processes in teaching thermodynamics, it is submitted that such teaching gets off to the wrong start by the very prescription of the First Law of Thermodynamics as the governing doctrine. It is the Principle of Conservation of Energy that should be declared as fundamental. The First Law of Thermodynamics, if retained in the physics curriculum under that name only serves as a 'number one' precedent to the 'number two' law. A thermal system with no heat flow would be at a uniform temperature. A purely thermal system with heat flow can be in equilibrium with heat flow. Non-equilibrium processes imply actions which are not solely concerned with the flow of heat in a system. In presenting his case, Moore begins by reciting that First Law as having a meaning expressed by: E=Q-W where E is the change in energy, Q is heat flow and W is work done. Note the words 'change', 'flow' and 'done'. The Principle of Energy Conservation requires that a change of energy between its various states, such as heat, electric potential, gravitational potential or kinetic energy sums to zero and I do not see why a student should have to have to learn this as a law of 'thermodynamics'.
25.4.2005
Page 29 of 34
At the outset of his argument, Moore defines 'heat' as 'the interaction that occurs between two systems, or between a system and its surroundings by virtue of a temperature difference'. This is not correct, because 'heat' is a form of energy - a scalar quantity, whereas a temperature difference has direction and so is a vector. 'Heat flow' can be said to have the prescribed definition. This shows how careful one needs to be with words in teaching the fundamentals of the subject. In his following sentence Moore states: 'A temperature difference can be further defined in terms of lack of thermal equilibrium between two systems ...' Later he says 'A new generation of physics textbooks will probably be needed to cope with the fundamentals involved in the teaching of nonequilibrium thermodynamics at a base level'. However, I suggest that the question at issue is whether we are concerned with the physics of temperature difference or whether we are erring in using 'thermodynamics' to relate to something that is not strictly 'thermal'. Physics today, and science generally, covers such a vast field and there has to be economy in teaching techniques, whilst conserving fundamentals. We need to understand how energy can redeploy and how order can evolve from chaos, but that is not the subject of thermodynamics. Thermodynamics has only become involved because, historically, it has been used to draw an arbitrary line between the possible and the impossible, but this is a line which is not holding steady. The energy that does cross that line in going from chaos to order is not heat, as such. However, it can create heat after making the transition. One has to distinguish between the physics of heat flow that involves a temperature differential and the physics of energy conversion generally. In stating the fundamental principles underlying that First Law of Thermodynamics, with examples in mind, one really needs to set the stage for the student who may progress and have to face the following two problems. Firstly, when a ferromagnetic substance cools down through its Curie temperature it releases heat over and above that associated with its normal specific heat. This extra heat happens to equal the sum of the magnetic energy which is thereby established, meaning the energy needed to set up the same field conditions in an air-cored solenoid as exist in the saturation state of the magnetism created in each ferromagnetic domain, and the additional work done in setting up the mechanical strains associated with that magnetism. Readers will find, on considering this, that, notwithstanding misguided attempts to bring in magnetism as a negative potential, the First Law of Thermodynamics does not hold. We do not have here a situation where the work done requires a loss of heat. The only system we recognize as present is the substance of the ferromagnet. Unless there really are two systems inside one another, one that supplies energy from a source we cannot see or sense in temperature terms, there is no way of keeping an energy balance according to that First Law of Thermodynamics. So, turning to the Principle of Conservation of Energy, we need to admit that our 'system' comprises an underlying sub-quantum field medium as a coextensive system having its own reserve of 'zeropoint energy'. One presumes that there are in that field medium quantum effects at work in priming those spins in atoms that we say establish the ferromagnetic state. Secondly, although one finds in books on cosmology that one can ask such questions as 'is the vacuum gravitating?' (see section 11, chapter 1 of Novikov's 'Evolution of the Universe', Cambridge University Press; 1983), one does not see the equally important question 'does the vacuum have a temperature?'. Yet, when we look into the space enveloping body Earth there is evidence of thermal equilibrium manifested by the 2.7 K radiation. For some reason this 'heat energy' is deemed to be a residue of the Big Bang in the scenario of the expanding universe.
25.4.2005
Page 30 of 34
What is rather curious is that cosmologists try to apply the principles of energy balance to the assumed gravitational interaction within the vacuum acting on itself, forgetting that if the vacuum does contain something that can gravitate it must contain electric charges in some neutral composition. The pure vacuum, devoid of matter, must have its own quasi-static equilibrium and probably will not exhibit a temperature. Here, the word 'probably' is used because, in common with so much that is theorized about in cosmology, one really does not know the certain answer, but we need to imagine the likely scenario in our effort to solve the riddles of Nature. However, assuming that, if matter did not exist, the vacuum would have no temperature, what cosmologists then fail to do is to apply the Principle of Energy Conservation or that First law of Thermodynamics to the straightforward question of how matter, that we know exists, interacts gravitationally and thermally with that elusive vacuum medium. Consider the energy balance equation: m + kT = 0 or: m + mv2/2 = 0 where m is the mass of a virtual particle deemed by Novikov (in following Zel'dovich) to constitute the vacuum medium, T is the temperature of the particle, k is Boltzmann's constant, v is speed and is a measure of gravitational potential attributable to matter within gravitational range of the particle of mass m. The equations apply in a physical sense because, by analogy with magnetism in the first problem, gravitational potential is said to be a negative quantity, though really it is a manifestation of an exchange of energy with that hidden field system. Now, much as we think we know all there is to know about gravitation, we really have no adequate reason for believing that gravitation can act over a range exceeding a few hundred light years. Indeed, if gravitation has a limited range of action that could explain why stars form in separate space domains rather than converging into one central core to set up a reversal of the Big Bang scenario. The gravitational coupling across a galaxy can be one that is a chain coupling linking stars that are separated by less than the critical range of action. Note again that the words 'can be' are used deliberately, because students have much to gain by being shown that we are uncertain, which leaves them something to delve into in finding their own way forward in physics! From a teaching viewpoint, it is then of interest to estimate the gravitational potential at the centre of the sun, based solely on the solar mass. We know and so can derive v, the speed imparted to the mass m. When this calculation is performed that speed v is found to be much the same as the translational speed of our solar system through the cosmic background. Therefore, if the formation of the sun meant that gravitational energy was shed, then that could have been taken up as kinetic energy by imparting a translational non-thermal motion to mass seated within the sun. Should one view the relationship as coincidental or does it have significance cosmologically? The teacher cannot offer the certain answer to this question and so that may be a reason for not telling the student. However, physics education should not just be about what teachers know but should also give students an insight into what teachers do not yet know! Looking at the equation involving T, one may apply this to the vacuum medium in the near vicinity of Earth. Here the gravitational potential can also be calculated. The effect of the sun dominates that of Earth by a factor of 14, so we need not be too rigorous about specifying an altitude in making this calculation.
25.4.2005
Page 31 of 34
The energy kT is used because it is assumed that there are only two degrees of freedom in the vacuum medium, inasmuch as its action may resemble the properties we associate with antiferromagnetism. However, the exact numerical coefficient is not too important in making the proposition that the 2.7 K cosmic background radiation temperature is local evidence of the Principle of Conservation of Energy or that First Law of Thermodynamics in the vacuum itself. The known gravitational potential attributable to the solar system in the vicinity of Earth, plus that 2.7 K temperature as measured, lead us, from the energy conservation equation, to derive a 'measured' value of m. The mass of the virtual particles forming the vacuum medium can, therefore be shown to be approximately 0.04 times the mass of the electron*. The main thrust of these remarks is that the Principle of Conservation of Energy is a sufficient statement of whatever is intended by the First Law of Thermodynamics and it does have the merit of embracing actions that are not exclusively thermal or temperature-related. However, in its application we need to be open to energy exchanges involving the vacuum medium and we must then come to terms with the problem that so many physicists think it best to avoid, namely delving into the properties of a real vacuum medium. This is forbidden territory because it is outlawed by the theory of relativity. In summary, whilst students need to know how internal combustion engines and electric kettles conform with the principles of thermodynamics, the laws of thermodynamics must no longer be presented as barriers which preclude exploration of new energy fields. One governing condition suffices, the Principle of Conservation of Energy, and its application to a physical system embracing the total field environment and if we hypothesise laws of thermodynamics by appeal to 'experience' we should keep in mind that students of the future may yet 'experience' something that past textbook authority did not 'experience'. _____________________________________________________________________ * It is beyond the scope of this commentary to show in detail how one can confirm this value m by an independent test, save to say that the vacuum has the ability to define the value of the fine structure constant in terms of the ratio of the mass m to the mass me of the electron: hc/2e2 = (108)(4m/me)1/2 A derivation of the above is presented by the author in Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 40, 53-57 (1984). See also the derivation as equation (19) on p. 354 of 'Quantum Uncertainties', Nato ASI Series B: Physics Vol. 162 (Plenum Press) 1986. Footnote for this Energy Science Report: This value of m, the mass of the aether particle, was shown to be 1/25 of the electron mass at page 24 in the author's 1959 work entitled 'The Theory of Gravitation'.
APPENDIX B ANALYSIS OF THE A-FIELD REACTION 'A-field' signifies the 'aether' diamagnetic reaction field set up in space by gyromagnetic reaction of aether charge in response to the normal B-field. The experimental evidence from classical physics research on gyromagnetism in ferromagnetic rod specimens presents physicists with an experimental anomaly in that the observed change of
25.4.2005
Page 32 of 34
magnetic moment in relation to angular momentum has twice the value expected. The Dirac abstract 'spin' mathematical route to this factor of 2 is wrong and has led science away from the 'free energy' opportunities. The alternative is to accept the simple explanation as a diamagnetic reaction from free conduction charge in the metal. Then one is confronted with the need to extend the argument to the vacuum medium and accept that the aether contains charge in motion that can set up a reacting magnetic field, even under steady d.c. field conditions. This latter proposition has now been verified by experiment reported earlier in this Report. An insight into the formal theory as applied to reaction in metal is presented below, as it recently appeared in the author's U.K. Patent Specification No. 2,267,995. ___________
To determine the strength of the A-field reaction in a metal conductor one needs to note that each conduction electron moves at a high velocity and is subject an electric potential mainly sourced in the positive residual electric charge of the atoms which have shed those conduction electrons. These atoms are locked into the metal crystal structure and so the free electrons move under the constraint of a local electric force F(r) which has a component constraining the electron to move between collisions in general orbital paths of radius r centred on the atoms. If a magnetic field of strength B is also present this supplements the electric force by a component force Bev, where e is the electromagnetic charge of the electron and v its speed in circular orbit about an axis aligned with the direction of B. Note that the force F(r) is a restoring force proportional to displacement of the electron from a notional position of rest, assuming it has no motion. The restoring force factor depends on boundary shape but is the same throughout any metal structure having parallel planar boundaries, regardless of the direction of charge displacement. Its value is halved within a cylindrical metal structure provided the displacement is in a plane at right angles to the cylinder axis. Therefore a displacement through a distance r will involve adding potential energy of F(r)r/2. The force equation, assuming that B is zero, is simply: F(r) = mv2/r ............. (1) If one now sums the effective kinetic energy component attributable to v for all the free electrons in a unit volume of the metal and write that as energy density W, the equation gives: F(r)r/2 = mv2/2 = W .......... (2) Now bring in the action of the B field. This adds the force term in Bev to the left hand side of equation (1) and so changes equation (2) in the following way: F(r)r/2 + F(r)r/2 + Bevr/2 = W + W ........ (3) Next, note that the terms in F give rise to a potential energy and it is appropriate to bring the energy terms together on the right-hand side of the equation into a single energy density function that depends upon B. Denoting this energy density function as E, equations (2) and (3) combine to give: Bevr/2 = E ..............(4) The expression involving evr/2 is a measure of the reacting magnetic moment of each conduction
25.4.2005
Page 33 of 34
electron. It develops a back-field or reaction field which is denoted the 'A-field' and which, if scaled by a factor g, has the value: A = 4gevr/2 ................ (5) The B-field acting on each conduction electron is, therefore, a combined field effect produced by a primary field which we write as gB and this is offset by the field of strength A. Note that the same scaling factor has been used to modify the B field as is used to modify the reaction field. Reasons for this will be apparent in what follows, but one needs to keep in mind that a unity value must be assigned to g to comply with orthodox teachings on this subject. One can now write: B = gB - A .............. (6) Combining equations (4), (5) and (6): E = (gB - A)(A)/4g ............. (7) which is a simple relationship representing an energy quantity which tends to maximize because its negative potential energy component tends to a minimum. The variable in the equation is the value of the A-field. Differentiating equation (7) with respect to A shows that the energy density attributable to the B-field is a maximum when: gB - 2A = 0 .............. (8) which shows that the strength of the A-field reaction is exactly half of gB and, from equation (6) this means that g is precisely 2. Then, from equation (7) this, in turn, means that: E = B2/8 ............. (9) which is the conventional magnetic field energy density formula in the units we are using. The result of this analysis is that when a primary magnetic field acts on the free conduction electrons in a metal there is, inevitably, a half-field reaction, the A-field, which is opposed to that primary field. Since, in the past, one has been able to work with theory which presumes there is no such reaction, then the B-field which is known to be effective in the metal must owe its action to a magnetizing effect twice as strong as the B-field. The half-field reaction has passed unnoticed in experiments because one has failed to double the primary field action before halving it. Therefore, the moment of electric current attributable to the electron, which is represented by a term such as (evr/2), and which would otherwise be deemed to represent the reaction, must also be incremented by that same g-factor. This explains why the g-factor was introduced in equation (6). It makes sense of an otherwise impossible situation. Note that the half-field reaction is sensed in gyromagnetic reaction measurements, where observation based on reversing the ordered electron activity which is associated with magnetic polarization causes a proportional reversal of angular momentum. The ratio of the electrical current moment to the angular momentum, as measured, is twice that expected from conventional theory based on the known charge/mass ratio of the electron. This gyromagnetic ratio factor of two is the g-factor deduced above. The experiment confirms the theory presented. Note also that the interpretation of the gyromagnetic reaction in terms of the 'A-field' is indisputably strong, but it does require the concomitant recognition that there is an A-field vacuum reaction involving the charges which account for Maxwell displacement currents. This A-field reaction in the vacuum or aether is the basis on which inductive energy is stored as a magnetic field. Physicists have for most of the 20th century, at least until recent times, sought to avoid referring to the aether or recognizing it as an active energy medium, and this has been to the detriment of innovative energy
25.4.2005
Page 34 of 34
technology.
APPENDIX C
25.4.2005
POWER FROM SPACE: INERTIA AND GRAVITATION HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents Section Title Introduction Why is Inertia Important? Creation of Matter What is the Cause of Gravity? Personal Footnote by the Author APPENDIX A: The Energy-Mass Formula APPENDIX B: 'A Theory of Proton Creation' APPENDIX C: 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant' APPENDIX D: 'Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer' ***** page 1 2 6 8 10 14 15 16 17
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
POWER FROM SPACE: INERTIA AND GRAVITATION Introduction This Energy Science Report is one of a series concerned with new energy technology and the fundamental energy science that is involved. Much of that science is of record in published papers that lay dormant on the shelves of those university libraries that have kept abreast of the source tributaries that might eventually flow into mainstream physics. However, for some mysterious reason that science historians will one day need to explain, the physics community has built a dam which blocks much that could flow more rapidly into the knowledge stream. In particular it stands aloof and ignores evidence which tells us there is energy in abundance in a real space medium that regulates the quantum world. Those few scientists that have become aware of the enormous energy resource pervading the universe and extending into our immediate environment have, in the main, failed to see its technological potential. Being a pioneer who has researched this subject for more than forty years, and published comprehensive theoretical accounts of the way in which the vacuum field energy governs gravitation, inertia and determines all the fundamental constants of physics, this author has become well accustomed to 'peer review' rejection. Institutional interests fend off the intruder who does not want to build on their sinking foundations and who points to better ground on which to build. And so, those who profess to be the scientific establishment hold firm in their beliefs, not expecting the Earth to shake in any way which may force them to rebuild on a new base. This somewhat cynical introduction is presented in the hope that it will make readers pay more attention and cause them to help in bringing the world to its senses on just a few points about physics, before we are swept along by a tidal wave of technological change involving us in 'free energy'. The author, some time ago decided to arrest the research on his theory, realising that no one really cared and that the only way forward was for that research to await the emergence of a related technological breakthrough which could help mankind generally. Mankind has been made well aware of the genius of Albert Einstein and the importance of the relativistic equation E = Mc2, which says that energy E has mass M provided one is able to 'see', with the constant speed c of light referenced on one's own self, what it is that has that mass. There are those who know why E = Mc2 is relevant to
2 nuclear power, but the scientific genius of those 'expert' even in that field has not yet solved the mysteries of the true causal nature of gravitation and the property of inertia. Occasionally, of course, there are those who claim to understand inertia and confront us from time to time with their interpretation of their solution to that great mystery. Yet, always it seems, the opinions which penetrate the 'peer review' are those which 'conform' to tradition and go out of their way to comply with what is termed 'Lorentz invariance', which fits too closely in the Einstein mould and accounts for his failed attempts to explain inertia. It is because a group of scientists (Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff: Physical Review A 49 pp. 678-694, 1994) have now claimed attention by asserting a new Lorentz-invariant account of inertia in terms of the universal energy background and implying prospect for tapping that energy resource that this author feels obliged to write this Report. Why is Inertia Important? Inertia is the property which relates mass and motion, just as gravity is the property by which mass is drawn to other bodies by a force of mutual attraction. Ignoring the imaginary 'quarks', electricity is a property possessed by all truly fundamental particles of matter, in equal measure, represented by a universal unit of charge e, and we know that like polarity charges interact by mutual repulsion, whereas opposite polarity charges interact by mutual attraction. Inertia, gravitation and electricity are properties that are absolutely basic in Nature. They are the manifestation of energy that has suffered disturbance and is in search of equilibrium, whether seeking to avoid redeployment or seeking to become redeployed. One can always start with Einstein's ideas, but then do remember that he tried and failed to discover the unifying links between electricity, inertia and gravitation. One can heed what is said about the inertial theory of Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff by Robert Matthews writing in Science, vol. 263, pp. 612-613, 4 February 1994 under the title: 'Inertia: Does Empty Space Put Up the Resistance?'. Matthews discusses Einstein's failure in this quest and goes on to say: "Now three researchers think they have found the source of inertia - and it turns out to be much closer to home. Inertia, they say, comes from the apparently empty space that surrounds us all - or rather, from the buzz of activity that, according to quantum theory, fills even a perfect vacuum, where sub-atomic particles are being created and annihilated in the blink of an eye. It is this ever-present sea of energy that the researchers believe resists the acceleration of mass, and so creates inertia." So, we have our attention drawn to the notion that that sub-quantum sea of energy in space is the underlying essential activity that endows a particle with its inertia.
3 One has to imagine a particle, when accelerated, being pushed and shoved by that sea of energy in space with the result that it exhibits a property of preserving its motion and evidences inertial 'resistance' when accelerated. Now, it is this author's experience, based on the development of his own theory, that Nature prefers the simple life and does not, as it were, ever 'put the cart before the horse'. Whatever fills that empty space with energy will, at least so far as simple physics requires, have itself to comprise component particles. It is no use talking about 'radiation' when one does not understand 'energy' and one can hardly preach knowledge concerning 'energy' without nucleating that energy on a 'particle'. Remember, we are talking about 'motion' and, to say something moves, that something has to have a position and an existence. 'Fields' are expressed as mathematical symbols and exist in man's thoughts, but Nature has no way of knowing what we mean by a 'field'. Nature builds on particles and their motion and that then leads us to recognize what we call 'energy'. So, how can we really expect the particle to derive its inertial property from a background that is nothing other than other particles? No, the inertial nature of a particle has to be something intrinsic to that particle! What else is intrinsic to that particle? It has an electrical charge. We then can argue that the particle has form and is bounded so that that electric charge is confined into a limited volume of space centred on the particle. That gives it a measure of intrinsic energy, by the teachings of electrostatics, without us yet having spoken about motion. The word 'motion' if expressing speed or velocity is meaningless unless we can refer to a frame of reference. Such a frame, as an electromagnetic reference frame, is not intrinsic to the particle. If the 'motion' is an acceleration, a rate of change of velocity, then, and only then do we have a property intrinsic to that particle, because that electric charge in its confined state suffers internal disturbances as its electrical energy adapts to the accelerated motion. Such disturbances, as measured within the body form of the particle, are undoubtedly propagated within that body at a finite speed, which we denote c, and so, still intrinsic to the particle, we have energy E and speed c. We need something else to take our understanding forward and so we ask the question of how we would ourselves respond if Nature made us a single particle in a mystery environment that we could not see or sense. The answer, or at least this author's answer, is that we would do everything possible to resist our destruction. In short, we would conserve our energy. Nature must prescribe, therefore, that the third and governing element affecting that particle under normal conditions is that it will conserve its energy unless physically transmuted, as by breaking into three particles and sharing energy with a newly created particle pair.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
4 What does that particle have to do to conserve its intrinsic energy, as opposed to the other energy we think it has because it is moving relative to some external frame of reference? (This latter energy is 'kinetic energy'). The answer is that it must not shed energy by radiating disturbances through the empty space surrounding it. We now begin to see the link with quantum theory, not one where quantum theory explains the inertial property, but one where the particle's own conservative property can explain quantum theory, the latter being a feature imparted to the particle population constituting at least some of that background sea of energy in space. Physicists will now tell you that Larmor derived a formula which 'proved' that an electron when accelerated must radiate energy. Yet, if those wise physicists read up on the subject they will see that there is no 'proof' because the derivation is based on unproven assumptions. There are two assumptions. One is that energy is, in fact, capable of being 'radiated' as a wave or 'field' disturbance. Note that we now think of energy transfer in terms of particles (photons). The other assumption is that the particle is 'accelerated' by unspecified means or means, which if specified, are promptly eliminated from the analysis by relying on the energy supposedly radiated to the remote wave zone where the accelerating cause is not to be seen. The latter puts even further emphasis on the first assumption. Now, what this means is that we, in looking for the real truths, have substituted for the Larmor assumptions the simple attribute of 'energy conservation' and so denied the energy 'radiation' possibility. We can then rework Larmor's analysis and keep in place the influence of other charge which has to be present and influential in promoting the acceleration of the particle under study. Readers who perform this calculation (see Appendix A) using the correct formula relating electric energy E (proportional to e2) and the particle radius confining that charge e, find that there need be no energy transfer across that boundary of charge confinement. There is, however, a condition which emerges from the analysis. This is that the accelerating force, as known from the local action of the accelerating field, necessarily factored into the field energy equations, must be 'resisted' by the particle in a measure formulated by an expression in which E/c2 relates force and acceleration. Mass becomes a derived inertial property as does the formula E = Mc2, and both stem from the simple fact that Nature allows each and every particle in the universe to act conservatively in preserving its existence by denying radiation of energy. So, inertia is understood in the simplest possible way and E = Mc2 owes nothing to Einstein's imagination and everything to energy conservation principles. The background sea of space energy is not a party essential to give account of this basic property. The latter only features in the collective actions and particle collision processes as energy is pooled by electrodynamic activity.
5 Concerning the latter, note that collections of charged particles sharing oscillations, as in a radio antenna, involve mutual effects. For N charges e, accelerated together, the intrinsic conserved energy accounting for the mass of N particles relates to Ne, whereas the mutual interaction in electrical energy terms, given an overall confining space for the cluster of charge, is proportional to (Ne)2. It follows, therefore, that since we do not think in terms of the mass properties of mutual interactions, or 'mutual acceleration energy', we confront three prospects: (a) The radio antenna can be a transmitter of energy as a function of charge acceleration, but only in proportion to N(N-1) and not in proportion to N2. However, since N is measured in countless billions, this poses no practical problem and shows why one can dare to challenge the Larmor formula without upsetting the radio physicists. The 'mutual acceleration energy' of a cluster of like polarity charges must add to the inertia of that cluster, but note that the particles have a very small radius whereas the cluster is relatively very large, which diminishes the inertial contribution. When particles are part of a vast sea of action characteristic of space, in a neutral mix of positive and negative polarities, they must involve energy that one might classify as 'mutual acceleration energy' subject to fluctuation and yet, somehow, form part of a system in which equilibrium is preserved. Given that inertia is dependent upon action intrinsic to a particle, one can then contemplate mutual actions as giving a base frame for collective reference of electric actions. In other words it seems probable that the locally applicable frame of electromagnetic reference is that set in a frame associated with the collective energy activity of a local sea of vacuum particles, otherwise known as the 'zero-point background field'.
(b)
(c)
In summary, the property of inertia is not dependent upon interaction with the vacuum field and the energy in space as suggested by Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff. That space energy background is, however, likely to play its role in determining the frame of reference for the energy of motion (speed) of a particle. This becomes a probability when one brings to bear the argument that the energy added to a particle owing to its motion is energy added in creating its satellite companions in the nearby field. This activity takes the form of a statistical presence of created particle pairs, leptons, typically electrons and positrons, which can become quite prolific and add enormous supplementary mass as a core particle acquires a speed close to that of light. The so-called 'relativistic mass' increase with speed then becomes an attribute of inertia possessed not by the core particle or by the zero-point energy background but by its satellite companions in their individual form. From a practical energy viewpoint, the author sees no route to tapping 'free energy' by this link between the inertial property of particles and the sea of energy in space. The only link which can give access to that energy is via the quantum coupling of that medium,
6 its so-called 'Zitterbewegung' or jitter motion, with electrons in atomic orbits and particularly with ferromagnetism. The latter is the subject of the 'Power from Magnetism' studies in this Energy Science Report series. Creation of Matter The fact that the basic particles, protons and electrons, which form matter exist and have inertia and mass in compliance with E = Mc2 means that Nature has its own way of giving up energy to create those particles. Is this really a one way process? The proton and the electron are not listed in particle data as having a finite lifetime. Do they really live for ever? If so, then one can think of the universe being created once and only once and not existing in a background seething with energy that keeps some kind of equilibrium with matter whilst fluctuating transiently to shed and recapture energy as some of that matter is created and annihilated. Given that we can 'see' that when matter is created it comes to us in two 'stable' forms of different charge polarity, the electron and the proton, of greater mass by a factor of 1836, we have the clear evidence that Nature sheds energy which is seen to materialize in these particular forms, presumably only because they have the longer chance of survival than the myriad of other particle forms that one could conceive. It is only logical, and involves very little thought, to recognize that if the proton and the electron were to decay and return their mass energy to the background activity in space, so, in immediately reasserting energy equilibrium as between matter and that background, those particles would be recreated. They may not be created in the first instance as a proton-electron pair, but they could develop from a kind of chemistry of reactions involving leptons in various forms, and particularly muons, and in the end the stable particle forms of proton and electron must emerge. In short, one must accept that the proton and the electron do have their own characteristic lifetimes. They need not be created and annihilated in paired relationship because the electron will undoubtedly decay and be recreated numerous times between events involving proton creation. Given that this is the case, the question of energy radiation by an accelerated electron might seem to be of no importance and merely an academic issue. One then finds, using the Larmor formula already mentioned, that if it were applicable to the electron in orbit in an atomic electron shell and if the intrinsic self-energy of the electron were to be radiated, the lifetime of the electron would be of microsecond order. Yet the electron lifetime is most certainly of the order of 10-13 seconds, as can be inferred from its ability to 'tunnel' through potential barriers as if such a time factor has meaning. It 'tunnels' through that barrier by the expedient of decaying on one side of the barrier and finding it desirable energy-wise to reappear by creation on the other side of the barrier.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
7 However, if we use this argument to discount the need for challenging the derivation of the Larmor formula, so we lose that physical basis for understanding inertia as expressed by E = Mc2. It is a trap we must avoid falling into, because understanding inertia is so important as it is the stepping stone for the onward understanding of the physical connection with gravitation. In particular, by deriving the property of inertia as having a 'first principle' dependence upon the energy conservation response of a discrete electric particle when subjected to external influence, we know that all such discrete charge forms, if truly fundamental, will exhibit a mass property. It follows that the background sea of energy in space must have mass and yet we cannot sense that mass directly in the usual way, which is by its weight. The energy in free space has, therefore, some unusual properties in a gravitational sense. A factor in this is the consideration of form. A body having weight we can measure in a laboratory has shape and is bounded in some way. It has a centre of gravity that can be identified. Boundary conditions are important when calculating gravitational interactions. As with an electric charge within a uniform continuum of charge, the forces exerted on that charge when displaced a unit distance depend not just upon the charge density of that charge but upon the shape of whatever it is that limits its boundaries. A charge displacement in a spherically bounded charge continuum is subject to one third of the restoring force rate of a charge bounded between two planar surfaces of virtually infinite extent. Who, however, is ready to say how that background continuum of the world of zero-point energy is bounded? It does matter, because a 19th century theorem bearing the name Earnshaw has well established the fact that the aether cannot comprise electrical particles in a neutral combination whilst exibiting any stable form that could define a structure. Yet, the latter is needed to give basis for determining the universal constants and particularly the finestructure constant. The one form that eludes Earnshaw's theorem is that for which the particles in the structure all have like polarity and are set in a background continuum charge of opposite polarity. The boundary conditions limiting the space energy are, in this author's opinion, planar and each such plane defines the separation between domains of 'space' and 'antispace' in the sense that protons and electrons predominate on one side, whereas positrons and antiprotons predominate on the other side. Proceeding, from this we need to understand how gravity comes into the picture, but our starting point is that there is a mass property throughout empty space and, for some reason, we cannot sense the linear momentum property. It is almost as if one is dealing with a perfectly incompressible fluid in which energy can be stored by motion but transfer to matter of a net linear momentum is impossible, though spin of a spherical body of the fluid can occur with energy storage and angular momentum.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
8 What is the Cause of Gravity? It is extremely easy for the author to carry on in this style and give account of the nature of gravity but there is little point in rewriting what is of record in refereed and published scientific periodicals. Suffice it to say that, just as no mechanic could contemplate building a machine which failed to take account of dynamic balance, so Nature in providing a dynamic sea of energy subject to that 'Zitterbewegung' oscillation could not possibly avoid also providing the counterbalance feature. That counterbalance feature is provided by a population of particles dedicated to that objective. The quasi-stable structured background of space gives the firm basis on which Nature builds to determine the fundamental constant of action we name after Max Planck, but that is merely a catalyst regulating the interplay between the background space energy and matter. The space energy is mainly seated in mu-mesons, which are quite distinct from the particle system that defines the vacuum structure. However, the third essential part of this space 'machine' system is the graviton population which provides that dynamic balance in a way that involves minimal distortion of that lattice structure. That 'distortion' is small because the gravitons have greater mass than protons and so displace only a minute amount of continuum charge, but as they have motion spaced away from the main lattice, the latter determining the frame of electromagnetic reference, so, in measure related to the mass they balance dynamically, they give rise to forces of mutual electrodynamic attraction, namely a 'force of gravitation'. This is an extremely simple account of the nature of gravitation, the real challenge being that of showing how the precise value of the Constant of Gravitation G can be derived to conform with the theory. Of course, one could not come to this picture of the underworld of space without thinking as a mechanic with some electrical skills. The mathematicians who dominate physical theory and seek to develop equations displaying properties of symmetry and having aesthetic properties are not thinking of a real world in which the 'balance' is inertial and not necessarily symmetrical. One has only to take note of the blind reliance which mathematicians place upon Maxwell's wave equations to realise how easy they have found it to wander away from and out of the real world. How can an electric wave displacement propagate through space by its lateral oscillations if the field has energy and so mass and yet do this without that counterbalance? Where in the Maxwell equations do we see the formulation of the dynamic counter-balance, the wave which must accompany the propagating primary wave as an anti-phase partner? If one says it is not necessary then one is not thinking in terms of a real physical environment but indulging in fantasy by presenting a form of mathematics which may seem to work in some limited situations but yet fails to give that physical account needed to understand why it is that the universe holds together. Without the dynamic balance in
9 energy transfer across space and in energy storage in space and, indeed, without the consequent property of gravitation, the violent universe, like any violent out-of-balance machine, would break up into chaos devoid of form. As it is the universe gives us Planck's constant and the Constant of Gravitation and these are very easily explained and derived, once we have found the secret of why a particle has inertia. At least, this author has found that task somewhat easy, in the formal analytical sense. What has been enormously frustrating and excessively difficult has been the obstructive effect of the Einstein doctrine and the related disbelief in the existence of a aether. It is, to this author, quite remarkable to see so many errors perpetuated by so many scientists who live in the belief that the vacuum is empty of energy, that Maxwell's wave equations have sufficient meaning without there being something missing to explain dynamic balance and go even further in thinking that a photon can convey energy at the speed of light, when a particle travelling at the speed of light has infinite energy! It is incredible that the scientific community has been willing to tolerate the socalled 'wave-particle duality' problem, thereby giving up on resolving why it is that waves promote energy transfer in a sea of energy, as if carried by a particle travelling with the wave through space from A to B. Surely everyone should realize that the wave disturbance is all that 'travels', whereas the energy background absorbs energy quanta at A and sheds energy quanta at B, as if that energy has moved at the speed of light. If one takes away the energy background, the aether, and then finds that particles of photon energy have to travel at the speed of light one has immediately been inconsistent in ignoring the fact that mass energy becomes infinite at that speed. On the other hand, if one thinks of a wave as a disturbance of the energy in space but not as a transporter of energy, so the photon becomes an event in demise at A and an event in creation at B, and the question of the Larmor radiation of an accelerated charge is solved ab initio. There is no energy radiation and the E = Mc2 expression for inertia then emerges as a derived expression based on energy conservation, which was our starting point. A discerning reader might see the 'mechanic' as being in trouble in building his model of the vacuum energy machine with three major components, a structured electrical particle array moving inertially in counterbalance with a graviton system and an intermediate virtual mu-meson system occupying the inertial intermediate position. How can there be electrodynamic interaction from the gravitons and not from the charged structure? Well, the answer to that is again simple. The inertial frame is that in the intermediate position and the frame of reference having physical effect is that determined by the moving charged structure. In physics we have assumed that the inertial frame and the electromagnetic frame are one and the same, but we have not proved it. On the contrary, though experience on a macroscopic scale and Einstein doctrine tell us that there is something in common between these two frames, there is other evidence linked to Heisenberg's Uncertainty
10 Principle and quantum theory. This has been interpreted as a situation where the motion and position are both uncertain but they relate in a manner connected with Planck's constant. Imagine the 'structure', which we take to be the frame we sense electromagnetically, to move in a quantum orbit around the inertial centre, dynamically in balance with that graviton system. The 'structure' has a position that is uncertain in measure related to that orbital radius and a momentum that is uncertain in measure related to speed in orbit. That speed and that radius when multiplied together is a finite and fixed quantity; it is certain, yet position and momentum are uncertain! The 'mechanic' knew this when he built the machine and Heisenberg suspected the design 'principle' without realising that this very point is the real clue to the nature of gravitation! The 'mechanic' can also be seen to have built a universal timekeeper in that the orbital motion has to be one that is synchronous on a universal scale, as otherwise the structure that is moving will be distorted and will break up. Therefore, time itself is woven into the fabric of the space energy background and, again, one wonders how it is that 'time dilation' based on different observers in relative motion can be tolerated in physical theory and why Lorentz invariance has become a law unto itself. The author can but hope the reader will research this subject in his or her own way, beginning by reference to the few of the author's papers appended to this report. Whether or not the reader accepts what is said is of little consequence, provided, however, that the reader has at least seen a glimmer from that raging quantum inferno of energy that is there in our immediate space environment. Such a reader will, it is hoped, then be ready to be attentive to claims made by those now working in the 'free energy' field when they come to declare 'Eureka'. Personal Footnote by the Author The above account about the Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff inertia theory began by referring to the article in 'Science' by Robert Matthews who writes for the Sunday Telegraph in London, England. It was of interest to me to read in that article: "Their argument draws on a curious quantum vacuum phenomenon first described by the British physicist Paul Davies (now at the University of Adelaide in Australia) and William Unruh of the University of British Columbia in the mid1970s. If you move at a constant speed through the quantum sea of virtual particles, it looks the same in all directions. But as soon as you start to accelerate through it, theory predicts that the vacuum gives the appearance of being a tepid 'sea' of heat radiation." "Cosmologist Paul Wesson of the University of Waterloo, Canada, an authority on the links between the subatomic and cosmic worlds, is 'glad that someone is trying to return to the question of inertia again'. But he is concerned about 'the astrophysical and cosmological implications of the work'. Wesson's concern centres on the cosmological constant, best known as the add-on to Einstein's
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
11 equations of general relativity that endows free space with extra energy and gives it a gravitational effect." So here we have two authorities on the subject, one declaring that the energy of the vacuum appears hotter 'from the viewpoint of a particle' simply because that particle accelerates, and the other who is 'concerned' and is 'glad' that someone is trying to explain inertia. Much of what I have described in the above Report is the subject of my 1972 book 'MODERN AETHER SCIENCE'. It was Paul Davies, I believe, who at that time was called upon to review that book, branding it as 'Physics in Fairyland'. Yet I would say that it would indeed be a 'fairyland universe' if it were seen to glow with heat when someone sitting on an accelerated particle is looking at it but yet appear to cool suddenly if that acceleration ceases. If Davies is right it would seem that all we need to do to extract heat by allowing the vacuum medium to shed energy by cooling is to cause matter to oscillate and become a receiver of energy! This I do not believe, but I do believe, as I have explained on page 116 of 'MODERN AETHER SCIENCE' that "when a charge is set in motion it will have to find its own equilibrium via the catalytic action of the aether, exchanging energy with other free charge present ... the net effect being that the catalytic action can transfer kinetic energy between the charges, a phenomenon we well know from the behaviour of the electrical transformer." It is my contention that before we waste time trying to understand imagined apparitions of heat deployment in space, we should first explain how, in the laboratory, energy devoid of the independent observer as a local carrier of the action, finds its way from an electrical circuit into the vacuum medium as electrical inductance and then comes back again when we switch off the current. There is no point in scientists thinking they can explain the cosmology of the universe when, as is blatant fact, they cannot explain the nature of the energy processes involved in electrical inductance. The explanations on offer are empirical, just as if there were no such thing as 'cosmology' but only observation of stellar objects. If inductance requires acceptance of a real aether medium and not just a mathematical four-space formulation, so much of cosmology, with its reliance on symmetry and invariance, is open to question. One needs, as said above, to avoid forcing an argument forward by putting 'the cart before the horse'. Paul Wesson, I remember as a young scientist who had read about my theory and came to my home to discuss it even before beginning his graduate research study. I recall that he was impressed by my account of gravitation and tried to pursuade his academic supervisors at Cambridge to allow him to pursue the theory as his Ph.D. thesis subject, a request which was firmly denied!
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
12 So, should Paul Wesson come to read the above account, having stated that he is "glad that someone is trying to return to the question of inertia again", I send my greetings and invite him to look up and reread my account of inertia that was in my 1966 book 'THE THEORY OF GRAVITATION'. It is still the same, 28 years on, as a theory which says that an accelerated charge does not radiate energy, leading, as equation (1.18) on page 15 of that book, to: Electric field energy = mass of the field times c2 followed immediately by the words: "The realization that an electric field has the property of inertia is fully supported by the derivation of that equation". I have provided in Appendix A an extract from pages 80 - 84 of my 1980 book 'PHYSICS UNIFIED' to show the reader the formal analysis by which E = Mc2 is derived as an account of inertia based on energy conservation by accelerated charge. I have in APPENDIX B, by my paper 'A Theory of Proton Creation': Physics Essays, 1, 72-76 (1988), shown how the mu-meson energy sea in space is active in creating the proton. Similarly in APPENDIX C, by my paper 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant': Physics Essays, 2, 173-179 (1989), I show how G is determined by the space energy medium. Then, to round off the subject of this Report, I present by APPENDIX D, my paper 'Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer': Hadronic Journal, 11, 169-176 (1988). This latter paper solves a problem I struggled with for many years as I sought to deduce the full physical basis for steady-state electrodynamic interaction and explain how there could be balance of action and reaction forces in the electrodynamics that connects with gravitation. The propagation of action at the speed of light with all the mystery of the retarded 'solutions', the mathematical equations which confound textbooks on the subject and are never applied in practice, is clarified by this paper. Written in 1988 the paper complements my efforts to advance my earlier research into hadron electrodynamics, meaning my interest in the anomalous energy behaviour of heavy ions in electric discharges. However, for the general reader I commend study of the paper, having in mind the age-old question about action-at-a-distance forces and Newtonian interaction versus the propagated action that features in Einstein's theory. The action is summed up in the title of the paper. There is instantaneous action-ata-distance with spontaneous energy transfer both at the action source and at the seat of the distant reaction, but that action is with the local space energy medium and is followed by
13 a retarded adjustment of energy in the zero-point energy background as equilibrium of that sea of energy takes its time to recover. I conclude by thanking the Editors of Physics Essays and Hadronic Journal for permission to reproduce the appended papers. 26th April 1994 DR. HAROLD ASPDEN ENERGY SCIENCE LIMITED c/o SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB ENGLAND
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
14 APPENDIX A The Energy-Mass Formula In the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 6, published in 1994, this Appendix comprised a copy of a section of text between pages 80 and 84 of the author's 1980 book 'PHYSICS UNIFIED' published by Sabberton Publications, the distributers of this Report. It begins with a four-line quote from Einstein's 1905 basic paper. However, in this 2003 PDF version of the Report, it suffices to provide a link to those book pages as they are of record, also in PDF form, on the authors website. To see those five pages use the link below: http://www.aspden.org/books/Pu/pupp80to84.pdf
15
APPENDIX B A Theory of Proton Creation In the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 6, published in 1994, this Appendix comprised a copy of a paper printed in the Canadian periodical Physics Essays. This paper, published in 1988, presented the updated version of one of the primary themes of the authors theoretical work. Understanding the creation of the proton in the onward progress of our understanding of the physics which governs our universe. It is a key feature now included as Chapter 4 in the authors new work: The Physics of Creation, which now (June 2003) appears in full on the authors website www.aspden.org. However, here the object is to provide, for the record, a copy of Energy Science Report No. 6 and this Appendix, to be complete, requires access to that Physics Essays paper. To see that paper in PDF format use the link below: http://www.aspden.org/books/Asp/1988c.pdf
16
APPENDIX C The Theory of the Gravitation Constant In the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 6, published in 1994, this Appendix comprised a copy of a paper printed in the Canadian periodical Physics Essays. A mention of energy in transit in the copy of this paper that was included in that printed version of Report No. was marked with an asterisk drawing attention to an added footnote. This footnote was: [* Energy in transit has to be seen as a ripple in a large pool of energy. Just as a ripple in a pool of water travels at the wave velocity, so the energy ripple travels at the speed of light, but neither the water in the pool nor any energy moves at that wave velocity.] This related to the discussion of the electrodynamic action in the context of its relevance to gravitation, it being essential for energy to deploy in the field medium, which, absent an aether as such, requires energy to travel at the speed of light, whereas matter travelling at that speed would need to have infinite mass. The presence of the aether as an energy medium is essential if one is to interpret the empirical evidence in a way that makes sense in physical terms. To see that paper in PDF format use the link below: http://www.aspden.org/books/Asp/1989b.pdf
17
APPENDIX D Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer In the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 6, published in 1994, this Appendix comprised a copy of a paper printed in the U.S. periodical Hadronic Journal. At the time this paper was written, it was deemed by the author that understanding electrodynamic interaction as between particles of matter and their associated graviton accompaniment was vital to an in-depth understanding of the true nature of gravitational force. Although the author has, in the new book The Physics of Creation mentioned in Appendix B above, given reason for modifying his opinion on the role of electrodynamics in gravitational action, this paper warrants consideration and needs to stand on the published record of the authors work. Note also that it was written at a time when the author had been distracted by some fascinating observations by E. W. Silvertooth (now deceased) who had claimed to sense motion through the aether. This was mentioned on pp. 312 and 313 of that paper, but, nevertheless, in presenting the paper as Appendix D of Report No. 6, the author had reason to include the following footnote as an addition at the end of that paper: [* Although the author has anxiously waited for the Silvertooth Experiment to be confirmed or disproved, there has been no final clarification reported. Therefore, at the time of writing this Report (April, 1994), the author has decided to consolidate his theory, adhering to the position expressed on the EM (electromagnetic) reference frame in his book Physics Unified] The latter book is now of record in PDF form on the authors website www.aspden.org whereas the paper, the subject of this Appendix, can also be seen in PDF form by using the following link: http://www.aspden.org/books/Asp/1988a.pdf
Page 1 of 37
POWER FROM SPACE: THE CORREA INVENTION

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
Sabberton Publications P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England ISBN 0 85056 016 0
Contents Preliminary Remarks The Correa Project The Root of the Problem The Dilemma Confronted Operational Characteristics of Correa Discharge Device Performance Data of the Correa Discharge Device The Vapour Reaction Hypothesis The Author's 1977 Plasma Discharge Device Spence's 1986 Energy Conversion System Chernetskii Vacuum Energy Breakthrough A Concluding Note APPENDICES: I: Why the Earth is not a Self-Excited Dynamo II: The Thunderball - An Electrostatic Phenomenon Listing of Published Work of Dr. Harold Aspden
*****
http://www.aspden.org/reports/Es8/Rep8.htm
25.4.2005
Page 2 of 37

Introduction This Energy Science Report is one of a series concerned with new energy technology and the fundamental energy science that is involved. It is devoted exclusively to the research findings of Dr. Paulo Correa and Mrs. Alexandra Correa of Concord, Ontario, Canada and seeks to explain the fundamental physics underlying their remarkable experimental discovery. The Correa technology pioneers one of the four routes now opening up and promising to give us access to a plentiful and abundant source of what is coming to be termed `free energy'. These all can contribute in their various ways to an energy future free from pollution, but all, at this time, trespass on forbidden territory, as judged by orthodox physicists and so are not attracting mainstream scientific interest. This leaves the field open for exploration and exploitation by the few who do have the needed technical competence, the inspiration and an independence of spirit. The four avenues can be classified as (1) cold fusion, (2) ferromagnetism (3) vacuum spin and (4) electrodynamics. Each involves a mysterious input source of excess energy and each is destined to impact the world of technology in the near future. It is debatable at this time whether events will confirm true nuclear 'cold fusion' as the source of heat in the well publicized pioneer work of Fleischmann and Pons. It may in fact be another manifestation of the 'vacuum spin' phenomenon, by creating in an aqueous electrolyte, or even in the cathode itself, conditions somewhat analogous to those prevailing in the Correa apparatus. Indeed, there seems to be no doubt that the Correa technology itself bridges two of the above 'excess energy' categories, electrodynamics and vacuum spin. The Correa method is probably the most advanced of these emerging new energy technologies, being fully reproducible, well researched with its test findings well documented in and protected by granted U.S. patents. It already allows us to tap energy from space itself, or rather the vacuum field activity that fills space, and in contrast with the alternative methods it offers what may prove to be a mobile light-weight power source compared with the heavy apparatus needed where magnets and rotating machinery are involved. Unlike 'cold fusion' which generates low grade heat output, the Correa technology generates electricity at power voltage levels. The physics involved in understanding the source of energy in the Correa discharge tube is as basic as that required to understand the energy source which sets up the force of gravity. Both are seated in an electrodynamic action involving, in the main, heavy ions and, indeed, the electrodynamics of the interactions between heavy ions are not well understood by scientists. This is why they have failed to solve the mysteries of gravitation and the problem of field unification and why they have missed seeing the way forward to the new energy technology which we are about to discuss in this Report. Below we will come to describe the operating principles of the Correa invention and the action by which energy is extracted from the aether. The reader who is impatient and curious to learn some details about the technology may wish to jump ahead to read the section between pp. 6 and 8 and then from p. 17 before coming back to read what immediately follows. The sceptical scientist who does not expect to believe what is evidently being claimed will be served best by following the discourse as it now develops. Preliminary Remarks Having just stated that "the electrodynamics of the interactions between heavy ions are not well understood by scientists" I see it as important to justify this statement before I venture to criticize other aspects of basic physical theory relevant to the new energy field. I will simply quote a few
25.4.2005
Page 3 of 37
passages from the published specification of British patent application GB 2,002,953 which I, as inventor, applied for in 1978. The title of the patent application was 'Ion accelerators and energy transfer processes'. Textbook doctrine on the subject has not progressed since that time. "Electrical engineering has developed using the simplest formula (for electrodynamic interaction between electric charges in motion) and few today would concede that there is any question about the universal validity of this formula, the so-called Lorentz formula. More informed teachers of electrical engineering have kept the problem in mind and express caution. Professor E. B. Moullin, who was President of the Institution of Electrical Engineers and Professor of Electrical Engineering at Cambridge University at a time when the applicant was engaged on Ph.D. research in electromagnetism (1950-1953), wrote in the 1955 edition of his 'Principles of Electromagnetism': 'It is useless to speculate about the effects of electricity moving in a particular piece of circuit until we have discovered further laws of electromagnetism' This appears at page 26 of this Oxford University Press publication." "In a book by A. Von Engel entitled 'Ionized Gases', 1965 Edition also by Oxford University Press, there is the statement at page 285: 'There is no final answer to the question of whether the primary electrons find in the plasma an artifice which without extracting too much energy is able to transform the more or less uniform electron energy into an energy distribution which is needed to satisfy ion production in the gas. In fact it has been suggested, as a result of certain probe measurements, that there is a strong positive space charge accumulated in front of the cathode, so intense that the space potential is considerably higher than the discharge voltage and at least higher than the lowest excitation potential. How this space charge develops and how electrons have random energies sufficient to overcome the retardation in the negative field between the space charge and the anode is still an open question.' Earlier on page 273 he wrote: 'One of the most puzzling problems of the arc discharge is the functioning of the cathode of the cold arc. Cathodes of Cu, Ag, liquid Hg, and many other metals are examples of this type. It can be stated from the very outset that no final solution of this problem has yet been found.' Berneryd et al (Direct Current, vol. 6, 1961, pp. 81-85) studied instabilities of discharges and found positive ions to have energies very much higher than suggested by theory. Benford et al (New Scientist, vol. 56, 1972, pp. 514-516), writing about electron beams in relation to fusion, declared that a 1.3 MeV electron system accelerated gas ions to energies as high as 20 MeV. They said that the origin of the fields was a subject of speculation. Stock (Journal of Physics D, vol. 6, 1973, p. 988) found that ionization current calculated from electron energies were up to one thousand times smaller than those observed." Now, in quoting the above I have added the underlining to the marked passages to emphasize my point that the scientific èxperts' in the field do not understand the reason for these energy anomalies produced by electrical discharges through ionized gas. The scenario giving these problems is one where the discharge involves a predominant presence of heavy ions rather than the mere arc discharge of electrons freed as by thermionic emission. It applies to current in what are termed 'cold cathode' discharge tubes. The passages quoted above should be kept in mind when reading about the technological breakthrough disclosed by the Correa inventions. The phenomenon involved has been turned to account by generating electrical power output far in excess of the input power used and so it is no longer a question of scientists declaring, as they do regularly, that they understand so much about the
25.4.2005
Page 4 of 37
laws of thermodynamics that they can deny this possibility without even considering the evidence. They do not understand their own experimental findings of clear record in this particular technical field and so are in no position to say that excess power generation is impossible by virtue of a 'law' prescribed by past 'authority' in ignorance of the experimental facts just quoted. We have here to confront the reality of this situation, namely that energy from a mystery source can be harnessed technologically, and this Report aims to explain this as well as pointing to the source of that energy and showing where accepted physics stands in need of correction. To appreciate in full measure of what this Report is about it is recommended that the reader should procure copies of the three U.S. Patents granted to Dr. Paulo N. Correa and Mrs. Alexandra N. Correa: U.S. Patent No. 5,416,391 (issued May 16, 1995), U.S. Patent No. 5,449,989 (issued September 12, 1995) and U.S. Patent No. 5,502,354 (issued March 26, 1996). The disclosure in the specifications contains experimental facts presented in a form which amounts to an academic dissertation or degree thesis and, as I see it, the disclosure in these patents cannot now be ignored owing to their clear showing that we already have access to the hidden energy source which one can presume powered the creation of the universe. I can also interject here a note added since the main body of this text was written to advise that a full description of the Correa project together with a copy of the specification of U.S. Patent 5,416,391 has been published in the Vol. 2, No. 7, 1996 issue of Infinitie Energy (ISSN 1081-6372), Editor-inChief and Publisher Eugene F. Mallove Sc.D. and that publication warrants the fullest attention. Still as part of these preliminary remarks I further draw attention to the fact that my paper: 'The Law of Electrodynamics', appeared 27 years ago in the Journal of the Franklin Institute, 287, 171-183 (1969). It explained how one could justify, by simple dynamic analysis based on empirical data, the fact that in an electrical discharge through heavy ions there is an axial electrodynamic force acting on the ions that is (M/m)i2, where M/m is the ratio of ion mass to electron mass and i is the current carried by the heavy ions. I stated that many authors had found anomalous cathode reaction forces in discharge studies and quoted E. Kobel, Physical Review, 36, p.1636 (1930) as measuring that anomalous cathode reaction force and showing that it was proportional to the square of current and far greater than any value one could compute from a pinch pressure in the discharge filament. Later, in 1977, my paper: 'Electrodynamic Anomalies in Arc Discharge Phenomena', appeared in IEEE Transactions of Plasma Science, PS-5, 159-163 (1977). Here I had in mind the subject of my patent application as referenced above. See the quoted text on its p. 161 and the last five lines on p. 163, where the action was deemed to accelerate ions into the cathode as a means for generating heat. I had by then become aware of the possibility that we could tap vacuum field energy and generate heat anomalously by harnessing the electrodynamic forces set up in an axial discharge involving heavy ions. However, my circumstances did not allow me to take the proposition forward experimentally. The invention, the subject of that patent, was aimed at tapping the zero-point field energy to produce 'excess energy' heat by the electrodynamic ion discharge action which sustains a positive space charge adjacent the cathode. In contrast, as we shall see below, the Correa invention is able to produce electrical power directly by discharging that positive charge in pulses drawn through a secondary output circuit. The energy source in both cases is the same, as is the principle for setting up the positively ionized plasma and holding it transiently stable. By 1985 a new kind of discharge anomaly had been reported as a result of passing very high current through water. I showed a simple derivation of my version of the law of electrodynamics and commented on this anomaly in my paper: 'A New Perspective on the Law of Electrodynamics', Physics Letters, 111A, 22-24 (1985). This referred to the incomprehensible enormous explosive effects found from pulsed ion discharges in pure water and pointed again to the reason advocated
25.4.2005
Page 5 of 37
earlier, namely that scaling factor of m/m. Separately in my paper: 'Anomalous Electrodynamic Explosions in Liquids', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS-14, 282-285 (1986), I presented a more detailed analysis of the incredibly high speed at which ions are driven into an electrode, in defiance of known physics. In the Correa invention to be described there is a slowing down of these fast ions by causing them to transfer energy into the build-up of electric charge in the abnormal glow discharge in front of the cathode, which energy can be drawn off as output electrical power, rather than as heat. To complete this preliminary account I refer also to my paper: 'The Thunderball - An Electrostatic Phenomenon', presented at the 'Electrostatics 1983' conference held at Oxford University, and documented in Inst. Phys. Conf. Series No. 66, at pp. 179-184. As can be seen from the data presented in the third Correa patent referenced above, the operation of the Correa discharge tubes at low pulse frequency indicates that energy in excess of 1,000 joules can be stored in the plasma of each discharge pulse. This implies an enormous capacitance and voltage gradients that should be far in excess of those actually prevailing. Indeed, for such energy to be contained as electric charge energy in a plasma confined within the Correa tube one would expect voltage gradients expressed in billions of V/m, unless some compensating reaction suppresses that field. This energy of 1,000 J in a volume of plasma of the cubic cm. order is an energy density of some 109 J/m3, which is of the same order as that known to exist in thunderballs produced by lightning discharges. The Correa invention therefore, in a sense, mimics the action of lightning discharges in compacting energy into plasma balls which we see as the thunderball anomalies of atmospheric electricity. The subject paper, which will be reproduced later in this Report as Appendix II, explained how radial electric displacement, as opposed to the transverse displacement we know from Clerk Maxwell's theory, can induce `vacuum spin' or àether rotation' which permits such energy densities to be stored in an electrically quasi-stable manner at low voltage gradients. The Correa technology, it will be suggested, does therefore rely on `vacuum spin' for its storage function, whilst setting up the positive plasma in the discharge tube by electro-dynamic confinement in an axial sense, as opposed to the electromagnetic `pinch' sense that features in fusion reactor research. However, though it succeeds in sustaining confinement for the pulse period, the Correa device it is not powered by a fusion process. Indeed, since this author presented the subject paper at the conference at Oxford University he has become aware of independent research in three countries on electromagnetic machines which overheat owing to the low voltages and very high current involved, but which nevertheless draw energy anomalously from the àether' by setting up radial electric fields in a conductive disc spinning in a magnetic field. The Correa technology taps this same `vacuum spin' source of energy and the subject paper published by the Institute of Physics in U.K. points to the aether phenomenon involved. It is of interest also to mention that geophysicists and cosmologists have not been able to explain the magnetism of the Earth or the Sun in terms of unipolar charge rotating with that body, even though a connection was recognized which gave basis to the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis. This was not just because they discovered that the magnetic field reverses periodically but because the charge needed would develop those same electric field gradients of billions of V/m that are somehow avoided in the Correa tube. This really is an interesting subject of research, all connected with the evident fact that charge displacement in the aether cancels that electric field but does not cancel the magnetic field! I therefore see the Correa research as having important implications for the interpretation of several phenomena in cosmology. See also Appendix I, where I explain why the alleged self-excited dynamo theory for the geomagnetic field is quite untenable.
25.4.2005
Page 6 of 37
I refer in this connection also to 'Space, Energy and Creation', my privately published paper, for use on the occasion of a lecture delivered at the University of Cardiff in 1977. Copies are available from Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England, the publishing source of this Report. This was a lecture delivered by the author as an invited speaker addressing students in the Physics Department at that university. It dealt with the subject of anomalous electrodynamic acceleration of ions in plasma discharges and explained why this was relevant to the induction of 'vacuum spin' which was intimately linked with the energy and momentum aspects of creation of stars and planets, as well as thunderball and tornado phenomena. The basic physics of 'vacuum spin' are there presented in a concise way for easy assimilation by students. The lecture paper also explains how 'vacuum spin' can stabilize the axial discharge and pointed to some surprising experimental work by Vonnegut on that subject. Later in a note at the end of this report text from the last page of that lecture paper is reproduced for the reader's interest. It is also noted that an important updated section of the theoretical analysis in that paper has recently been incorporated in my new book 'Aether Science Papers', now available from the publishers of this Report. It will be evident from this that the now-emerging technology for generating power from space energy is destined eventually to upset the physics world and particularly cosmologists. Instead of exercising their criticism to block the breakthrough developments on the new energy front, they need instead to look to their own problems, as now exposed, because they have invested so much time in futile theoretical pursuits that now come under attack. The Correa Project Essentially the core element of the Correa apparatus is an electrical discharge tube containing a rarefied gas. It is a tube having a special construction but which can be manufactured in much the same way as a fluorescent lamp. Its objective, when used in a special circuit, is not the emission of light but rather the generation of electrical power in excess of the input power needed for its operation. This seemingly impossible feat is proved by providing a battery of electric d.c. storage cells large enough to deliver a high enough voltage to trigger the discharge which in turn feeds output to a separate battery of d.c. storage cells which store the electrical energy generated. Since the generation of electricity is the objective there can be no better way of proving that, over a period of time, the net energy output exceeds by far the net energy input. Measurements of instantaneous power and the energy transients can reassure an investigator that there is a power gain but sustained performance conditions are essential for a definitive proof. Indeed, this will be better understood when the principle of operation is explained. The pulse of energy input is ahead of the output pulse in timephasing, owing to the intervening opening of the gate, otherwise described as the radial electric field, which allows entry of energy from the quantum activity of the vacuum field. The battery tests, repeated during a succession of charge and discharge cycles, using two banks of cells, one charging on output power as the other discharges input power, provide indisputable evidence of a substantial gain in power. This gives a verifiable accounting of an energy inflow that can be put to good use while enough energy is returned to sustain operation of the system. Though a cumbersome part of the overall apparatus in comparison with the small and light-weight tube, which is the heart of the system, such a battery of conventional electric storage cells satisfies a research need, but ultimately, since power feedback should make the device self sustaining, one can foresee a compact product not requiring these cells and which operates to deliver electric power, as if from nowhere. Now, our world of technology is not really ready to accept such a claim and no amount of technical comment here concerning the specific structure of the Correa apparatus can sway the minds of a professionally qualified engineering and scientific community, well indoctrinated by their teaching and by their experience to require conformity with the well established laws of thermodynamics.
25.4.2005
Page 7 of 37
It goes without saying that one simply cannot get energy from nowhere and so there are only two issues to confront. Firstly, does the Correa apparatus really deliver what is claimed? That is a question of fact which needs the testimony of those witnessing demonstrations and able to judge what they see. Secondly, given that the Correa invention does deliver excess power, how are we to come to terms with the need to understand the true source of that excess energy? To be sure, the answer is not to be found in physics textbooks and such textbooks are not noted for disclosing unsolved mysteries. Yes, they do tell us that there is still a mystery concerning the force of gravity, which we all know should somehow find unification with the theory of electromagnetism. However, gravity is something everyone of us contends with every waking hour of our lives. It weighs upon us physically, if not mentally, but there are forces and actions seated in the energy background that are revealed only in a spurious way or come fleetingly from unusual experimental conditions. These are not recorded in our physics textbooks, because those who write such books write only about topics they understand and can explain by accepted theory. This, therefore, is why this Report is being written. We need to understand that source sufficiently to be able to do onward design work and develop the Correa invention. We need to understand it in order to reassure those who manage and invest in new energy technology, because there has to be scientific certainty underpinning any R & D venture that is not funded as a mere academic speculation. The latter is the province of the funding resource assigned to university and to government research institutions and those responsible for such funding are very careful indeed in ensuring they avoid controversy by not investing in projects which their peers may ridicule. The Correa project is now the trigger for taking forward the theme of some earlier research findings, notably those of Geoffrey Spence, a researcher in U.K. who has demonstrated an operable òverunity-performing' discharge device to sponsoring interests, but whose device was presumably impractical in requiring heavy magnets to guide the discharge in a kind of cyclotron spiral orbit. There is also the research of Professor Chernetskii in Russia and possibly even the work of Tesla to keep in mind, but it is the research of Dr. Paulo Correa and Alexandra Correa that has been disclosed in sufficient detail to warrant attention at this time in view of the immediate prospect it offers for rapid technological development. Later in this Report such background activity will be reviewed because the several earlier findings lend support to the Correa project, but the immediately following sections of this Report will be devoted to presenting a scientific case concerning the true source of the excess energy generated by these plasma discharge devices. To conclude this introduction to the Correa project, it is noted, by way of a summary, that the apparatus involves a cold-cathode electric discharge with current flow between anode and cathode producing an axially-directed electrodynamic compression force which squeezes positive ions into a ball of plasma trapped against the cathode. The electron current from the cathode delivers the negative electrons at a rate which is overwhelmed by the ion discharge pulse and the powerful ball of positively charged plasma can build up enormous radial electric field gradients which induce equally enormous cancelling electric field gradients owing to a spin reaction set up in the vacuum medium. The vacuum reacts by propagating waves when responding to transverse electric fields around a radio antenna. However, whereas the latter promote such wave propagation according to Maxwell's theory, the vacuum spin provides a contained quasi-stable field condition which draws energy from the phase-lock of the quantum spin states of the enveloping aether field. The analogy we see in nature is the creation of the thunderball which research findings show to have electrical energy densities of the order of 109 J/m3 stored in their plasma forms. Some of the pulses in the Correa experiments operated at low pulse frequencies are found to contain energy of one thousand joules or more. With a 2 cm electrode spacing defining a plasma as having a volume of cubic cm. order, this gives 109 J/m3 as an energy density, clearly of the same order as is reported from thunderball investigations. It has, incidentally, been reported that a thunderball was once seen to enter a barrel of water and dissipate itself leaving the water at an elevated temperature. From the data collected its energy density was estimated.
25.4.2005
Page 8 of 37
However, we can now see from the Correa research findings that the trapped energy can be deployed into electrical power output and so measured as it is shed by an output pulse and then more energy can be regenerated repeatedly at the pulse frequency. The Correa data indicate an inverse relationship between the energy output per pulse and the pulse frequency, given a sustained input voltage and input current. Therefore, much of the Correa research has involved examining different electrode configurations, gas fillings and pressures, as well as different electrode materials and operating conditions, all with the object of determining which give the best power gain. Such data is presented in the Correa patents and the technical description which will be given later in this Report is directed not to the specific technology options, but rather to the disclosure of what is relevant to understanding what governs the access to the vacuum energy source. The Root of the Problem It is basic to the teaching of Newtonian mechanics that momentum is conserved when energy transfers between particles in motion. Yet Newton's laws were formulated before the electrodynamic action between charged bodies had been discovered and before it was known that all matter is composed of fundamental particles which are electrically charged. Scientists today declare that a substantial portion of the matter forming material bodies on Earth is really attributable to `neutrons', which supposedly have no electrical charge. However, the neutron exhibits a magnetic moment that betrays the presence of electrical charge in its composition and all we really know about the properties of a neutron apply to something that only exists as an unstable particle having a mean lifetime of the order of 15 minutes. It is mere hypothesis to suggest that neutrons exist alongside protons in atomic nuclei and so exist as a major component of matter. In fact, beta particles (electrons and positrons) have a stronger claim to a presence in atomic nuclei and these can serve with protons to account for all the properties of the atomic nucleus. Essentially, the point made here is that Newton devised his laws without taking proper account of the electrodynamics of interacting charges and the fact that all matter, even matter we see as electrically neutral, comprises nothing other than such charged particles. In the electric discharges of the Correa apparatus we have a scenario where heavy atomic ions, rather than mere electrons, are also the charge carriers. A rarefied gas, such as argon, in the discharge tube is ionised and the heavy positive ions are pulled one way by an electric field, whilst the electrons go the other way. The current flow is that of electrons in one part of a closed circuit but at least partially that of heavy ions in another part of the same closed circuit. To understand the physics involved, we need to know whether Newtonian principles hold valid in such a case and whether even standard electrodynamic principles hold valid having regard to the fact that their empirical basis is not the testing of current circuits where heavy ions flow in one circuit segment and electrons flow in another circuit segment. There are undisputed and unexplained anomalies of record in the science literature concerning the very substantial cathode reaction forces set up in what has come to be termed a cold cathode discharge. These have been mentioned already but the Correa patent specifications reference several other sources and the data provided in the Correa patents include measurements of such forces in the apparatus tested by Dr. Correa. In the cold cathode discharge thermionic emission of electrons from the cathode is avoided and an electric potential set up between anode and cathode is relied upon to trigger the discharge. Ostensibly, it seems that there is a force acting on the cathode with no counterpart force acting on the anode The root of our problem then has two offshoots, one being the Newtonian origin of the principle of conservation of momentum and the other being a feature of accepted electrodynamic law that says that interaction forces act on charge at right angles to their motion.
25.4.2005
Page 9 of 37
There is contradiction of principle here and virtually all physics textbooks contrive to avoid discussion on this enigmatic problem. If an electrodynamic force acts on charge at right angles to its motion it cannot do any work. This means that there can be no exchange of energy with the field background owing to that interaction and other than the energy deployments that arise from electrostatic potential. It means that physics theory obscures the process of electromagnetic induction by relying on an incompatible mixture of empirical formulations which serve us well in engineering design, provided we do not trespass into territory outside the scope of the empirical protocol relevant to our problem. The Correa invention lies in that outside territory because the current circuit through the discharge tube is not one involving a closed all-electron flow such as was used in one or other of the interacting circuits that gave basis for the accepted empirical data. It is well accepted that if there can be any breach of the principle of conservation of momentum then there is scope for gaining, or losing energy, anomalously, in seeming contradiction with the principle of conservation of energy. However, one needs to be careful to be sure that one is looking at a total system. If the field background contains energy, even the energy stored by magnetic induction, it must participate in the energy conservation process and that field background is not something we can isolate as belonging exclusively to a particular charged particle or a particular current circuit. There is enough energy activity in the vacuum (the aether) owing to its intrinsic charge motion that underlies the quantum control of atomic electrons to assure the buffer needed to keep faith with the law of energy conservation, whatever anomalous forces are developed in any apparatus we can build. In the university teaching of dynamics as evidenced by a textbook by an author in Cambridge, the seat of learning attended by Isaac Newton, and published by Cambridge University Press, the principle of conservation of momentum is deduced by the preliminary assumption that internal actions and reactions between particles are equal and opposite in pairs. It is as if each and every paired combination of particles interact with one another without any dependence upon anything else. This is manifestly not the case for the electrodynamic interaction because electrodynamics has a dependence upon motion relative to a frame of electromagnetic reference, something totally absent from Newtonian mechanics. When Einstein tried to bring conformity between inertial and electromagnetic effects his transformations of the space and time dimensions led him to the Lorentz force law, which prescribes that the interaction force between two electric charges in motion is not directed between the two charges as internal actions and reactions between particles that are equal and opposite in pairs. This condition is only met where the two charges travel at the same speed side-by-side along parallel paths and this clearly is not the case for the discharge current through the tubes used in the Correa apparatus. An electrical discharge likes to form a kind of filamentary current with charge travelling in line, each ion or electron following behind its like form but the negatively charged electrons dodging around the heavy ions or even replacing electrons in the atomic ion and neutralizing its state. It follows, therefore, that, whether one relies on the principles of Newton or Einstein, or both, these being the accepted doctrines, the resulting theory will have no certain bearing on the practical situation encountered by the Correa research. This means that, with the vast majority of scientists all conforming with the restrictive disciplines of physics that confine knowledge to conventional technology, those few who venture into the new energy world with an open mind confront some very significant opportunities. So, first and foremost, we must be prepared, when considering certain very special situations in electrodynamics, to go against the teachings of our profession and pay attention to the messages in the experimental findings disclosed by the Dr. Paulo Correa and Mrs. Alexandra Correa. The earlier messages about anomalous electrodynamics which this author found in the many
25.4.2005
Page 10 of 37
scientific papers of record were sufficient reason for investigating where the errors had crept into our theories. The author discovered how energy is stored by electromagnetic inductance within a metal body and how it is later retrieved from within that conductive material. This provided the onward inspiration for questioning how the electrodynamic interaction between two electric charges in motion is affected if they have the same charge magnitude but different mass. There was, in the metal, a magnetic field reaction which was not properly factored into the diamagnetic state as analyzed in conventional theory. It was in fact ignored, because energy was not the focus of attention in the use of the Lorentz field formulation, but if its energy role had been duly noted and incorporated in the theory of the steady field situation, it would have given explanation of the factor-of-2 anomaly that became known as the g-factor. This is a phenomenon of charge in orbital motion, but theoretical physicists sought to solve the problem by inventing what they called 'spin', even though a charge which `spins' is not moving its centre of charge and so its field is not changed by a changing spin condition. There are angular momentum issues involved here in relation to magnetic moments and the g-factor was measured in solid metal rods by the ratio of these two quantities. The essential step needed to explain that factorof-2 in terms of orbital reaction of electron motion required taking the argument from within the metal to the external vacuum field. There has to be in the aether the same basic g-factor reaction as applies within a metal conductor and this clearly points to the g-factor reaction being at the heart of the field energy storage by magnetic induction. The aether and its angular momentum properties as well the thermodynamic properties associated with the activity of its charge composition cannot just be brushed out of sight by a flourish of the mathematician's pen. I interject here the comment that I am not unaware of the anomalous g-factor account afforded by Q.E.D., the theory of quantum electrodynamics. This is regarded as being the only theory of relevance on the subject of electron dynamics, because it can explain the g/2 factor of the electron as being 1.001159652. It involves copious mathematical exercises that are far too extensive to be fully worked through and documented to that precision in any textbook. Indeed, as the successive advances in precision measurement crept to this quoted value, the theoretical physicist was always found to be lagging behind in trying to work through to the next iteration in the calculation. If, on the other hand, the reader would like to see a derivation of the factor 1.001159652200 fully presented in only three printed pages, the reference is the Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 32, 114-116 (1981), this being a well known English language periodical published by the Italian Institute of Physics which was noted for its rapid publication of new scientific contributions. A later very relevant reference on the same theme, but more closely connected with the energy source we are concerned with in the Correa invention, is my paper entitled 'Fundamental constants derived from two-dimensional harmonic oscillations in an electrically structured vacuum', which appeared in Speculations in Science and Technology, 9, 315-323 (1986). This paper, as the title implies, referred to synchronizing constraints as between aether charge in its quantum activity as part of the vacuum medium. The analysis, which is quite brief, is also reproduced in my new book 'Aether Science Papers'. As energy is 'lost', as by thermal radiation into outer space, it is absorbed into the quantum activity of a two-dimensional oscillating system. There is equipartition of energy as between charge displacement and kinetic energy. Now, if this energy system of the field medium is caused to move in one region relative to another region of that same medium, this invokes that constraining action because the aether charge is kept in synchronized motion at a universal rhythm, the photon frequency at which the surplus energy can materialize as electron pairs or heavy electron pairs (the latter being otherwise known as `muons'). If, on the other hand, one interferes with this activity by producing a positively charged cluster of ions, this sets up a radial electric field and forces radial charge displacement in that aether medium. This would upset the timing as each displaced element of aether charge in its quantum orbit moves
25.4.2005
Page 11 of 37
faster about the centre of the orbit in one half cycle and then slower in the next half cycle. However, the synchronizing power coupled to all that energy in the aether resists that and assures a perfect phase-lock with the result that, to hold smoothly in that state, the whole system of aether charge has to rotate about the centre of that radial electric field. The glow discharge in the Correa tube becomes the seat of what this author has called 'vacuum spin'. Such a spin condition derives its power by drawing on energy from the universal field system enveloping the glow discharge. In other words, the action promotes the inflow of aether energy from outer space. The key to all this is that synchronizing influence or phase-lock that is at the very heart of quantum theory, this being a theory that represents the properties of the harmonic oscillator and is governing at the microcosmic level where individual electron motions are coupled to the action quantum. Planck's constant is, in fact, determined by the structural form of the array of aether charge which constitutes the elusive, but real, medium we call the 'vacuum'. This link between the vacuum medium or vacuum energy field and electrons is crucial to our problem of tapping energy from what we see as empty space, but to get things started we need to set up that positive core charge. Here, rather than just using electric field effects to pull electrons out faster than the positive ions can make their way to the cathode of a discharge tube, we find that the action can be augmented electrodynamically as a function of current discharge. The heavier mass of the positive ions helps enormously in making them more sluggish, but it needs real force to compress those ions into a positive ball of plasma and here the anomalous electrodynamic interaction forces along the current axis become effective. It is a curious fact of accepted physics that the interaction forces between two charges in motion are assumed not to have any dependence upon the mass of the particles transporting those charges. We use Newtonian mechanics to argue that momentum has to be conserved, momentum depending upon mass, but somehow eliminate mass from the electrodynamic problem. Why then should we be surprised to hear that when experiments are performed involving charge interactions between heavy particles and light particles, atomic or molecular ions and electrons, we encounter energy and momentum anomalies? The very substantial anomalous cathode reaction forces observed in reported experiments indicate that a powerful force is exerted on the cathode with no counterpart reaction on the anode. They indicate, by theory alone, that energy is being shed by the inductive system in excess of that supplied when the discharges through the device are pulsed. However, the Correa research gives us the experimental proof. As an aside here, it is mentioned that the energy source is much the same as that already discussed in Report No. 1 in this series, where the author has pursued his interest in ferromagnetism to show that the energy set up inductively in a gap between two magnetic poles can exceed the energy input to a magnetizing winding. The energy source in the latter case is the quantum priming of the electron motion in the atoms in the ferromagnet. However, in the Correa situation, access to that energy is more directly associated with the motion of the underlying electromagnetic frame of reference. In a sense, the quantum world involves microscopic orbital motion of a charge system constituting the vacuum medium at a very high frequency, the Compton electron frequency, whereas superimposed on this there is a low frequency rotation of a very extensive electromagnetic system. Both of these motions feed the anomalous energy to the Correa apparatus. The Earth would have to stop rotating and to arrest its translational motion with the local galaxy before the energy resource harnessed by the electrodynamic action in the Correa apparatus can be exhausted. However, the energy of the quantum activity at that Compton frequency will never be exhausted, simply because the rest condition of the vacuum medium is one of negative electric potential and the absolute ground state cannot go sub-zero anywhere. Then, because energy is
25.4.2005
Page 12 of 37
conserved overall, we must have activity, meaning motion of charge, which keeps the charge displaced to positions of positive finite potential in which its motion stores additional energy, the fluctuations of which give life to the universe. Now, physicists, except at least for this author who is also professionally qualified as a physicist, are locked into the belief that momentum as well as angular momentum are conserved, meaning that an isolated system cannot by its internal interactions develop any angular momentum or linear momentum. For this reason, so far as they are at all interested in the problem, they have been very perplexed by the fact that the solar system has angular momentum that is not zero. Indeed, the Sun and the planets all rotate in the same sense and so the Sun must have been created in a rotating state before it shed matter to form the planets. By standard physical theory this is not possible but it is nevertheless an indisputable fact. How then have cosmologists come to terms with this problem? It is all too easy to say that the angular momentum was there, shared by matter in its galactic circulation, before that matter condensed to form the Sun, but that says nothing about how it all started. One hypothesis was that another star grazed past the Sun to set it in rotation and in the process disperse the matter that condensed to form the planets. Yet when the chance of this occurring was estimated it was found so improbable that of all the stellar systems in the universe the solar system would possibly be unique as the one having planets. Another hypothesis was that all the stars were created together in a Big Bang and were so close at the time that they could exchange angular momentum and so move outwards in a spinning state. What is not seen as possible by accepted physics teaching is the acquisition of angular momentum and linear momentum as energy was fed into the nucleating star to create it. Energy transfer from 'somewhere' surely implies that momentum and angular momentum can flow in from that same 'somewhere'. So it seems very logical for some of us to be open to the possibility that somehow Nature has a way of breaking faith with what we have adopted as the laws of physics, because, as surely as the Sun was created, there is a physical process that is non compliant with our modern physics teaching. The author submits that it was the initial onset of gravitation that triggered creation and caused the dispersed electric charges in the universe to condense to form stars, in much the same way as ferromagnetism appears in iron as it cools through its Curie temperature. This brings into account the anomalous transfer of energy and momentum to matter. The heavy protons would converge to form the stellar nucleus before the lighter-mass electrons could come together to neutralize the star so formed. The electrodynamic interactions between electrons and heavy ions during this primordial period would set up the linear momentum of the star and the transient radial electric field in the conductive plasma would develop the vacuum spin which imparts the angular momentum. The technological discovery evident from the Correa research is therefore giving direct evidence of the anomalous electrodynamic force interactions between heavy ions and electrons, which go hand in hand with anomalous momentum and anomalous energy. The physics involved in such research is much closer to the subject of energy powering the Sun than is the physics of nuclear fusion. Readers who decide to look up their book references on Newton's laws should consider the right way and the wrong way of presenting those laws in the light of our knowledge of electrodynamics. Newton himself, if he were alive today, would surely be prepared to restyle his argument if, by doing so, he could adapt the laws to extend their cover beyond macroscopic mechanics and embrace the microscopic dynamics of electric particle interactions. Firstly, note that it is Newton's third law of motion that is in issue, the balance of action and reaction. Newton combined this law with the principle of conservation of energy and was able to deduce that two particles, not necessarily having the same mass, would emerge from a collision with their relative velocity reversed. In sharing their energy the velocities of the two particles have to adjust so as to assure that they separate from the collision with a relative velocity that is -1 times their relative
25.4.2005
Page 13 of 37
velocity just before impact. This is known in mechanics as 'Newton's rule'. Secondly, note that it is logical that if two conditions determine a third condition then that third condition taken with one of the two conditions can determine the other of the two conditions. If, therefore, Newton had taken his 'rule' to be his third law, especially as it is more easily demonstrated, as by propelling a metal ball into another at rest and observing that it transfers its motion to that other ball, then he would have got things the right way around. The new law would be a 'law of relative motion' and, taken together with the principle of energy conservation, one can then deduce that action and reaction follows 'as a rule'. Thirdly, given this latter entry to the physics of electrodynamics, one can give support to the 'law of relative motion' because electric charge interactions are dependent upon relative position and so upon relative motion, but not dependent upon mechanical inertia. Fourthly, however, we have a new scenario once electrodynamics get into the act, because whereas a pure mechanical system involves the summation of discrete collisions between pairs of constituent particles, which only see their own energies as involved at the instant of collision, the case is entirely different for the electrodynamic interaction. The reason is that there will invariably be numerous other electric particles in motion in the immediate locality of the colliding charges. The conserved energy is not exclusively that of a collision between a discrete pair of charges. In the latter situation the derivation of the 'rule' that action and reaction are always equal will fail. Energy will always be conserved but one cannot in this case formulate the relevant energy exclusively in terms of the square of a relative velocity. In mathematics every square power of a quantity has two roots, one positive and one negative, which is why we see the relative velocity of two colliding balls reverse after their impact. It is all a question of mixing vector and scalar quantities. Energy is a scalar quantity but velocity is a vector. We can take numerous particles conforming with linear vector equations and add their individual contributions to determine the overall state of a combined system, but once we start changing those vectors by working out the square roots of component scalar energy quantities, without being able to exclude the external cross interactions between charges acting on the two in collision, we really are headed for trouble. The well proven laws we have accepted for mechanics cannot be applied to practical situations where there is a dominant electrodynamic effect involving the interaction of electrons and heavy ions. This rider has been added because Nature contrives to deceive us in a rather curious way when we apply the Newtonian philosophy to the electrodynamics of the closed circuital all-electron current flow. We find we can use the Lorentz force law which does not conform with Newton's law of action balancing and reaction and apply this to all the discrete elemental current circuit interactions to find in the end that they sum to give the balance needed to satisfy Newton's law for the circuit as a whole. This is a quirk of the mathematics of this situation combined with the fact that the Lorentz formulation prescribes force on charge in motion acting at right angles to that motion. A force so directed can do no work and so the summation of all the individual interactions will result in no work being done, meaning that the circuit carrying current is not giving or drawing power from its field environment. It can therefore not assert force on that environment and so internally its action overall must balance its reaction. Yet, as soon as we change that current, there is inductive energy exchange with that field environment, which means that somehow the forces on the electrons moving through that circuit are no longer at right angles to charge motion. Electric fields have been set up by induction effects and the moment these are introduced one is bringing into play empirical rules, all of which have been discovered by experiments where at least one of the interacting current sources is all-electron closed circuit flow or its equivalent.
25.4.2005
Page 14 of 37
Once one departs from the latter constraint one enters a realm needing new physics tailored to the problem of electrodynamic interaction between heavy ions and electrons, because the mass of the charge carrier has to play a role in the dynamics of force-producing situations. In fact, analysis shows that it is the mass ratio between two interacting charge carriers that is the dominant consideration and it so happens that in the all-electron current flow circuit this ratio is unity, thereby disguising its true relevance in an electrodynamic formulation. Once that ratio is measured in thousands as is the case the heavy ion to electron mass ratio, then we enter a whole new scenario, the one into which the Correa research has ventured. In summary, therefore, the root of the problem of understanding why the Correa apparatus actually works is intermeshed with the basic principles of Newtonian mechanics and their inadequacy in coping with the conditions peculiar to the electrodynamic interaction. To adjust our theories to the facts of the Correa experiments and at the same time bring conformity and unification into the connection between Newtonian mechanics, gravitation and electromagnetism, we need to correct the empirical law of electro-dynamics so that it embraces the interaction between heavy ions and electrons. There has to be a mass term in the law of electrodynamics. This author derived the inter-electron interaction law nearly 40 years ago and the version with the mass ratio term some 30 years ago but it was not until 1969 that its derivation featured in a scientific paper as published by the Journal of the Franklin Institute. This was referenced in the earlier introduction. The law thus formulated in no way conflicts with the accepted Lorentz law when applied to the same problems, those involving closed circuital electron current. It indicates powerful anomalous forces on heavy ions flowing between electrodes in a gas discharge tube where the current circuit is completed by a partially closed electron circuit. These anomalous forces generate the build up of electric charge at the cathode which establishes the condition needed to trigger excess power output from the Correa discharge tube. The Dilemma Confronted Hopefully the reader will now join the author in confronting the dilemma which has been introduced in the foregoing pages. We have on the one hand certain anomalous facts of experiment which have been building up over many years and are now crowned, not so much by the Correa discovery, but by the fact that the Correa patents disclose so much experimental data that technologists have the way charted to begin to invade the new energy world. We have on the other hand a well established scientific belief system enshrined in notions of the socalled Big Bang creation of the universe and the notions of a relativistic four-dimensional space-time metric which aims to destroys belief in an aether brimming with energy. We have intermediate these extremes the knowledge that physicists and cosmologists openly admit that they are still searching for their Holy Grail, the Unified Field Theory, by which they mean a theory conforming with the Einstein doctrine but yet bridging the gap between electrodynamics and gravitation. Supplementary to this we have the very extensive theoretical contributions of this author, all built on the revision of physics resulting from acceptance of a vacuum energy medium and that law of electrodynamics as adjusted to permit anomalous force imbalance in the interaction of moving electric charges of different mass. The author's theory is an all-embracing unified field theory. In the appendices which follow this text many of the relevant references will be listed. The author has come to realise that the scientific community is so entrenched in its dedication to the Einstein doctrine, which is linked with the Lorentz force law, that no amount of contrary reasoning based on
25.4.2005
Page 15 of 37
new theory will be heeded. This is why the experimental discovery demonstrable by Dr. Paulo Correa and Mrs Alexandra Correa is of vital importance, not just as a way forward which offers us direct access to a new source of energy, but for its scientific significance. The anomalous cathode reaction forces discovered and duly recorded by past experimenters have been swept aside by physicists with the presumption that there must be sufficient electrode vaporization to explain the cathode reaction force. That process would, of course, impart a back pressure on the vapour that would assert a balancing force on the anode. However, I am not aware of any tests that confirm the balancing reaction on the anode and I find it difficult to understand how vaporization of a metal can impart much more energy to the freed atoms than is implicit in the latent heat of vaporization. See the later comment on this point. The generation of excess energy in seeming breach of the law of action and reaction is the decisive factor in determining the scientific truths involved in this situation and the Correas have taken us forward decisively on that front. What lies ahead, therefore, is not only the entry into a new energy regime, but the prospect of a developing thrust in aerospace applications and a scientific revolution as the extremes of modern philosophy in physics collapse into a more rational picture. The dilemma the reader now faces is whether to do nothing and simply watch events, leaving the task to others, or whether to explore and probe the Correa claims to try to trace a flaw in their experiments, (if there is one to be found!) or whether to stand by the principle that what amounts to 'perpetual motion' is impossible and so pass judgment solely on the strength of that conviction. It may or may not help the argument to say that each atom in the reader's body exemplifies the reality of 'perpetual motion', because if the reader were to die and be cooled down to the absolute zero of temperature, minus 273oC, the electrons in every atom in the reader's body would keep moving perpetually. All that is suggested by the new theory underlying the new energy science is that, by understanding the quantum activity of the aether and showing how it determines the Planck constant and regulates electron motion in atoms, we can see a way forward to tapping into that energy system. The obvious challenge comes in the statement: "Prove it by demonstrating something that works." Well, the Correas have done that! Yet even that will not be enough to turn the scientific world upside down, because the cry then is: "Where does the energy come from?" Well, the author has outlined the explanation above! Yet that will not be enough, because the scientists who are able to judge the theoretical arguments would rather not waste time in that effort, being so confident that there must be flaws. So, assuming the worst case scenario, the final arbiter is likely to be the public at large, those who care little about where the energy comes from, so long as it is cheap, plentiful and non-polluting. That means that we will need to see several technologies develop all generating energy in a way which confounds the physicists but all aimed at the domestic market or the small user, such as by providing back up power to keep electric batteries on a boat charged when the boat is not being used. In saying this, the author is aware of initiatives around the world and particularly in Japan which do seem to be backed by adequate funding and which suggest a lower level of prejudice against the new energy theme. So it is really now a question of waiting to see how the situation develops, trusting that what is explained in this Report will contribute to forward developments. Even though we will hear much about new technology in the form of anomalous heat generation at
25.4.2005
Page 16 of 37
water temperatures and new motor technology in which magnets play a dominant role, all pointing to excess energy generation, whichever technology is the first to command enough attention to convert Establishment opinion from disbelief to belief will pave the way for acceptance of the other technologies. In this race, the Correa technology has a distinct advantage in that it is already the subject of three granted patents in USA, in that the claims of these patents cover, quite broadly, the three key aspects of what the Correas have discovered and in that the scientific basis is seated in anomalies long recognized in scientific literature by authoritative institutional researchers. This is why much of the remainder of this Report simply gives references and abstracts as there seems little that needs further explanation other than the provision of a brief description of the way in which the Correa tube taps aether energy. As with any technological development introducing a new electronic device it will be necessary to involve experts in the design for mass production, with particular attention to the problem of enhancing electrode lifetime. There will be scope for more invention in improved design structure of the electrode configurations and choice and composition of electrode materials, but there are some new and interesting principles embodied in the patented Correa apparatus and these should survive and have value as the technology comes into commercial use. I am writing this section of text on February 13, 1996 and have just received my copy of the February 1996 issue of New Energy News, a monthly publication edited by Dr. Hal Fox and issued from a postal address P.O. Box 58639, Salt Lake City, UT 84158-8639. At pp. 10-12 I summarized the 1 hr documentary shown on British television on 17th December 1995 concerning 'free energy'. That programme included reference to research on energy from plasma discharges, notably by reference to the research of Professor Chernetskii in Moscow, but the programme was compiled before news concerning the Correa discovery came to light. Accordingly, in my submission to New Energy News I did refer to the Correa research in Canada. I find, incidentally, that the editor, Hal Fox, interjected the additional note that "The work by Kucherov, Karabit & Savitimova has also shown excess heat generation from a `glow discharge'", but I have at this time no data on that subject. The remaining body of this Report will concentrate on a simple illustrated exposition as to why the abnormal glow discharge in a Correa tube generates excess energy and how that energy is taken off as electric power rather than as heat. So far as possible what is presented will be extracts from what has already been published on the subject, since it is not appropriate to elaborate new theories to explain the operation of the technology discovered by Dr. Paulo N. Correa and Mrs Alexandra Correa. The object here is to show that the scientific basis of the discovery is something in common with natural phenomena that have hitherto defied accepted explanation when the physics was there on record but was ignored. Operational Characteristics of Correa Discharge Device The excess energy mode of operation of a typical Correa discharge device involves cyclic current oscillations in the EF region of the operational characteristic depicted in Fig. 1 of U.S. Patent No. 5,416,391.
25.4.2005
Page 17 of 37
Note that AGD denotes the abnormal glow discharge region. The plotted data show how current varies as the voltage between the electrodes increases. There are two regions of negative resistance. The one at higher current is used to develop pulsating current oscillations which allow excess energy to be drawn from the device. To get current to flow between the two electrodes in a cold-cathode discharge tube containing a rarefied inert gas such as argon a sufficient voltage, of the order of 1,000 V, is needed to initiate ionization. Much then depends upon the circuit connected to the tube and the load conditions that can limit the current to certain levels, which in the case of the Correa invention hold the current in a stable pulsating oscillation mode. Normally the current will climb to the VAD region where the high current vacuum arc discharge condition applies. That state does not deliver excess energy output. Once the ions are formed (Fig. 2) a flow of current through the tube arises by the attraction of electrons to the anode and the migration of the positive ions owing to their attraction to the cathode.
25.4.2005
Page 18 of 37
Fig. 2 Because the heavy positive ions do not move as rapidly in the field between the electrodes as do the electrons, there will be a residual positive space charge established, particularly adjacent to the cathode. This means that there will be a radially directed electric field gradient from the centre of the glow discharge. Now, how does the medium to which we attribute electromagnetic wave propagation in terms of Maxwell's displacement current respond to a radial electric field? It responds by trying to cancel the plasma charge field, just as it does in a parallel plate capacitor. Nevertheless there is a difference. There the electric field is applied from outside, namely from the electrodes, and the Maxwell displacement, which comprises two separated layers of charge of opposite polarity, simply confronts the charge on the plate electrodes and screens it by placing one polarity charge adjacent one plate electrode and the other polarity charge adjacent the other electrode. In the absence of an electric field vector, the scalar reaction of the aether is to store energy by equipartition between kinetic and electric displacement energy by expanding the radii of the orbital quantized motion of the elements of its aether charge. This is the basis of this author's theory for the photon and the derivation of the theoretical value of the fine-structure constant [Reference 2 in the bibliography]. The aether responds to the field vector mode of a linear electric field displacement by storing energy as electrical field energy. This amounts to an internal strain in the aether and, if a gas is present, it may become ionized. Here there is translational motion of the charge system in the aether but no kinetic energy is added to its overall quantum state because the displacement of the charge orbits in local aether regions is affected by synchronizing constraints exerted from external aether regions which assure phase lock. These constraints, rather than the applied electrical field, provide the energy needed to sustain that translational motion. This is why the aether cannot be sensed in terms of the mechanics of linear motion. This aspect is a subject mentioned in reference [57]. The aether responds similarly in response to the radial electric field vector, because it is able to set up a state of spin or rotation which involves inflow of kinetic energy in the aether itself, energy which is supplied from the external aether owing to the phase-lock just mentioned. In this case, if the external influence which sets up the radial electric field subsides in strength, the phase-lock persists but the kinetic energy which has been fed into the field system from the external aether cannot return to its source by virtue of that same phase-lock. This is akin to the situation where a dog with its feet firmly locked to the ground can wag its tail, but the tail cannot wag the dog and, with it, body Earth. Therefore, the energy in the aether spin has to be shed in a different way, but by virtue of the synchronizing constraint which now forces a radial charge displacement powered by the captured
25.4.2005
Page 19 of 37
aether spin energy. In other words, what is stored in the spin state as aether input energy becomes available as electric field energy which can be tapped by drawing power from the electrodes of the Correa tube, just as if the glow discharge were a capacitor. To do this it is necessary to have pulsations and here there is an aspect which warrants further theoretical research, but which seems to have already found a practical solution in the Correa device. The point of interest is that, in theory, we need to add as many joules of energy to build the electric field condition as we can expect to draw in as excess energy from the enveloping aether. This is because the aether has certain harmonious features consistent with equipartition of energy between electric and dynamic (kinetic or magnetic) states. The puzzle then is that of understanding how energy efficiencies in excess of 200% are possible. The answer is easily found if there is a Q factor applicable to the circuit, meaning that the electrical energy oscillates as between the discharge and an external capacitor. However, it may well be that in the Correa tube the extended form of the cathode in relation to the electrode spacing allows multiple discharge zones which can cooperate in exchanging some portion of the electric energy whilst the aether energy inflow is pumped into all such zones in each external pulse cycle. In summary, therefore, there are undoubtedly some very special advantages in the way in which the Correa discharge tubes are designed. The design of the electrode configuration as covered by the Correa patent position seems therefore to be crucial to securing high conversion efficiencies with excess power generation well in excess of 200%. What is clear is that the radial separation of positive and negative charge in the plasma in the Correa discharge tube will capture large amounts of aether energy. Fig. 3 depicts that radial separation and shows two capacitors denoted C which make a circuit connection with a load resistance.
Fig. 3 The object here is to set up an oscillation in the a.c. output circuit connected in parallel across the discharge tube electrodes. Suppose that there is an oscillation which allows us to draw a.c. current through the load. There will
25.4.2005
Page 20 of 37
be times when the current through the tube collapses rapidly and this means that the current in the discharge drops. The rate at which positive ions are being created will drop as well and so the radial electric field can fall below the value corresponding to the state of aether spin. This then uses the kinetic energy of the aether spin to set up radial electric field displacement in the aether itself and that, in turn, releases the plasma charge at a higher potential, corresponding to that negative resistance characteristic. The result is that the tube delivers power drawing on aether spin and sheds it in those output current pulsations that are channelled around the a.c. shunt loop through the load resistor shown in Fig. 3. Now, to accentuate this effect, one of the features of the Correa patents involves a discharge tube having an extended cathode structure with a relatively small anode in fairly close proximity. As indicated in Fig. 4, this has the effect of spreading the cathode current and so the distribution of positive ions over the area of the extended cathode, whilst the anode current is more confined to the central part of the tube.
Fig. 4 ..........................Fig. 5 Thus, in Fig 5, the way in which current flows through the tube is illustrated by the separation of positive ions and electrons. These can recombine, as by the electrons entering the anode migrating around the d.c. supply circuit path to find their way to the cathode. However, the significant point of interest is that the AGD discharge has a charge storage feature which is depicted by the notional capacitors illustrated inside the tube. One has then to visualise a region of aether spinning about the centre of that plasma forming the glow discharge and contriving to contain the build-up of an enormous amount of charge separation. Under the cyclic relaxation control of the suitably-adjusted parameters of the external load circuit, the oscillation which develops can literally pump energy from the aether as the positive ion state of the plasma is increased and allowed to decrease, increasing under control of the power input, but decreasing spontaneously to draw on the aether energy stored once the input loses control. It is not the purpose of this Report to describe precisely how the circuits of the Correa experiments are designed to exploit this phenomenon, but before mentioning other related research and before giving further explanation of the physics underlying the spin phenomena, one example of the reported performance data will be quoted from U.S. Patent No. 5,449,989. That patent together with the other two already mentioned show several circuit diagrams to which the reader can refer. Performance Data Exemplifying the Correa Discharge Device In experiment No. 8 as listed in Table 5 in column 36 of the patent specification, it is shown that a battery pack in which 46 batteries, each of 12 V rating, provide an input voltage of nearly 600 V. As
25.4.2005
Page 21 of 37
energy is drained from this battery pack a separate pack of 28 such batteries is charged by the rectification of a.c. output drawn from the pulsating oscillations of the discharge tube. The experiment begins with the driver pack at a voltage of 582 V, corresponding to 12.65 V per cell, which was an 87.5% state of charge. The charge pack had an initial voltage of 328 V, corresponding to 11.71 V per cell, which is a 20% state of charge. The cathode in the discharge tube was of hardened aluminium and had an area of 64 sq. cm. There was a 4 cm. gap between electrodes and the gas pressure in the tube was 0.8 Torr. The experiment ran for 28.5 minutes. Thereafter, the driver pack was found to have lost very little of its charge, its voltage having reduced to 579.5 V, corresponding to an 84% state of charge. It had shed 0.134 kWh of energy. In contrast the charge pack had climbed to a voltage of 350 V and become 76.5% charged, an energy increase of 1.213 Kwh, which is a ninefold increase. The energy conversion efficiency was greater than 900%. The Vapour Reaction Hypothesis The conventional assumption concerning cathode reaction force in the cold-cathode discharge is that the discharge involves vaporization of the cathode material. The reaction force on the cathode is then attributed to the rate at which momentum is imparted to the ejected vapour. The speed of ejection times the rate of loss of cathode mass should then equal the measured anomalous force. It is therefore interesting to compare that speed, and the kinetic energy it implies for an atom shed by the cathode, with the thermal state of such an atom just prior to its release, as determined from the latent heat of evaporation of the cathode metal. For an aluminium cathode, given that the latent heat of evaporation is 10,800 J/gm, the speed of the vaporized atoms can be little more than 5,000 m/s. This is estimated by equating the kinetic energy of unit mass to the energy 10,800 J. It follows that, the force of 245.2 dynes as measured and reported in Table 15 of the third of the Correa U.S. patents for a current of 1.6 A, will require the cathode to vaporize at the rate of 490.4 10-6 gm/s to impart the necessary rate of reaction momentum to account for that cathode reaction force. This assumes that the force is not set up by electrodynamic action. Now, in column 20 of U.S. Patent 5,449,989 the rate of erosion of cathode material is discussed on the basis of the Correa data on actual measurements of craters formed by vaporization activity. That data allows the conclusion to be drawn that electrodes having a mass of less than 100 gm would have a useful life equivalent to the generation of power of 40 Mwh. Assigning 250 V to the 1.6 A current implies output power of 400 W and, if that were to consume the cathode at the rate estimated above, a 100 gm electrode would be consumed in 56 hours, corresponding to a lifetime energy production of 0.0224 Mwh. This is discrepant by a factor of the order of 1,000 when compared with the erosion observed. It follows, therefore, that the cathode reaction force has to be almost wholly attributable to some cause other that reaction produced by vaporization. Hence the anomaly already discussed in connection with this new source of energy!
The Author's 1977 Plasma Discharge Device This was the subject of U.K. patent Application No. 2,002,953. It proposed the concentration of
25.4.2005
Page 22 of 37
heavy positive ions in a central chamber by the anomalous electrodynamic forces of the cold-cathode discharge, with the object of producing heat in excess of that generated by electrical input power. The invention was based on the recognition that the aether can shed its ìntrinsic' energy. The last paragraph of the specification was: "The ion acceleration technique provided by this invention becomes, in such situations, a catalyst by which high energy concentration in suitable ionizable media may trigger transformations and possibly release of intrinsic energy." The circuit shown in the following reproduction of Fig. 11 of the patent had the merit of avoiding cathode overheating by injecting ions into the heat generation chamber and subjecting them to accelerating effects produced electrodynamically by auxiliary cold-cathode discharges.
Spence's 1986 Energy Conversion System This was the subject of U.S. patent 4,772,816. See the figure below of the patent. Geoffrey M. Spence of Crowborough in England assembled operative plasma discharge devices which generated more electrical power output than was supplied as input. The abstract of the patent reads: "The apparatus uses a magnetic field (80) to accelerate a charged particle radially towards a target electrode (10). The increased kinetic energy of the particles enables the particle to give up more electrical energy to the target electrode (10) than was initially given to it. This charges the target electrode (10), and the increased energy is extracted from the apparatus by connecting an electrical load between the target electrode and a point of lower or higher potential."
25.4.2005
Page 23 of 37
Chernetskii Vacuum Energy Breakthrough: News Release dated 1989 The Novosti Press Agency, Moscow, USSR issued their Press Release No. 03NTO-890717CM04 in 1989. A few sentences from that document are quoted below: "Abstract: A design model of a plasma generator which can convert physical-vacuum energy into electricity has been developed under Professor Alexandr V. Chernetskii at the Moscow Georgi Plekanov institute of the National Economy. Such generators could lay the groundwork for a future environmentally-benign power industry." "Classical physics cannot explain what happens when a plasma discharger placed in a Chernetskii circuit is started. For no apparent reason the ammeter pointer suddenly shows triple strength of current increase and energy output is several times more than input. The plant's efficiency is suddenly much more than ONE! No magic is involved. Additional energy outputs at specific plasma discharges have been established in several independent 'Expert reports' by staff from the V. I. Lenin All-Union Institute of Electrical Engineering (Moscow) of the Ministry of the Electrical Equipment Industry. This effect has been checked by different methods. Where does this mysterious energy come from?" "The self-generating discharge emerges when the discharge currents reach a definite critical density, when the magnetic fields they create ensure magnetisation of the plasma electrons and they begin to perform mainly cycloidal movement. The interaction of currents with their magnetic field forces the electrons to deviate to the cylinder-shaped discharge axis and the electrical field emerges. ..... Clearly, only part of the tremendous vacuum energy is extracted." "We've developed several circuit versions which can find application. In the latest experiment which had an input power of 700 watts, the generator produced three kilowatt for load resistance, or nearly five times as much. This is only the start and not the limit. The calculations for more powerful plants show that many megawatts of free energy can be produced from a minimal power source."
25.4.2005
Page 24 of 37
A Concluding Note In this concluding note there are two points which it is believe warrant attention. One is quite topical in that it has attracted media interest in the vacuum as a new energy source. The paper generating that interest is that of C. Eberlein in Physical Review Letters 76, 3842-3845 (1996) entitled 'Sonoluminescence as quantum vacuum radiation'. It is the phenomenon by which sonic pulsations applied to water result in the water emitting optical radiation which betrays the release of energy in bursts which signify high temperatures. See also the report by Peter Knight 'Sound, Light and the Vacuum' in News and Views in the journal Nature (381, pp. 736-737, 27 June 1996). This phenomenon is of little practical consequence when measured against the discovery underlying the Correa invention, but it shows that scientists need to face up to the reality of the new energy world. The sonoluminescence phenomenon is, in my opinion, another manifestation of the vacuum spin scenario. By compressing tiny air bubbles at frequencies of 25 kHz the positive H3O hydronium ions and the negative OH hydroxyl ions in water converge radially towards each bubble of air during the pressure impulse period. The heavier ions respond more slowly and each such pulse sets up a small radial electric field displacement. This induces aether spin or vacuum spin, with inflow of energy from the quantum underworld, owing to the phase lock action of the quantum environment. As the pressure relaxes the ions do not recover their original positions owing to the neutralizing field effects inherent in the aether spin. Each successive sonic pressure pulse then augments the effect by forcing further radial charge displacement. This is an escalating situation broken only when the build-up of vacuum spin energy centred on those air bubbles grow in physical size until instability sets in as by surface collision with other such spin states. These collisions in their random distribution will be triggered in time with the sonic pulsations and local flashes of light will be emitted. In effect what one sees is a kind of very tiny thunderball phenomenon, where the stimulus exciting the formation of the glowing balls is not an electrical discharge but a pressure wave. While physicists ponder on that sonoluminescence phenomenon, those interested in the practical pursuit of the new energy opportunity can follow the Correa lead, confident that scientists who decry the `free energy' prospect have their own problems in understanding sonoluminescence. As indicated earlier in this work, the theme of charge induction by vacuum spin featured in my 1977 lecture paper 'Space, Energy and Creation' and I stated that I would from quote something from the end of that text. This now follows:
Finally, an interesting experiment has been performed by Ryan and Vonnegut (1971)*. They arranged for a cage to rotate around an electric arc discharge at quite low speed and found that this stabilised the arc. The task of stabilising an electric arc is one of the major problems of thermonuclear fusion research. It seems therefore very difficult to believe that the wild antics of the arc discharge are tamed merely by the slow rotation of a column of air. Here then is more scope for research. Can an arc be stabilised by a in a vacuum by cage rotation? It is research which the modern physicist will not readily undertake because there is widespread belief that the vacuum is a non-entity devoid of any special properties. It is a belief encouraged by the development of relativity and in my experience those who believe in relativity deny the existence of the aether. On the other hand I was once reassured by a comment Professor Cullwick** made about something I published. He quoted Einstein as saying: 'The special theory of relativity does not compel us to deny the existence of the ether .... there is weighty evidence in favour of the ether hypothesis.' (H. Aspden, 15 September 1977) * Nature Physical Science 233 142 (1971). ** Electronics & Power 22 40 (1976).
25.4.2005
Page 25 of 37
APPENDIX I WHY THE EARTH IS NOT A SELF-EXCITED DYNAMO

Introduction Readers of 'The Homopolar Handbook' by Tom Valone will see that it has the sub-title 'A Definitive Guide to Faraday Disk and N-Machine Technologies'. They will also see on its page 78 a reference to a Scientific American article which gives weight to such technology by declaring that the Earth is a self-excited dynamo analogous to a Faraday disk generator which powers the self-induced magnetic field. The article appears in the February 1979 issue of Scientific American at pp. 92-101. Its authors are Charles R. Carrigan and David Gubbins and it is entitled 'The Source of the Earth's Magnetic Field'. In the December 1979 issue of Scientific American at pp. 120-130 there is an article by Lewis P. Fulcher, Johann Rafelski and Abraham Klein entitled 'The Decay of the Vacuum'. This latter article predicts that matter can be created from empty space in the close vicinity of the atomic nuclei of high atomic mass. One at least of those two articles just quoted is based on a false foundation, but both bear upon the subject of this Energy Science Report. I make this statement well recognizing the authority of authors who write for Scientific American, but knowing that where magnetism and the aether's energy properties are concerned one really needs to be discerning as to what one is willing to believe. In this Appendix I it will be shown why the Earth's magnetic field cannot be self-induced by homopolar induction. Appendix II reproduces my paper as read at an Institute of Physics conference at Oxford University, England in 1983. It provides the authentic explanation of the induction of the Earth's magnetic field as an aether phenomenon, consistent with the foregoing analysis of operation of the Correa PAGD technology.
The Logic of My Case 1. For there to be self-induction of electric or magnetic effects attributable to the rotation of any system that system must comprise a composition of electric charges. 2. The electrostatic force acting between any two charges is directed along the line joining them and there is balance of action and reaction, meaning that the system will not develop an out-of-balance reaction force that can enhance or retard a state of spin. 3. If the system is already spinning then there will be mutually-induced electromagnetic forces acting on the charges as each moves under the influence of the field set up by the motion of other charge. 4. By the Lorentz force law these forces act at right-angles to the charge motion. The effective motion of each charge is in a circular orbit about the axis of spin and so any electromagnetic force must be radial with respect to that spin axis. This means that no force component will enhance or retard the spin. 5. It must be concluded that the mutual-interaction of charges within a spinning body cannot set up
25.4.2005
Page 26 of 37
any electromagnetic forces affecting that spin, this being, of course, consistent with the principle that angular momentum is conserved in the absence of an external influence. 6. A consequence of this is that there can be no circulating electric current induced inside that system owing to its rotation as that would draw on the inertial spin energy and mean that the spin speed must reduce. 7. This account does not preclude the setting up of EMFs in the body of the spinning system of charge because those EMFs would be balanced, meaning that the perimeter is at a different potential from that at the axis. 8. In an operable homopolar generator based on the Faraday disk principle there is a non-rotating return current circuit path external to the rotating disk and that accounts for the unbalanced EMF around a circuit whilst providing the external structure which can absorb the forces affecting the spin speed of the disk. 9. Body Earth has no external structure against which to apply the requisite force action if it is to slow down owing to self-exciting dynamo properties. The Alternative Solution There is, of course, a solution to the mystery of the Earth's magnetic field, but it depends upon something totally unfamiliar to those expert in the physics of field theory. It concerns 'vacuum spin' and a 'phase-lock' effect and that connects the phenomenon of the Earth's magnetic field with the energy activity intrinsic to the aether. It involves a process which taps that aether energy, which is why the subject is important in our quest to discover a new and commercially viable source of energy. Appendix II should now be read, keeping in mind that the self-generating magnetic dynamo theory as an explanation for the Earth's magnetic field is flawed and must be rejected. _______
APPENDIX II
THE THUNDERBALL - AN ELECTROSTATIC PHENOMENON
This is the text of the author's paper as presented at Electrostatics 1983, Oxford and as published in Institute of Physics Conference Series No. 66 at pp. 179-184.
Abstract A quasi-static electric displacement according to Maxwell's theory is considered in a novel context, that of a forced radial electric strain centred on a source of energy. The resulting balancing charge displacement in enveloping matter may have transient stability and should exhibit ionization if gaseous. Potentially hazardous pockets of migrant electrostatic energy may well be created in the vicinity of electric discharges. Analysis shows the energy content to be within the range applicable to the thunderball, that is between 2x109 J/m3 and 5x109 J/m3.
25.4.2005
Page 27 of 37
1. Introduction Maxwell's equations are very much a part of the accepted physics in use today. They are used without much regard for the physical model on which Maxwell developed his theories. Jeans (1966) has referred to Maxwell's displacement theory as 'part of the scaffolding by which electromagnetic theory was constructed' but said that it was an open question whether this scaffolding ought now to be discarded. Some impetus in examining this question stems from the recent experimental discovery by Graham and Lahoz (1980) that the field medium can provide a reaction force to quasi-static fields. The evidence from this experiment, which is electromagnetic in character and depends upon current displacement between capacitor plates, is so strong that the authors ended their paper with the comment that 'the quasi-static Maxwell's field is not merely an invisible medium of interaction between matter and matter; it has in fact the mechanical properties postulated by Maxwell, in contradistinction to any "action at a distance" theory'. This encourages the author to present a proposition directly based upon Maxwell's displacement theory. The question at issue is whether the vacuum, as a physical medium in its own right, can be set in a state of electrical strain and might, under certain circumstances, retain this strain transiently so as to store energy in a quasi-stable manner. In particular, it seems worthwhile to ask whether radial electric displacement centred on a source of energy has a role to play in physical phenomena. Note that this contrasts with the lateral oscillatory displacement we associate with wave propagation. We are considering a static displacement such as is associated with the storage of energy by a charged capacitor.
Fig. 1 We believe that when the parallel plates of the capacitor shown in Fig. 1 are electrified, as by the potential V, the linear displacement in Maxwell's field medium (depicted by the arrows) effectively neutralizes the capacitor charge and stores energy in the state of strain in the dielectric and the field medium itself. The hypothesis we now address is that Nature may operate in the reverse mode, particularly in response to a radial displacement, and somehow sustain a state of radial electric strain in the vacuum medium so that it asserts a primary role and causes the electric charge in enveloping substance to take up neutralizing positions. Instead of the electricity applied to the capacitor causing energy to be stored, we have an event accompanied by the injection of energy into the strain storage system of the field medium and a consequent electrical adjustment in matter.
25.4.2005
Page 28 of 37
Fig. 2 A lightning flash is a likely candidate for such an event. Its action must be to pinch the discharge into a thin filament in which the more mobile electrons concentrate along a core as shown in Fig. 2 and set up radial electric strains bounded by the inert positive ions. If the field medium reacts in some way to preserve this strain and store energy in a quasi-stable form for a transient period before the electrons and ions recombine, then the condition according to the hypothesis outlined above is achieved. The resulting pocket of energy optimizes its form to that of a sphere and asserts a primary role in keeping the positive and negative matter charge displaced, pending eventual decay.
Fig. 3 A useful concept giving strength to this hypothesis involves an imaginary state of spin, which we will term `vacuum spin'. The idea here is that if the vacuous field medium were to contain charges capable of displacement then it would be feasible to imagine a sphere of such a medium rotating as shown in Fig. 3 about an axis through the centre of the sphere. The charges would be subject to a
25.4.2005
Page 29 of 37
centrifugal action and so would be displaced radially. Energy would be stored by the spin state and by the radial electric fields induced. In the presence of matter such as the atmosphere these fields might well be cancelled by ionization and separation of charge in the matter itself, leaving only the spin energy. Nevertheless, the spin would sustain the electric displacement in the field medium and a transient state of ionization pending the eventual dissipation of the spin energy. Hence the vacuum spin concept does convey some understanding of the quasi-stable character of the phenomenon under discussion. 2. Theoretical Analysis We can proceed to analyze a spherical field system subject to symmetrical radial strain, without further recourse to this spin concept and solely by reference to the charge separation in matter. Consider a spherical shell of negative charge Q enveloping a uniform sphere of distributed charge +Q developed to balance the radial electric displacement. The electric energy is simply the sum of three terms. These are (i) the self-energy of the distributed charge 3Q2/5R, (ii) the self energy of the charge Q which is Q2/2R and (iii) the mutual energy of the interaction between -Q and Q, which is Q2/R. The total electric energy becomes Q2/10R, where R is the radius of the sphere subject to the electric strain. Given this amount of energy applied to form the spherical object under discussion, we know that it will be characterized by a charge Q and a radius R connected by the above formula. To proceed further it is helpful now to digress a little and consider the possible creation of such a spherical object wholly within a larger spherical object of similar character. This is possible because we are talking about fields and the field medium and can envisage pockets of this medium permeating matter. As depicted in Fig. 4(a), a sub-sphere of electric strain is contained wholly within a much larger sphere of electric strain. The strains are radial in each sphere and combine to determine the strain energy density at points within the sub-sphere. Because the main sphere is very large in relation to the sub-sphere we can regard the strain of the larger sphere as uniform over the volume of the smaller sphere. This means that when the electric strain vectors of the spheres are combined at points within the sub-sphere the cross products will balance and so cancel to leave the energy needed to form the sub-sphere independent of the strain within the larger sphere.
Fig. 4(a) ................................ Fig. 4(b) Fig. 4(a) shows a sub-sphere of radial strain within a larger sphere of radial strain and Fig. (b) shows an ion and its associated electron influenced by a non-linear electric strain. Note that we have in mind the possible ionization of matter and the separation of electrons and positive ions. The electrons present will, by their thermal equilibrium with the ions, have a range of
25.4.2005
Page 30 of 37
travel well in excess of that of ions with which they are associated. Thus, collectively each ion and its paired electron will form a system which is electrically neutral overall and which can be represented, as shown in Fig. 4(b) by a positive central charge surrounded by a spherically symmetrical negative charge distribution attributable to the statistical random motion of the electron. This is because the electrons have a much smaller mass and a much greater speed and, though confined to the spherical boundary of the sub-sphere in order to balance the effects of the strain discussed above, they are less confined than any ions present at that boundary. Owing to this greater range of motion of the electrons it is the polarity of the electrons that determines the direction in which ionized matter tends to move in a non-linear electric field. For stable confinement to a sphere the electric strain everywhere within the bounds of that sphere must correspond to the action of a positive charge. Thus the radial electric strain of the sub-sphere at its surface is limited by the prevailing electric strain in the larger sphere and the latter must correspond to the action of a positive rather than negative charge.
Fig. 5 Imagine now that what we have described occurs in our own environment, with the Earth and its ionosphere constituting the larger sphere and the subspheres being the thunderballs induced in the Earth's atmosphere. The Earth rotates, as depicted in Fig. 5, and so the charge just mentioned would rotate to produce a magnetic field attributable to a distributed positive charge and a balancing negative charge at the upper bounds of the atmosphere. Overall this would give the Earth a geomagnetic moment attributable to a negative charge, which is found to be the case. Furthermore, no electric field would be detected directly because the strain caused by vacuum spin would be balanced. It is well known (Rosser, 1968) that this strain causes no magnetic field itself as, otherwise, charged capacitors when rotating would induce no magnetic field, yet such a field is observed. The magnetic moment attributable to the collective action of a surface charge Q is readily shown to be: M = QR2/5c (1) where R is the body radius and is its angular speed. c is the speed of light. Note that this expression is in electrostatic units and both the dielectric constant and the magnetic permeability are taken to be unity. For the Earth the geomagnetic moment M is 8.1x1025 gauss-cm, R is 6.4x108 and is 7.26 105 rad/s. c is 3x1010 cm/s. Thus Q is readily found and so the surface electric strain Q/R2 as applicable in atmospheric regions.
25.4.2005
Page 31 of 37
This sets the surface strain of the sub-spheres and determines the energy density associated with their overall energy. The mean energy density of any such sub-sphere is found by dividing Q2/10R by the volume 4R3/3, R now being the radius of a sub-sphere and Q its charge. This energy density is simply 3/40 times (Q/R2)2 and as this latter quantity is the same throughout the Earth's atmospheric layer we may expect all sub-spheres to have the same energy density. It is known that thunderballs all exhibit the same energy density, regardless of their size, as was reported by Altschuler et al (1970) and that this energy density lies in the range 2x109 J/m3 to 5x109 J/m3. We have, therefore, an encouraging link with the hypothetical model under consideration. However, more than this, we find that the energy density calculated from the above expression and using the value of the parameter Q/R2 derived for the Earth itself is 2.37x109 J/m3. The theory is therefore supported also by a quantitative connection with the geomagnetic field. 3. Discussion The greatest puzzle of all concerning thunderballs is their ability to pass through solid matter and still preserve their form. This is explained by the above theory. As a phenomenon of electric strain in the vacuum itself, a strain which is primary and sustained by some inner mechanism of the vacuum state, the thunderball can pass through solid matter just as easily as solid matter can pass through the vacuum. What is seen of the thunderball is merely the ionization in the atmosphere resulting from the decay of the energy locked up in this state of strain. As the pocket of strain passes through solid matter any ionization on the entry side merely subsides to be replaced by ionization on the exit side once the sub-sphere surface of the thunderball emerges. Another property of these objects is that they would exhibit a magnetic field of the same order as the Earth's magnetic field. This is quite small but, bearing in mind that the mass of the thunderball is that of the field itself and therefore negligible, it needs very little force to displace them. Accordingly, it becomes possible to explain why thunderballs can hover over the surface of an aircraft wing in flight without being swept away in the slipstream (Aspden, 1980). In separating from the conductive surface of the wing, eddy currents would be induced by weakening the flux linkage sourced in the ball. These would develop a magnetic attraction for the ball and resist its separation, so holding the ball for a period in the proximity of the aircraft. Connected as they are with dramatic and dynamic events such as lightning discharges, it may appear to be bold speculation to suggest that these glowing spheres really are manifestations of a quasielectrostatic effect. Yet, as we have seen, their unusual properties can be explained on such a theory. Given data concerning the amount of energy released, the theory suggests that the size of these objects is then determined by the standard energy density already estimated. This means that even a small amount of energy released by a discharge that is quite weak could produce a tiny thunderball. Since the electric field gradient is the same at the surface of all such objects and this is sufficient to ionize large and easily visible objects, we can expect even the smallest to exhibit ionization as well. They become, therefore, a potential hazard where explosive and inflammable substances are present. They constitute an unexpected hazard because they have a durability and a mobility not shared by other electrical phenomena. They are so elusive in character that they may exist without having been noticed except as an apparent illusion. Yet the thunderball is unquestionably a real phenomenon and a dangerous one. In order to devise experiments by which thunderballs may be created and examined under controlled laboratory conditions, one needs at least to begin with a viable hypothesis as to their character. This
25.4.2005
Page 32 of 37
has been offered in this paper. The theory presented should be judged in the light of the very great spectrum of theories proposed hitherto and discounted for many reasons. See, for example, the excellent review articles by Golde (1977) and Charman (1979). Of more practical concern on a grand scale are the efforts of Nobel laureate Kapitza (1979) who, recognizing that the energy densities of the thunderball are of the right order for application in fusion reactors, seeks to create them artificially by R.F. techniques, this mechanism being his assumption of how these objects may derive their energy. Finally, it is noted that the author has explored in considerable depth the possible physical basis of the underlying `vacuum spin' on which the argument was developed (Aspden, 1980). It remains to devise and conduct experiments aimed at inducing this spin condition by using radial electric fields, so as to verify and perhaps apply the phenomenon to useful ends. References Altschuler M D et al 1970 Nature 228 545 Aspden H 1980 Physics Unified (Sabberton: PO Box 35, Southampton) Ch. 3 & p 188 Aspden H 1981 The Journal of Meteorology UK 6 258 Charman W N 1979 Physics Reports 54 261 Golde R H 1977 Lightning (London: Academic Press) v. 1 pp 409 Graham G M and Lahoz D G 1980 Nature 285 154 Jeans Sir James 1966 The Mathematical Theory of Electricity and Magnetism (Cambridge University Press) p 155 Kapitza P L 1979 Rev. Mod. Phys. 51 417 Rosser W G V 1968 Classical Electromagnetism via Relativity (Butterworths: London) Appendix 6 p. 285
LISTING OF PUBLISHED WORK OF DR HAROLD ASPDEN
In writing this Report I had occasion to refer to just a few of the various published papers I have written over the years and am mindful that I have been writing in a confident style, taking strength from my other related efforts on the creative properties of the aether. The Correa research findings have been my inspiration by opening the door giving access to that aether. It may be that the following list of my papers may serve as a partial index giving guidance as to what also lies a little further behind that door.
25.4.2005
Page 33 of 37
[1] 'The Law of Electrodynamics', Journal of the Franklin Institute, 287, 179-183 (1969). [2] [Jointly with D. M. Eagles] 'Aether Theory and the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 41A, 423-424 (1972). [3] [Jointly with D. M. Eagles] 'Calculation of the Proton Mass in a Lattice Model for the Aether', Il Nuovo Cimento, 30A, 235-238 (1975). [4] 'The Fresnel Formula applied to Empty Space', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 15, 263-264 (1976). [5] 'Inertia of a Non-radiating Particle', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 15 631-633 (1976). [6] 'A New Approach to the Problem of the Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Electron', International Journal of theoretical Physics, 16, 401-404 (1977). [7] 'Electrodynamic Anomalies in Arc Discharge Phenomena', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS-5, 159-163 (1977). [8] 'Energy Correlation Formula Applied to Psi Particles', Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 59-63 (1978). [9] 'Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism', Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 281-288 (1978). [10] 'G Fluctuations and Planetary Orbits', Catastrophist Geology, 3-2, 1-2 (December 1978). [11] 'Ion Accelerators and Energy Transfer Processes', U.K. Patent Specification No. 2,002,953A (Published 28 February 1979). [12] 'The Spatial Energy Distribution for Coulomb Interaction', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 25, 456458 (1979). [13] 'Energy Correlation of Radiative Decays of psi(3684)', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 26, 257-260 (1979). [14] [Jointly with D. M. Eagles] 'The Spatial Distribution of the Interaction Contribution to the Magnetic-Field Energy Associated with Two Moving Charges', Acta Physica Polonica, A57, 473482 (1980). [15] 'The Inverse-Square Law of Force and its Spatial Energy Distribution', J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 13, 3649-3655 (1980). [16] 'UFOs and the Cosmic Connection', Energy Unlimited, 8, 37-40 (1980). [17] 'A Theory of Neutron Lifetime', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 31, 383-384 (1981). [18] 'Atmospheric Electric Field Induction', Speculations in Science and Technology, 4, 314-316 (1981). [19] 'The Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Electron', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 32, 114-116 (1981).
25.4.2005
Page 34 of 37
[20] 'Electron Form and Anomalous Energy Radiation', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 213-216 (1982). [21] 'A Theory of Pion Lifetime', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 237-239 (1982). [22] 'The Correlation of the Anomalous g-Factors of the Electron and Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 481-484 (1982) [23] 'Mirror Reflection Effects in Light Speed Anisotropy Tests', Speculations in Science and Technology, 5, 421-431 (1982). [24] 'Charge Induction by Thermal Radiation', Journal of Electrostatics, 13, 71-80 (1982). [25] 'The Aether - an Assessment', Wireless World, 88, 37-39 (October 1982). [26] 'Relativity and Rotation', Speculations in Science and Technology, 6, 199-202 (1983). [27] 'The Lamb Shift for a Cavity-Resonant Electron', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 36, 364-368 (1983). [28] 'The Thunderball - an Electrostatic Phenomenon', Institute of Physics Conference Series No. 66: Electrostatics 1983, pp. 179-184. [29] 'The Determination of Absolute Gravitational Potential', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 169-172 (1983). [30] 'The Nature of the Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 210-214 (1983). [31] 'Theoretical Resonances for Particle-Antiparticle Collisions based on the Thomson Electron Model', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 307-311 (1983). [32] 'Meson Lifetime Dilation as a Test for Special Relativity', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38 206210 (1983). [33] 'The Mass of the Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 342-345 (1983). [34] 'The Assessment of a Theory for the Proton-Electron Mass Ratio', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 423-426 (1983). [35] 'The Finite Lifetime of the Electron', Speculations in Science and Technology, 7, 3-6 (1984). [36] 'Electromagnetic Reaction Paradox', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 247-251 (1984). [37] 'The Muon g-Factor by Cavity Resonance Theory', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 271-275 (1984). [38] 'Boson Creation in a Sub-Quantum Lattice', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 40, 53-57 (1984). [39] 'The Steady-State Free-Electron Population of Free Space', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252256 (1984). [40] 'Don't Forget Thomson', Physics Today, 15 (November 1984).
25.4.2005
Page 35 of 37
[41] 'The Nature of the Pion', Speculations in Science and Technology, 8, 235-239 (1985). [42] 'The Maxwell-Fechner Hypothesis as an Alternative to Einstein's Theory', 8, 283-289 (1985). [43] 'Unification of Gravitational and Electrodynamic Potential based on Classical Action-at-aDistance Theory', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 44, 689-693 (1985) [44] 'The Paradox of Constant Planetary Mass as Evidence of a Leptonic Lattice-Structured Vacuum State', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 44, 705-709 (1985). [45] 'The Exploding Wire Phenomenon', Physics Letters, 107A, 238-240 (1985). [46] 'A New Perspective on the Law of Electrodynamics', Physics Letters, 111A, 22-24 (1985). [47] 'Theoretical Evaluation of the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 110A, 113-115 (1985). [48] 'The Proton Enigma', American Journal of Physics, 53, 938 (1985). [49] 'More on Thomson's Particles', American Journal of Physics, 53, 616 (1985). [50] 'Weak Violation - a New Concept in Relativity?', Nature, 318, 317-318 (1985). [51] 'Anomalous Electrodynamic Explosions in Liquids', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS14, 282-285 (1986). [52] 'How to Test Special Relativity', Nature, 321, 734 (1986). [53] 'Classical Relativity', Nature, 320, 10 (1986). [54] 'Electron Self-Field Interaction and Internal Resonance', Physics Letters, 119A, 109-111 (1986). [55] 'The Mystery of Mercury's Perihelion', The Toth-Maatian Review, 5, 2475-2481 (1986). [56] 'Flat Space Gravitation', Physics Education, 21, 261-262 (1986). [57] 'Fundamental Constants derived from Two-Dimensional Harmonic Oscillations in an Electrically Structured Vacuum', Speculations in Science and Technology, 9 315-323 (1986). [58] 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, 9, 129-136 (1986). [59] 'Meson Production based on Thomson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 137-140 (1986). [60] 'An Empirical Approach to Meson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 153-157 (1986). [61] 'The Exploding Wire Phenomenon as an Inductive Effect', Physics Letters, 120A, 80-82 (1987). [62] 'Earthquake-related EM Disturbances', Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 28, 535-536 (1987). [63] 'The Physics of the Missing Atoms: Technetium and Promethium', Hadronic Journal, 10, 167172 (1987).
25.4.2005
Page 36 of 37
[64] 'Synchronous Lattice Electrodynamics as an Alternative to Time Dilation', Hadronic Journal, 10, 185-192 (1987). [65] 'Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer', Hadronic Journal, 11, 307-313 (1988). [66] 'The Theory of the Proton Constants', Hadronic Journal, 11, 169-176 (1988). [67] 'A Theory of Proton Creation', Physics Essays, 1, 72-76 (1988). [68] 'Do We Really Understand Magnetism?', Magnets, 1, 19-24 (1988). [69] 'The Vacuum as our Future Source of Energy', Magnets, 3(8), 15-18 (1988). [70] 'Conservative Hadron Interactions Exemplified by the Creation of the Kaon', Hadronic Journal, 12, 101-108 (1989). [71] 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant', Physics Essays, 2, 173-179 (1989). [72] 'A Theory of Pion Creation', Physics Essays, 2, 360-367 (1989). [73] 'The Supergraviton and its Technological Connection', Speculations in Science and Technology, 12, 179-186 (1989). [74] 'Standing Wave Interferometry', Physics Essays, 3, 39-45 (1990). [75] 'The Harwen Energy Radiation Regenerator', Speculations in Science and Technology, 13 295299 (1990). [76] 'Maxwell's Demon and the Second Law of Thermodynamics', Nature, 347, 25 (1990). [77] 'The Theory of Antigravity', Physics Essays, 4, 13-19 (1991). [78] 'Magnets and Gravity', Magnets, 6(6), 16-22 (1992). [79] 'Electricity without Magnetism', Electronics World, 540-542 (1992). [80] 'Switched Reluctance Motor with Full A.C. Commutation', U.S. Patent 4,975,608 (4th December 1990). [81] 'Thermal Power Device', U.K. Patent Specification 2 239 490A (Published 3rd July 1991). [82] 'The Law of Perpetual Motion', Physics Education, 28, 202-203 (1993). [83] 'The First Law of Thermodynamics', Physics Education, 28, 340-342 (1993). [84] 'Retardation in the Coulomb Potential', Physics Essays, 8, 19-28 (1995). [85] 'Space, Energy and Creation', Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England.
25.4.2005
Page 37 of 37
The latter item [85] was a privately published paper as distributed on the occasion of an invited lecture delivered by the author to the Physics Department, University of Cardiff in Wales in 1977. __________
This report was first issued on 26th February 1996 by a private arrangement with Dr. Paulo Correa. It was updated and reissued for publication in its present form on 31st July 1996, the date of publication of the author's 'Aether Science Papers'.
25.4.2005
Page 1 of 31

This Report was first published by the author in 1994 and was reissued later and made more generally available from Sabberton Publications as ISBN 0 085056 0217 in October 1996. It is now made available freely via this Internet facility. It concerns theory pertaining to the creation and properties of deuterons which, as present in atoms in heavy water, deuterium oxide, are involved in the experiments which gave birth to the notion of 'cold fusion'. The technology of that field is slow to develop and, though the author did plan to write a Part II Report as a sequel to this report, which is entitled POWER FROM WATER: COLD FUSION: PART I, this has not materialized. This Report nevertheless is an important contribution to the theory of the subject, also because it explains how the triton, the third isotope of hydrogen is created. It is worthy of study as an adjunct to the author's latest work, the book: The Physics of Creation, because the latter explains in updated detail how the proton itself, the primary isotope of hydrogen is created. For this reason it is given priority in updating this website by now adding progressively each of these ten Energy Science Reports as they are withdrawn from normal printed publication. It should be noted that the book just referenced is a substantial work and should not be confused with Appendix A of this Report, which has the same title. The latter featured as a 12 page Chapter 4 in the author's book GRAVITATION, published in 1975, which gives an early insight into what has now become a 28 year-old account of the origin of proton creation. .......... Harold Aspden, 1 June 2003
POWER FROM WATER: COLD FUSION: PART I
25.4.2005
Page 2 of 31
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents
Introduction The Black Hole Syndrome The Triton Factor Conclusion APPENDIX A: 'The Physics of Creation' APPENDIX B: Deuteron-Proton Transmutation APPENDIX C: Triton Lifetime Theory APPENDIX D: 'The Theory of the Proton Constants' APPENDIX E: 'The Neutron and the Deuteron'*
* These papers are reproduced here by kind permission of the Editors of the Hadronic Journal
Introduction This Energy Science Report draws attention to the revelance of theoretical work pursued by the author over many years before the advent of the now well-known 'cold fusion' discoveries reported
25.4.2005
Page 3 of 31
from Utah in 1989. It will be followed by a Cold Fusion: Part II Report, which will be more specifically directed to the author's patented technology which is emerging from this theoretical base. The object of this Report is to show how the 'cold fusion' scenario is destined to impact the whole field of fundamental physics, ranging from cosmology generally to the pursuit of energy generation techniques that are so fundamental that they can harness the still-latent and ever-present forces which brought about the creation of the universe. These Energy Science Reports are all connected with that underlying groundwork in energy physics that the author has surveyed, driven by his interest in magnetism. Thus Energy Science Report No. 1 concerned 'Power from Magnetism' and described three of the author's experiments which point the way forward to what many term 'free energy'. We are assuredly destined to see rapid strides in this technological field in the months and years ahead and we will enter the 21st century with a whole new vision of our energy future. Only today, 15th April, 1994, as the author writes the first words of this report, a communication was received which draws attention to what is termed 'UDT' - Unidirectional Transformer - which Paul Raymond Jensen of Santa Barbara, California claims to have invented. When readers of my Energy Science Report No. 1 become aware of Jensen's 'UDT' and compare the transformer with that shown in Fig. 4 of that Report they will see how the solid-state 'free energy' ferromagnetic device can now emerge on the 'free energy' scene. With the same prospect evolving on the magnetic reluctance motor using permanent magnets, as championed, for example, by New Zealander Robert G. Adams, this author has planned an Energy Science Report concerned with motor technology. However, here also, whilst currently in the throes of experimentation, it has come to light that a researcher named Frank F. Potter has, for many years, been urging university professors in U.K. to work on the prospect of tapping the energy field that powers a magnet. He has challenged them to do the calculations on specific field coupling involving magnets to prove the case one way or the other. In spite of the interest engendered, the usual establishment reserve about the so-called 'perpetual motion' machine has kept the Potter issue private and not brought it into open forum. However, this author, having now heard of this, has responded to the challenge and has brought ahead of schedule 'Energy Science Report No. 4: The Potter Debate' which was completed on 10th April, 1994. That Report provides a mathematical basis which will help critics of the 'free energy' field to come to terms with what is now bound to disturb the world of those experts who know how to design electrical transformers and chokes but appear not to know how close they are to a new technology that can provide an energy bonanza. The intervening Energy Science Reports Nos. 2 and 3 are captioned 'Power from Ice', and relate to experimental work on a thermoelectric energy converter in which the author is involved as inventor. These Reports exist only in confidential draft form at this time but that technology does spill over into something that will be said about the 'cold fusion' research, particularly in the Part II Report. This introduction, therefore, explains how this text fits into the series of Energy Science Reports by which the author has chosen to update his published research findings prior to incorporation and consolidation in a more formal book form. The 'free energy' scene is now evolving so rapidly that it is better if such a book is written once the author has possession of his own working 'free energy' generator and can provide full test data on a practical system. The Black Hole Syndrome
25.4.2005
Page 4 of 31
This may seem an unusual heading for a text about 'cold fusion', but the physicists who believe in 'black holes' think as do physicists who do not believe in 'cold fusion'. This is a very relevant comparison as one can see from the following remarks. 1. All physics is built on observation of how electrical particles behave, whether individually or in aggregation as matter. The interaction forces between such particles control their coming together, whether to form atomic nuclei, molecules, composites, crystals or stars and planets. 2. Physicists tend to extrapolate their knowledge of experimental behaviour to realms far beyond the bounds governing the conditions of their experiments. They seek to probe territory they cannot reach, but always build with confidence on the certain founding knowledge derived from experiments on what they can see or what they can explore in a laboratory. 3. The neutron as a real particle has only been detected upon creation in the free state and it has a half-lifetime measured in minutes but physicists extrapolate and create 'neutron stars' in their imagination, stars which survive far longer than a few minutes! They cannot 'see' a neutron in an atom, such as in the deuteron, but they assume it is there because the deuteron has two atomic units of mass and one of charge. But, surely, one could better surmise that two anti-protons plus three positive beta-particles represent two atomic units of mass having one positive unit of charge. We know that atoms decay by shedding beta-particles and what we could suspect is that, if they shed an anti-proton and a positive beta-particle, so that would manifest itself as a short-lived 'neutron'! If, on this basis, there are no neutrons in an atomic nucleus such as the deuteron, then is it really surprising to find no neutron emission when we contrive to capture those positive beta-particles by free conduction electrons in the host metal cathode of a cold fusion cell? On the contrary, physicists go the other way and make their unwarranted quantum leap by recognizing that neutrons are able to form stars that have no electrical resistance to the crushing force of gravitation - even though those free neutrons in the laboratory show a substantial negative magnetic moment! 4. They cannot see a 'black hole', but they can imagine matter becoming so compact, as gravitational interaction forces become so strong as to out-weigh and preclude the intervention of electric forces between those charge constituents of the neutron. They are thereby assuming that gravitation is a force so fundamental that it transcends and displaces electric force from a primary role that is so evident in laboratory findings from atomic physics. 5. Those physicists can see in certain remote galaxies certain effects which suggest the coming together of electrical matter, which, by all the basic rules of physics, should not occur because electric forces resist nucleation. Their evidence is a strong gravity force, abnormally related to the mass of the visible body acted upon or a substantial redshift in the optical spectrum of atoms radiating from the nearby field zone. Their assumption is that the universe was born in a Big Bang where everything was overheated and had such energy content that all physical barriers could be overcome. Anything is possible in such a vision! 6. So, if excess heat is seen to emerge from a deuterated palladium cathode in a 'cold fusion' cell, that could suggest that 'nucleation' or fusion has occurred between deuterons, overcoming their mutual electric repulsion in that metal palladium. However, those who believe in 'black holes' are not inclined to believe in 'cold fusion' because they know that the 'black-art' assumptions needed to create the 'Big Bang' and the 'black hole' are not as easy to apply inside a lump of palladium on a laboratory test bench. 7. This 'disbelieving' body of physicists has other 'disbeliefs' as well. They rely on their 'practical' knowledge of gravity and measurement of G to calculate 'black hole' properties, but do not believe that there is a real 'aether' medium, the distortion of which generates that gravitational action. They believe in mathematical extrapolation and that means reliance on equations do not 'rupture' when under excessive stress, as does real matter or real 'aether'. What, indeed, is the tensile strength or the
25.4.2005
Page 5 of 31
compressive strength or the shear strength of what physicists call 4-space? What, one wonders, are its internal dimensions, the distances between its component parts? Without common ground on which to stand in talking about 'aether' or 'space-time', one cannot discuss with such physicists how it is that the 'crystal' structure of the aether itself determines the 'fine-structure constant' they use in their atomic physics. One cannot discuss with such physicists how it is that the sub-quantum motion underlying the Planck action quantum interacts with matter present to force a need for a dynamic balance, which in turn demands the presence of a discrete and unseen graviton population. One cannot therefore get such physicists to listen to the formal account by which G, the constant of gravitation, is derived in terms of that dynamic balance. And so it follows that one cannot put the case to such physicists that, where matter is very concentrated, as within an atomic nucleus in the mid-range of the periodic table, the aether is not too far from the stress limits that govern graviton creation conforming with G as measured in our laboratory. 8. It seems that there is no way in which one can lead a 'disbelieving' physics community out of their wilderness, even if one uses their own language and words with which they are familiar. All one can do is to destroy their beliefs with the mighty blow forthcoming from the reality of a technological breakthrough. Whether this comes from 'cold fusion' or from 'free energy' sourced in ferromagnetism matters not, so long as there is that technological breakthrough. What is needed is something that points to evidence of how protons and deuterons are created preliminary to their fusion to form heavier forms of matter and how Planck's action in the underlying aether spills out energy to feed that creation. 9. The 'black-hole' supergravity that can occur in very dense matter cannot be explained until one can explain gravity in normal matter and until one can further explain the factors which determine the value of the fine-structure constant. If, for example, Planck's constant were to change in a step function as a function of the mass density thresholds in very dense matter, related to the concentration of aether energy, so that would affect the interpretation of the so-called 'black hole' evidence. 10. If, in striving to sustain a dynamic balance, the aether responds in a dual dynamic action to the passage of electromagnetic waves, so this could affect energy deployment implicit in Maxwell's wave equations and it could explain why the aether medium appears non-dispersive. These possibilities are not even considered by physicists who insist on building only on their 'past experience' without looking at the foundations to see what might have been missed. So, we advance by the accident of discovery, and, it seems, 'cold fusion' is one such accident. It remains now to convince physicists generally that there is excess heat generated in a cold fusion cell and then they can begin to think of revising their theories. This they will do in their own way, mindless of the work of record that can help them in that task. 11. Inasmuch as this author began in this field by first making the magnetic case for a real aether, then by determining the structure of that aether and deducing the fine-structure constant and going on from there to explain the connection with gravitation and proton creation, so it seems appropriate to lead from that into the subject of this Report. 'Black holes' and an 'expanding universe' conceived by physicists who were unaware of how Nature's ongoing attempts at proton creation in space can progressively reduce the frequency of electromagnetic waves in transit, plus the illusions of Einstein, have made them deaf to what this author has been saying over the years. In spite of this the author will here try once again to introduce his theory of proton creation and with it the creation of neutrons and deuterons, all to give basis to the new physics essential to our understanding of what underlies 'cold fusion' and of that deeper source of 'free energy' from which protons and deuterons are created. The author will further show how gravity features in this act. 12. One could not advance a theory on the scale provided by this author without encountering numerous obstructions where one has to pause to explain why others who claim something different have gone wrong in their own endeavours. The 'cold fusion' issue has run into such problems.
25.4.2005
Page 6 of 31
However, here it has not been a question of theory. There is now too much theory and not enough fact and so it is that the author feels he can let his own theory pertaining to cold fusion stand the scrutiny of others in this contest before needing to consider its defence. No, the rival claims in the 'cold fusion' field are those of experimenters. Whilst there are the pioneers who persist experimentally in their onward research, there are the others who rely on their personal 'experience' of confirmatory tests which have failed. Thus, whilst the author makes no special claim for superior wisdom in this experimental field, he has a comment to offer on the latter topic. It is merely an observation that to get two like-polarity charges to come together in a metal conductor one needs a standing charge of opposite polarity set up in that metal. One way of creating this condition is by setting up a non-linear orthogonal configuration of the temperature gradient and the magnetic field in the metal. In attempting to use uniform temperature calorimeter test apparatus enclosing the cold fusion cell, researchers are choking off the possible catalyst temperature gradient that could well be needed to trigger deuteron fusion. That topic will be discussed in the Part II Report and, pending that, readers may see some mention of this in New Energy News: April 1994: 'Patents for Cold Fusion' pp. 3-5. ****** It is hoped that the above discourse will explain why 'cold fusion' is seen by this author as offering more than a technological route to a non-polluting new source of energy. Nor is it merely something that can affect attitudes by nuclear physicists in their particular discipline. It is, in fact, a route to something of far greater consequence in that it gives us an insight into the true forces of Creation. It is appropriate here to remind the reader that 'cold fusion' is very much concerned with whether, and if so, how, hydrogen nuclei, adsorbed into a host metal and having their atomic electrons exposed to the interplay with free conduction electrons in that metal, can fuse together to release energy. The mutual transmutations and transient behaviour of the nuclei of the hydrogen isotopes, the proton, the deuteron and the triton, is what concerns us in finding the answer to these questions. The Triton Factor One is not far from claiming the ultimate scientific achievement when one declares an ability to calculate the proton mass theoretically in terms of electron mass, based on showing how Nature creates that proton. One should not then be surprised if the same theory explains other phenomena and leads to the precise derivation of other fundamental dimensionless physical constants, such as Planck's constant and the gravitation constant G. Whilst the author has waited patiently for his work in this field to be appreciated and recognized by the world at large, to no avail so far, it has been personally satisfying to see how the same theory yields the solutions to lesser problems, such as those posed by the muon, the pion and the kaon or the neutron and the deuteron. The key interest on which this research was founded was that of understanding the electrodynamic properties of these particles and relating the quantum of action of a real aether with the electrodynamics of the gravitons which determine the force of gravitation. In the Appendices to this Report some of the relevant published papers are reproduced, so there is no point in discussing that work in the body of this text on 'cold fusion'. However, not reproduced elsewhere is an account presented in a book entitled 'GRAVITATION' which the author published in 1975. The subject was that of showing how heavy electrons (the mu-mesons or muons) which account for
25.4.2005
Page 7 of 31
the primary energy action in the aethereal vacuum medium come together to create particles from which evolve protons and gravitons. Their action in creating protons is fully disclosed in the paper reproduced in APPENDIX D. The paper in APPENDIX E deals with the neutron and the deuteron and particular reference is made to Table II in that paper which shows how a deuteron alternates between three states, one of which is electrically neutral with a transiently-free -particle, a state which makes it particularly vulnerable to fusion with another deuteron. Concerning gravitation, the author could further include 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant', as published in Physics Essays, 2, pp. 173-179 (1989), but as that will be appended to ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 6, the reader is invited to refer to that. However, a summary introduction is presented below as APPENDIX A, reproduced from pp. 44 to 52 of the author's 1975 book entitled 'GRAVITATION'. It provides a pictorial scenario showing how particle building can occur to develop the proton into the graviton needed to explain the derivation of G, the constant of gravitation. From the viewpoint of 'cold fusion' this is relevant because one needs to be assured that a theory developed for the proton, the neutron and the deuteron is consistent with the physics needed to explain other phenomena and, as 'black holes' and gravitation have been mentioned, the link between protons and gravitation should be of interest. Knowledge of the graviton mass is essential if one is to calculate the value of G. The underlying theory was extremely simple in that the energy formula for two electric charges in contact is a quadratic equation having two solutions for the same energy value if one of the charge energies is a variable. This is because the energy of a charge e is inversely proportional to its bounding radius. Therefore, given two particle energy quanta, each nucleated by the standard unit of charge, one finds that a third particle form is created with no energy requirement. In an energy-active world, the separation and recombination of such particles and the ongoing regeneration of new particle forms amounts to a creation process. The question then arises as to which particle forms win in the contest for survival and it is found that only those having special secondary resonance properties can enjoy a long life span. In this contest for survival of particles, newly created by drawing on the pool of surplus energy, there are those which are created at very nearly the same mass by two different combination sequences. This gives them a dominant advantage but the only long term survivor in real matter is the proton. This means that the heavier particles of matter are formed by taking protons and/or antiprotons as basic building blocks and combining the -particle constituents, the electrons and positrons of the quantum-electrodynamic field background. The deuteron has to be an electron-positron-proton-antiproton composition of some kind, whereas the triton, the third isotope of hydrogen, can be of similar composition, but of more complex form. The reason for this is the fact that the basic graviton has a mass greater than twice the proton mass but not as great as three times the proton mass. Therefore, a closely-bound structure will constitute the deuteron, whereas the triton will need to have its mass seated in two end regions standing apart and not closely-bound by a -particle linkage. It was on these lines, that the theory of the deuteron and triton evolved, but the key to determining their actual structure was the evidence afforded by their precise mass and by their electrodynamic response properties as known from their magnetic moments. The same applied to the neutron, which, like the triton, had a third parameter to bring in as evidence, namely a measured lifetime. Such data, when deciphered, showed that the deuteron, for example, was exchanging states by particle and anti-particle annihilation and recreation and that in some states it had a satellite system
25.4.2005
Page 8 of 31
or 'entourage' of 'free' -particles, meaning that they could migrate a very limited distance into a host metal containing such a deuteron. For the neutron the lifetime became calculable but, as the theory evolved to build into a model of nuclear chain linkage as atoms of greater atomic number formed, so the neutron could not be seen as part of the atomic nucleus. It only exists in a free condition where it has that limited lifetime. It is only very recently that the triton data has been deciphered and the theory has been proved very successful in interpreting the lifetime. Note that lifetimes are calculated on the basis of destructive bombardment by combinations of mu-mesons featuring in their quantum-electrodynamic dance in that aethereal field background. The work on the triton has followed closely on the discovery that the proton and deuteron have an abundance relationship that is set by their interaction in this aethereal background field, as deuterons are primed to undergo fission to recreate protons, whilst protons merge by fusion to create deuterons. The showing that the deuteron and the proton have a relative natural abundance that is determined by an ongoing physical process forms the subject of APPENDIX B, whereas the derivation of the lifetime of the triton is presented in APPENDIX C. It is noted that the author has written many other papers that connect with the above theory and five, in particular, warrant mention and are commended for library reference to interested readers as they will not be included in this initial series of the author's ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS. They are: (a) 'Meson Production based on Thomson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 137-140 (1986). (b) 'An Empricial Approach to Meson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 153-157 (1986). (c) 'The Physics of the Missing Atoms: Technetium and Promethium', Hadronic Journal, 10, 185-192 (1987). (d) 'Conservative Hadron Interactions exemplified by the Creation of the Kaon', Hadronic Journal, 12, 101-108 (1989). (e) 'A Theory of Pion Creation', Physics Essays, 2, 360-367 (1989). All these papers passed the test of referee scrutiny as did many papers giving groundwork for the above developments that were published in English by the Italian Institute of Physics in their Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento series in the five or so years before that periodical terminated publication at yearend 1985. There will be those who read this text who stand ready to criticize because there is so much in physics that can affect one's views on particle behaviour. For example, the wave nature of the neutron is not something that may seem to fit easily into the picture presented above. However, in fact, it does, because that -particle 'entourage' already mentioned (see Table I in Appendix E) is what exhibits the wave property. The reader who is ready to discard the substance of this text on that account should first read the author's paper 'The Theoretical Nature of the Photon in a Lattice Vacuum' to be found at pp. 345-359
25.4.2005
Page 9 of 31
in 'Quantum Uncertainties' Series B: Physics Vol. 162 (1986) in the NATO ASI Series published by Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York. Then the reader may refer to the author's paper: 'A Causal Theory for Neutron Diffraction', Physics Letters A, 119, pp. 105-108 (1986), before looking up those many other background papers in Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento. Indeed, for the reader who has a cosmological inclination, half an eye on the 'missing mass' problem, and believes that steady-state equilibrium by proton creation and decay is not compatible with the redshift indication of an expanding universe, the author's paper that warrants special scrutiny is: 'The Steady-State Free-Electron Population of Free Space' Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento, 41, pp. 252-256 (1984). Conclusion This Energy Science Report on Cold Fusion, in its Part I contribution to the 'Power from Water' theme, is intended to present some of the author's relevant background theory in the scientific paper form in which it has already been published elsewhere, though the paper on the proton-deuteron abundance ratio is new to this work. As already stated, Part II will address other aspects bearing more directly on the technology of cold fusion, but this Part I material is an essential introduction to show why it is that the deuteron by its particle entourage can be partially embroiled in the electron-positron activity of free electrons in a metal host conductor. As already mentioned, one can see from the reference in APPENDIX E the situation where the core of the deuteron sits electrically neutral and bare of charge for moments in a fluctuating environment of charge, meaning that it is vulnerable to Coulomb barrier penetration by charged deuterons, so giving chance of fusion. Also, it is hoped that what has been said will cause some physicists to realise that existing knowledge of fundamental physics has its limitations but that 'cold fusion' research could well give us the added stimulus leading to the needed insight into the forces at work in creating the hydrogen nucleus and so understanding Creation on its universal scale. The reprinted papers forming APPENDIX D and APPENDIX E, are copied with the kind permission from the Editors of the Hadronic Journal. 26th April 1994 DR. HAROLD ASPDEN ENERGY SCIENCE LIMITED c/o SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB, ENGLAND
APPENDIX A [The text here in the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 5 was copied from pages 44-51 of the author's 1975 book 'GRAVITATION'] These pages can be seen in pdf format by using the following link: GRAVITATION pp. 44 to 51
25.4.2005
Page 10 of 31
*******************
APPENDIX B
THE DEUTERON-PROTON RELATIVE ABUNDANCE Introduction We begin by asking a question: 'Bearing in mind that the chemistry, meaning the chemical-bonding affinity, of heavy water is identical to that of ordinary water, would a human being be: (a) more healthy, (b) less healthy or (c) as healthy if the water intake to the body were to be heavy water rather than ordinary water?' As we approach the 21st century our scientific knowledge should have an answer to this question, especially as we know physicists are trying to solve our energy problems by nuclear fusion processes which utilize heavy water. Putting the above question rather differently: 'If a wealthy man were to create an environment in which he spent most of his time with no exposure to heavy water, meaning that all deuterium oxide or hydrogen deuteroxide is removed from the ordinary water supplied to that environment, could he expect to benefit healthwise and live longer?' Perhaps, unknown to this author, the answer to these questions is to be found somewhere on university library shelves. The author, in giving limited consideration to this question, referred to a textbook in his own possession, the third edition (1957) of 'Physical Chemistry' by Walter J. Moore, Professor of Chemistry at Indiana, published in the original American edition by Prentice-Hall Inc. of New York. An end-of-chapter question on page 249 reads: 'A normal male subject weighing 70.8 kg was injected with 5.09 ml of water containing tritium (9x109 cpm). Equilibrium with body water was reached after 3 hr when a 1-ml sample of plasma water from the subject had an activity of 1.8x105 cpm. Estimate the weight per cent of water in the human body.' The triton is the atomic nucleus of tritium, the third isotope of the element hydrogen, so, in a sense, one can infer from the latter exercise question that the body intake of very heavy water involving tritium will make the body radioactive and that cannot be good for one's health. Yet the very fact that this exercise question appears in a university textbook does suggest that water containing a concentration of tritium can be used in clinical testing. Our interest in the health implications of deuterium is therefore warranted. Deuterium is not radioactive but we still have a valid and unanswered question in wondering if heavy water is in any way damaging to health.
25.4.2005
Page 11 of 31
Deuteron Fission and Fusion as a Natural Phenomenon In that same 'Physical Chemistry' textbook and chapter 9, with its appended questions, we read on p. 244 about the 'energy production of stars'. Two nuclear processes are described as being alternative possibilities. One involves a process in which C12 and H1 fuse to produce N13 which in turn decays to C13 with the emission of a positron before experiencing further regenerative fusion and decay iterations with hydrogen and oxygen to yield ultimately He4. The other involves the fusion of two protons to produce a deuteron and a positron, also followed by the synthesis of He4. It is said that the first of these, the carbon cycle, is the source of energy in very hot stars, whilst the second involving deuterons applies to somewhat cooler stars like our sun. Amongst the steps in the stellar carbon cycle there is one in which C13 combines with H1 to yield N14 before the latter combines with H1 to produce O15. Now, moving back to Earth and those end-of-chapter questions we read: 'According to W. F. Libby [Science, 109, 227 (1949)] it is probable that radioactive carbon-14 (mean lifetime 5720 years) is produced in the upper atmosphere by the action of cosmic-ray neutrons on N14, being thereby maintained at approximately constant concentration of 12.5 cpm per g of carbon. A sample of wood from an ancient Egyptian tomb gave an activity of 7.04 cpm per g of carbon. Estimate the age of the wood.' The significance of this is that the physics of carbon-14 dating depends upon the transmutation of atomic nuclei and the probability of events involving exposure the atomic nuclei to bombardment by energetic stimuli. Now, in simply assigning a mean lifetime to a particular nuclear decay process the physicist can be hiding ignorance of something behind his presentation of empirical fact. He knows that there is decay and can measure the mean lifetime involved, but we are not in every case told why that decay occurs. Yes, we are told that the cosmic-ray neutrons create C14 from N14, presumably by emission of a positron, but we are not told what it is that sporadically bombards the C14 once it is protected from exposure to the elements and which somehow triggers its eventual decay. There is, quite clearly, something in our non-cosmic Earth environment that can activate nuclear fission and possibly nuclear fusion reactions. This may be that mysterious something we call the 'neutrino' but one really must wonder whether that term 'neutrino' is scientific 'mumbo jumbo' for what could be described as 'a sporadic intruding influence of an energetic interaction with an allpervading field background'. The advancement of energy science may depend upon the development of a better understanding of that intruding influence, because it surely must account for nuclear energy transactions which can occur at normal temperatures as in that ancient piece of wood of the carbon-dating example. It is not very satisfying to be told that, inasmuch as energy and momentum equations would not otherwise balance, there is need to recognize the existence of particles we call 'neutrinos' or the even enigmatic 'neutrons'. There was in pre-20th century science the firm belief in the existence of an aether medium which common sense suggested as that ever-present hidden underworld which could sustain electric field oscillations travelling through a vacuum. In a sense, the modern physicist has replaced that aether with a collection of imaginary particles, whether termed 'neutrinos' or described as being 'virtual' which are the unseen denizens of the vacuum state which we can refer to to 'take up the slack' created by gaps in our scientific knowledge. Yet, is the conventional picture of that virtual 'neutrino-inhabited' quantum sea correct? Let us return to our problem and focus attention upon the transmutation of the hydrogen and
25.4.2005
Page 12 of 31
deuterium nuclei, meaning the process deemed to occur in the sun by which two protons fuse with release of energy and a positron (or so-called beta-plus particle) to become a deuteron. Also meant is the reverse process by which, given the right stimulus, a deuteron can convert into two protons by emitting an electron or so-called beta-minus particle. The latter possibility as a natural process is suggested by the observation that the abundance ratio of deuterons to protons is the same for matter found in comets as it is for matter on Earth. What universal process determines this ratio and keeps it constant? Are we, instead, to believe that the ratio is one which evolves and so changes, in which case we should try to explain why the comet presents the same ratio as the Earth. Are we to believe that there was a Big Bang in which the ratio of protons to deuterons was fixed in an atomic soup which was stirred to a uniform and final mixture before the cometary matter and the Earth condensed from that common nebulous mixture? In the absence of verifying laboratory tests we shall never know for certain the answer to these questions, but one can say that there is more than the glimmer of a solution if the abundance ratio actually measured can be deduced in the manner and style of the solution of those end-of-chapter questions in that textbook entitled 'Physical Chemistry'. So, we now set our sights on explaining the proton/deuteron abundance ratio ducumented at page 965 of the 1967 second edition of the McGraw-Hill 'Handbook of Physics' edited by Condon and Odishaw. According to this reference work, in every ten million atoms containing hydrogen and deuterium there are 9,998,508 nucleated by protons and 1,492 nucleated by deuterons. The conditions governing the fusion and fission of these atomic particles must involve the element of chance, in that a combination of events conducive to decay must occur as a probability function, bringing about actions involving energy in a form which can materialize or dematerialize in integer quanta we associate with decay particle products (those beta particles). Note that we speak of 'decay' both for the fission and the fusion process as if decay can be a two-way or reversible operation. This has meaning only if the real form of the proton and the deuteron is that of a system which overall exhibits the stability of single-form existence but yet which, inherently, undergoes cyclic alternations of state, as between a ground state and one of greater energy. Much more will be said about this subject in this and later work and by reference to the author's published papers, but the reader may here consider two basic facts known to the particle physicist. These are (a) that the deuteron exhibits a nuclear magnetic moment that is about 6/7ths of that expected in relation to its spin property and (b) that the proton exhibits properties suggesting it is composed of three charges, rather than a single charge. (See APPENDIX E and the Feynman reference in APPENDIX A). The deuteron property implies that it has a state for one seventh of the time in which its positive charge becomes that of a satellite beta-plus particle that has been transiently displaced from the mass of its core, which thereby reacts as a neutral charge in its spin response during that limited transient period. The proton property suggests a 'quark' composition which this author prefers to see as being that of a proton charge +e aggregated with a (+e, -e) charge pair in the form of a beta-plus and a beta-minus particle or, in the alternative, an antiproton charge (-e) aggregated with two beta-plus (+e) particles. For the actual proton this implies alternation between two states in one of which the mass-energy is slightly greater than the norm of that of a bare proton charge standing in isolation and in the other of which the mass-energy is slightly lower than that norm. For the deuteron, there are three alternative states, (a) one of lowest energy, the ground state, in
25.4.2005
Page 13 of 31
which two antiproton charges are aggregated with three beta-plus particles, (b) the neutral state, of greatest 'core' energy, where a (+e, -e) beta-particle charge pair sits between an antiproton charge and a proton charge in the near presence of a satellite (+e) beta-particle, and (c) the third energy state for which two proton charges are aggregated with an intermediate beta-minus particle with the (+e, -e) beta-particle charge pair in a satellite position. These particle 'models' are justified on other grounds in APPENDIX E, but they serve here to give basis for our understanding that a system of protons in a suitable combination of states can serve collectively to permit a balanced energy transition involving the creation of the deuteron in its least energy state. Similarly, it is the transiently neutral state of the deuterons which permits their reaction in an energy balanced transition which regenerates the proton. To formulate the resulting abundance ratio of H1: H2 we write: H1/H2 = (S1N/(S2n)(P1/P2) ................... (1) In the above equation: S1 is the factor signifying the incidence of state when a transition can occur involving the proton (this having the value 2 because there are two equally probable states). S2 is the factor signifying the incidence of state when a transition can occur involving the deuteron (this having the value 7 because the deuteron is in its vulnerable neutral core state for one seventh of the time). N is the number of protons that need to be subjected simultaneously to the transition stimulus of the energy fluctuations in the environmental field background in order to secure the energy balance conditions needed to assure a transmutation. n is the number of deuterons that need to be subjected simultaneously to the transition stimulus of the energy fluctuations in the environmental field background in order to secure the energy balance conditions needed to assure a transmutation. P1 is the net number of protons created by collective action in a transition event. P2 is the net number of deuterons created by collective action in a transition event. The evaluation of the four parameters N, n, P1 and P2 will be our task below, but, to show the power of the argument being pursued, it is of interest to recite the calculated values first. They are: N = 35 n = 8 P1 = 18 and P2 = 16 Putting these in equation (1) gives the result: H1: H2 = 6705 : 1 which corresponds to a deuteron abundance factor of 1491 parts per ten million compared with the observed factor of 1492. This result is, at least in this author's opinion, a very significant scientific contribution.
25.4.2005
Page 14 of 31
It means that the physical processes that can occur in the oceans of the Earth can establish this equilibrium ratio as between the abundance of protons and deuterons to cause the heavy water content of the sea to be a natural physical quantity maintained at a constant value. One needs, of course, to apply the underlying theory to estimate the time constant of the exchanges leading to equilibrium. This is measured in thousands of years so that one can feel confident that a laboratory store of deuterium hydroxide or heavy water will not convert into normal water too readily. More important, however, there are implications for the Big Bang theory of cosmic evolution and for energy generation by so-called 'cold-fusion' methods, if deuterons and protons can undergo mutual transmutation at the temperature of our environment. The abundance ratio could not be computed by theory in the way suggested unless such transmutations do occur and, it may be noted, none of those high energy neutrons which are deemed so important in high energy physics are involved in the processes discussed. The Significance of the Deuteron Algorithm The reason for terming the formulation in equation (1) as an 'algorithm' is the author's way of saying that what has been discovered is the short-cut route for solving a problem which, by orthodox methods, would otherwise involve vast amounts of computer time. That is assuming that the route to a solution by computer methods has been devised and, as concerns the proton/deuteron abundance ratio, scientists seem not, as yet, to have appreciated that the problem is amenable to solution. It is traditional in particle physics which involve hadronic mass calculations for problems to be approached by iterative techniques which take account of a vast number of interacting factors. This will be better understood when we come to discuss what it is that determines the proton/electron mass ratio. The algorithm we will use for solving that problem is the 'jewel in the crown' amongst the arsenal already mentioned. It has devastating implications for orthodox scientific doctrine founded on so-called 'quantum chromodynamics'. However, as the scientific world knows from the hostility and resentment aroused against the claims of Professors Fleischmann and Pons for daring to imply that deuteron cold fusion had been discovered, there is readiness to scorn progress in science that challenges cherished beliefs. Where the only product is an intellectual accomplishment expressed as an equation which presents the numerical value of what is a very fundamental dimensionless physical constant, then the wrath of the establishment scientist can reach its zenith. The modern computer allows one, by trial an error, to probe all combinations of numbers, if one is willing to indulge in exercises that are arithmetic in character rather than physically founded. It follows, by the doctrine that if something is possible it will eventually happen, that scientists assume the trial and error arithmetic exercise is at the root of any claim to have deduced a physical constant. They lack credulity and show no tolerance when one makes a claim to explain the numerical value of a physical constant. What, they ask, is the merit of deducing the value of a quantity having a particular meaning in physics when the value of that quantity is already known to high precision from our experimental measurements? They argue, therefore, that to find acceptance one must, before it is measured, predict a numerical value of a constant having real physical meaning, so that eventual measurement of that quantity will deservedly command attention. This is not a logical posture, given that there are a limited number of truly dimensionless fundamental constants in physics, all of which have been already measured to very high precision. It is not a logical posture because it means that we are denied the hope of ever allowing a simple algorithmic approach to confirm to us the discovery of insight into the factors which govern the constant of gravitation, Planck's constant and that proton/electron mass ratio already mentioned. It is, however, deemed acceptable to allow the supercomputer to try to decipher the mysteries of Nature
25.4.2005
Page 15 of 31
whilst feeding it with mathematically elegant instructions designed to test artistic notions of symmetry. That said, the author challenges the reader to examine equation (1) and consider the skill needed to contrive its discovery and the choice of parameters had the author really probed the problem by exercising a computer. Firstly, consider the simplicity of the equation and its symmetry as between the proton-deuteron transition of the numerator and the deuteron-proton transition of the denominator. Then consider the chances, with an arbitrary choice of integer numbers for S1, S2, N, n, P1 and P2 of finding the correct solution and, after choosing an appropriate combination of integers, consider the scope for devising a plausible physical model giving meaning to the integers selected. Note that the author could have put the integer 9 for P1 and the integer 8 for P2, if the basis of the formulation had not developed from direct physical analysis. One may wonder what solution the trial and error computer search would have found had the objective been set for this general equation to give the right answer to within the one in thousand precision assuming any integer combination other than that presented above is to be regarded as valid. There are in fact many possibilities but then one confronts that formidable task of justifying in physical terms which combination applies and how each of the numbers chosen has a valid role in determining the proton-deuteron abundance ratio. In the absence of a tentative model to guide one's endeavours that is not a worthwhile pursuit. Physicists are not loath to wasting time on such a project, judging by the attack on the theoretical value of the dimensionless quantity incorporating Planck's constant. This is a reference to -1, the constant we know as having the value 137.035 9895(61). In 1970 a physicist named Wyler claimed a derivation for this constant as 137.036 082 by presenting a formula including the quantity and the integer numbers 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 and 9. As is explained by Petley in his 1985 book 'The Fundamental Physical Constants and the Frontiers of Measurement', it was in 1971 that Robertson, Roskies and Prosen brought disrepute to such work by arbitrarily sythesizing values of -1 with the aid of a computer. Using a similar format to Wyler's equation, given some ground rules and arbitrary combination and choice of 11 integer numbers and further including , the computer found 6 values of -1 all closer to the measured value than was Wyler's value. The integers ranged up to 19 in value and one can but deplore this 'numbers game' exercise, as a means for suppressing genuine physically based endeavour by those who seek to solve the great mysteries of physical science. The fine structure constant concerns the action we associate with Planck's constant. It is at the very heart of the Energy Science to be discussed in these Reports. It is with that background in mind that the author invites the reader to examine the algorithm presented in equation (1) and consider the problem of devising a physically meaningful result in such good accord with the measured value, if that accord were fortuitous. However, for the benefit of the reader who seeks the truths of this situation, we will first summarize the process involved and then begin the analysis of the energy transactions which govern equation (1). How is it that protons can transmute into deuterons and vice versa as an ongoing natural process, when the mass-energy of two protons exceeds that of the deuteron? The reason is that, owing to vacuum energy fluctuations, both the proton and the deuteron are constantly experiencing changes of state in which they have slightly changed mass-energy. It so happens that the highest energy state of the deuteron which applies for one seventh of the time
25.4.2005
Page 16 of 31
is one for which the energy is higher than twice the lowest energy state of the proton. The proton ground state applies for what is virtually half of any period of time. The other half is spent in its higher energy state and it flips cyclically between the two states halting very momentarily between these two states whilst in its 'bare proton' form. The presence of beta particles when in either of the two principal energy states account for the mass differences. Accordingly, the deuteron to proton transformation occurs when the deuteron is in its highest energy condition. Conversely, the protons cooperate in creating a deuteron by action focused on the deuteron ground state. The analysis by which these actions can be fully understood does, therefore, require the background study of the state composition of the proton and the deuteron. For the purpose of this Report, it suffices here to refer to APPENDIX A in which the author discusses the three-part proton and APPENDIX E, which concerns the deuteron. As to the proton, the 'bare proton' has a definite mass that is 1836.152 times the electron mass, as calculated in APPENDIX D, but, by reference to Feynman in APPENDIX A, we saw that the proton in its normal state behaves as if its charge is spread between three centres. In fact it is alternating between states, being at times a bare proton charge and at other times having close association with an electron-positron pair and even in another state becoming an antiproton coupled to two positrons or rather beta-particles, because physicists prefer not to think of electrons and positrons as being nuclear constituents. In its beta-particle association it has a mass increased in one state by a value very close to 0.25 electron mass units and decreased in the other least-energy ground state by very nearly 0.25 electron mass units. For the purpose of the calculations of the deuteron-proton transmutations the time spent in the intermediate 'bare proton' state, in order to keep the overall mass-energy balance at a mean value equal to that of the 'bare proton', is quite negligible. The reader is here reminded that particle physicists picture the proton as comprising quarks as if it has three separate fractionally charged components. This author urges the reader to think in terms of a proton which changes form between three states in each of which its component charges are unitary at all times. This author is urging the reader to keep in mind that charges can be created and annihilated in pairs and that this is a property of the beta-particles known from quantum electrodynamics. It needs little imagination to recognize that such charge transmutations occur inside protons and deuterons and that there could even be some polarity inversion or exchanges involved between beta-particles and protons when they are so closely bound together in atomic nuclei. Physicists who believe in fractionally charged quarks are leaping into the unknown and making unwarranted assumptions. All the evidence points instead to transmuting forms of unitary charge particles which only appear on a statistical average to be fractionally charged. They are, in fact, exchanging energy with nearby charges and participating in vacuum field effects of pair creation and annihilation activity. Therefore, they exhibit behaviour reflecting their average condition. Of course, when they emerge from their bondage in the composite particle form they must appear as unitary charges, which explains why the so-called quark has never been isolated in any experiments. Just as the physicist assumes that there is a neutron in the deuteron, so he has assumed that there are quarks in the proton. That is ill-founded assumption which can be remedied by understanding what is offered in this text as an explanation for proton-deuteron quantities which can be measured against the theory. We now delve into the detailed analysis leading to the prime formula specifying the natural proton:deuteron abundance ratio.
25.4.2005
Page 17 of 31
Energy-Balance Criteria It will be argued that, for the simple particle structures involved in the deuteron and proton states, we can assume for close approximation purposes, that energy transactions between these two particle forms involve quantities corresponding to quarter units of the rest mass-energy of the electron. Should the reader question this it may help to refer to another older textbook, this being 'Modern Physics' by Professor H. A. Wilson of the Rice Institute at Houston, Texas, reprinted in 1946 from the 1937 second edition (publishers Blackie & Son Limited, London). It is at p. 261 in the chapter on Atomic Nuclei that Wilson begins to discuss the fact that the energy released in nuclear reactions, particularly those involving the lighter atoms, is nearly always in approximate multiples of 0.387 MeV. This is 0.757 units of electron rest-mass energy, but, for reasons that will later become apparent, we will assume that this corresponds to three of the quarter units just mentioned. It seems quite logical, therefore, to look to the electron or the positron (that is, the beta particles associated with nuclear decay) as providing the 'glue' or binding energy holding the heavy charges (the hadrons) together in an atomic nucleus. The deuteron when bombarded by very high energy from a radioactive gamma ray source breaks up by emitting two heavy particles, one being the proton. The other heavy particle is a neutral entity which we call the 'neutron'. The neutron is unstable and has a mean lifetime of about 15 minutes, breaking up into a proton and an electron. It follows from this that one could say that a deuteron comprises two protons and an electron. Remembering then that the proton is deemed to comprise three charged components it is not unreasonable to believe that, when it stands in isolation, it comprises a heavy positive charge in close association with an electron-positron pair or a heavy negative particle closely bound between two positrons. In this scenario the 'neutron' can be a neutral aggregation of an electron and one of these proton forms. We come therefore back to the rather simple proposition that electrons and positrons exist in atomic nuclei and account for the binding energy which holds the protons and antiprotons together. There are no neutrons, as such, in atomic nuclei. Now, based on Table II in APPENDIX E, it can be seen that we can state the highest and lowest energy states of the deuteron in terms of their 'proton' P unit composition and 'electron mass units' E. The latter are units of 2e2/3a, so that state A has energy 2P+3E-35E/8 because the deuteron, as such, incorporates three -particles. State C has energy 2P+E-18E/8, there being only one -particle in the deuteron core. The intermediate state B deuteron has an energy 2P+2E-25E/8, which is the highest. In contrast the proton has a least energy P+2E-9E/4 and a highest energy of P+2E-7E/4. Consider now the action needed to produce ground-state deuterons from protons which have net energies of -E/4 or +E/4. The action we contemplate will involve no net energy exchange in the transmutation process, but may involve fluctuations of energy. Also, we will presume the decay of protons is conditioned at an energy level matching that at which protons are created, this is in their bare charge form with no satellite electrons or positrons. The proton input to the deuteron creation process must then involve an even number of protons involving equal participation of those with net +E/4 energies and -E/4 energies (meaning -7E/4 and -9E/4 interaction energies, respectively). Our deuteron creation reaction will involve N three-charge protons creating x ground-state A deuterons plus y bare electrons or positrons and z residual protons in their bare charge state. The rules governing a decay process of this kind are that the space occupancy by electron and positron charge and so their intrinsic energy content must be conserved, as must interaction energy
25.4.2005
Page 18 of 31
separately and the numbers of bare proton or antiprotons. Noting that the deuteron ground-state interaction energy is given by -35E/8 and that its electron/positron content is 3, so one can then write: space conservation: 2N = 3(x) + y ................................... (2) energy conservation: (35E/8)x = (7E/4 + 9E/4)(N/2) ........ (3) proton conservation: N = 2(x) + z ..................................... (4) It requires simple algebra to find the solution for minimal residue, meaning z is minimum with N finite. It may be verified that the following combination of numerical values satisfies the three equations: (x) . (y) . (z) . (N) 16 .. 22 .. 3 .. 35 32 .. 44 .. 6 .. 70 From this one finds the unique solution, which is that a trigger event involving 35 protons produces 16 ground-state deuterons. The protons can be in either of two states and at their transition through the bare state some will be tending to increase energy and others will be tending to decrease energy. This trigger event occurs when all 35 are in the same transient increasing energy state, meaning an event probability factor, the inverse of which is proportional to the numbers of protons in the equilibrium system. The latter factor is (2)35. The reverse process involves a vacuum field fluctuation supplying 0.511 MeV of energy as part of the trigger event by which deuterons in their transient highest energy B state are raised to the energy level at which they can transform into proton pairs. There is a governing requirement for other transient energy input in paired units of the electron rest-mass energy quantum E = 0.511 MeV and a need for charge parity by a transformation of the C state deuteron form into the ground-state A form. Note that a neutral B-state deuteron core without its satellite beta-plus particle has a net energy of 2E-25E/8 or -9E/8. Therefore the addition to a group of 8 such deuterons of the mass energy carried by 9 beta-plus particles will correspond to an event which brings the energy into balance with that of 16 protons, suggesting that this could be the process by which deuterons transmute into protons. The ongoing energy fluctuations in the electron-positron field will allow the energy of those 8 satellite beta-plus particles to redeploy into electron-positron pairs in the quantum-electrodynamic background which sources the 9 beta particles, as the positive charge transfers to the proton product. On balance only one 0.511MeV unit E of field energy is needed to simulate the deuteron-proton conversion. The action described can, therefore, on energy balance criteria, create 16 protons from those 8 deuterons, but only if there is a net unit electron rest-mass energy input and a complementary reaction which can take up the surplus unit of positive charge. Since the net core deficit energy of the C state deuteron is E less 9E/4 or -10E/8 and that of the A state deuteron is 3E less 35E/8, which is -11E/8, the transition of 11 C state deuterons to 10 A state deuterons with the shedding of two protons will occur with no energy residue. However, in this case the reaction product requires an input of one unit of positive charge. It follows that, at least in theory, the state transitions of the deuteron could, in the normal ongoing QED field activity, give reason for expecting protons to emerge from natural fission of deuterons but the statistics of such an event are set by the chance combination of 8 of the B-deuteron states. Then 16 protons will emerge directly from those B-state deuterons and 2 protons will emerge from the very frequent C-state to A-state transitions. The event will mean that protons are created in batches
25.4.2005
Page 19 of 31
of 18 from these events. Each deuteron is in the B-state for 1/7th of any period of time. This yields an event factor giving measure of deuteron population as (7)8 since 8 deuterons collectively are the target for the primary reaction. Combining these results one finds that S1 and N in equation (1) are 2 and 35, respectively. Furthermore, P1 in equation (1) is 18. Similarly, S2 is 7 and n is 8 in equation (1) with P2 as 16. The overall ratio of proton to deuteron in the equilibrium state can then be expressed by the contracted quantity 9(16/7)8, which is 6705 as a proton to deuteron ratio or 1491 deuterons per ten million protons. As already stated above, this compares with an experimental abundance ratio assessment of 1492 per ten million. The General Parity Criteria It is important to appreciate, when dealing with problems involving the background zero-point energy field, that the energy balance is the primary regulating factor. There can be energy fluctuations but, so far as the energy locked into the matter form is concerned, this is conserved in the overall picture of things. Charge parity and the parity of space occupancy associated with electron-positron charge forms are less important to individual energy processes of the kind just described, though these too must be balanced on a collective less-local basis. For example, an electron and positron can, together, be seen as a neutral charge entity and yet two space quanta are involved. Conversely, two space quanta can be occupied by charge of the same polarity, meaning that a given even number of space quanta can all be occupied, and then there can be a net charge out-of-balance. If one says that 35 normal three-charge protons can transform into 16 deuterons plus 3 bare singlecharge protons, there is a net charge deficit of 16 units of charge e. However, we are also saying that the reverse event can occur in which batches of 8 plus 1 deuterons convert into 18 protons. Both batch processes are occurring together in the deuteron/proton environment and so, allowing for transient leptonic (electron-positron) activity in the QED field background (see section III of APPENDIX E) the charge condition balances overall. Similarly the space occupancy condition is a self-balancing process in our stable local field environment. Should one ask whether a litre of heavy water will be transmogrified into normal water by the processes suggested above one must answer affirmatively. The real question is that of knowing the time scale involved. Here one can estimate the time rate of these events by noting that an event time factor of the order of 10-13 seconds characterizes the single electron transition in the quantum field background. It can decay at A and be recreated at B as if it jumps from A to B in that period. The three-charge proton and state B deuteron decays discussed above centre on a pairing of two electron-sized charges in each of these particle forms. The governing frequency of the background field is that corresponding to a photon of energy equal to the rest mass energy of the electron. The chance factor for a single electron as target for an energy fluctuation is about 1 in 107, meaning that
25.4.2005
Page 20 of 31
there are that many cycles of that electron Compton frequency in the 10-13 second period of the electron lifetime. Therefore, we can estimate that every 10-6 seconds every proton and B state deuteron will be a candidate for transmutation. For there to be transmutation, however, the target particles have all to be in the same state and this is governed, for the proton, by that factor above of (2)35. This means that, on average, a proton will withstand participation in the deuteron creation process for a period of (2) 35 microseconds, which is about 10 hours. This period reduces to a few seconds for the converse process by which deuterons should transmute into protons in water that is nearly 100% deuterium oxide. It is only in the composition of the equilibrium mixture that the proton transmutation time rate applies for the reciprocal transmutations. Clearly, therefore, the question arises as to why heavy water does not convert into normal water on a time scale measured in minutes. The answer to this is connected with the problem confronting the 'cold fusion' issue. When deuterons transmute into protons in the recognized way, energy has to be added by gamma radiation and the products are one proton plus one neutron. 'Cold fusion' has posed the question "Where are the neutrons?". It would seem that what happens in the world of very high energy collisions is not the same as events in the cool conditions of a medium at water temperature. In the sea the process described above can occur to keep the equilibrium between the deuterium oxide D2O, hydrogen deuteroxide HDO and hydrogen oxide H2O. The charge imbalance is there avoided by the recriprocal transmutation but one must assume charge fluctuations involving the atomic nuclei in exchanges with the background field. Possibly this activity has connection with the many reported energy anomalies found in experiments with water, particularly those involving electrolytic action. In high energy physics of deuteron transmutation the charge issue is avoided by the action we term the 'neutron', which this author must assume is really a proton or antiproton neutralised by an accompaniment of electron(s) and/or positron(s). However, we still ask the question "How long will it take before a kilogram of heavy water converts to a 50% mixture of heavy water and normal water?" Note that this question is put in terms of weight because the overall volume of the water would increase as deuterons change into protons. Furthermore, unless there is neutron emission, there would be release of hydrogen gas unless oxygen were to be absorbed. The answer must lie in the understanding of the source of the added positive charge taken up by the newly created protons. If this source is sluggish in providing that charge then the transmutation rate will be retarded. It may be measured in hundreds or thousands of years under normal environmental conditions or where water is sealed in a container. Equally, it may be a matter of days only where the heavy water is absorbed into a palladium host metal carrying electric current. Accordingly, one must wonder if the charge adjustments applicable where protons convert into deuterons and vice versa affect adjustments to the natural equilibrium ratio of protons to deuterons and see how this affects the 'cold fusion' deuteron transmutation process. This Part I Report will not enter into speculations on the technological implications of the latter issue. The main point made in this contribution is that the ratio of protons to deuterons which occurs naturally is not an arbitrary consequence of disorder in the evolution of historical events. It is a fundamental physical constant determined by the same regulating factors which fix constants such as the proton/electron mass ratio. Footnote
25.4.2005
Page 21 of 31
In the paper which follows as APPENDIX C the deuteron features as a component of the triton and the decay of the triton is related to events by which the deuteron is itself affected by the mu-meson bombardment. There is a fundamental difference in that action compared with the situation above. Whereas the beta-particles are really the target affected by those mu-mesons in the isolated proton and deuteron forms, when one considers these as part of larger atomic nuclei the decay action is dominated by mumeson attack on a different and larger target which latches onto nucleons belonging to atomic nuclei having atomic mass number of 3 or more. Though this may sound complicated, in the limited space available in this Report, the author has deemed it best to present this Appendix B and Appendix C as separate self-contained texts and it is hoped that the reader will be able to follow the logic of the separate presentations even though study of the author's other published work will be needed to fully comprehend the distinction. The threshold between 2 and 3 nucleons has a dynamic 'gravity' balance connection with the 'graviton' mass developed in Fig. 7 as shown in APPENDIX A. The 'larger target' involved in proton creation, one larger than the electron or beta-particle, by 1843 in volume, is explained on page 40 of APPENDIX C and more fully on the second page of APPENDIX E. The relevance of the latter to the deuteron as a component of the triton is that it brings about the actual creation of a proton within the triton as a deuteron-proton composition. It is shown on pp. 42-43 that the mu-meson bombardment of that space lattice charge 'target' triggers the transient creation of a proton, on average, every 12.2 years. If this event occurs in the 3-or-more-nucleon core, so that may well involve a proton transfer and a nuclear transmutation. This is an action quite distinct from that described above where it was assumed that the two beta-particles in the proton or the B-state core deuteron were the 'target' for mu-meson attack.
APPENDIX C
[The following paper was presented at a conference held by ANPA, the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association, in Cambridge, England during 9-12 September 1993. Though the title refers to the 'model proton' the main thrust of this paper concerns the triton and theoretical derivation of its lifetime.]
THE MODEL PROTON IN A NON-COMBINATORIAL HIERARCHY Harold Aspden The proton, as the primary form of matter, is at the creative equilibrium interface between matter and vacuum energy. Just as there is electron-positron pair creation and annihilation activity in the vacuum field, so there may be an underlying 'heavy' lepton (muon) activity in the universal field environment. This paper explores the relationship between the muon and the proton on the simple assumption that Nature is constantly trying to create protons but is normally restrained by energy equilibrium criteria. The author's theoretical model is of long standing record, as outlined in Physics Today, November 1984, p. 15, and as acknowledged for its remarkable 'classically-derived' prediction of the proton-
25.4.2005
Page 22 of 31
electron mass ratio in the paper reporting its measurement by Van Dyck et al, International Journal of Mass Spectrometry and Ion Processes, 66 (1985) 327-337. The advance reported in this ANPA-15 paper concerns recent developments of this model which focus upon aspects of the deuteron and the triton. In particular, the model will be tested by deriving theoretically the 12 year lifetime of tritium on the assumption that it decays owing to interaction with that same heavy lepton field environment that creates the proton. This approach then affords insight into the exposure of the deuteron to that heavy lepton field activity. The quantitative aspects of the energy transactions involved are too remarkable to be attributed to coincidence. The advantage to humanity which such research affords is linked to the prospect of success now emerging from research on cold fusion, inasmuch as the theoretical processes envisaged explain why no neutrons result from what is deemed to be deuteron fusion. The consequences concern an alternative natural philosophy having bearing upon the forces of creation in the universe and are important in that by theorizing about the derivation of the proton mass in relation to the electron there is spin-off which can cause physicists to revise their views on nuclear theory. 1. The Triton in Focus Tritium is the third isotope of hydrogen. It is radioactive but decays by releasing a minute amount of energy - about one thirtieth of what is needed to create an electron. Its nucleus, triton, is an enigma in physics. A portion of the energy it releases somehow vanishes without trace and this phenomenon has been the basis of the neutrino hypothesis. The fusion of hydrogen in the sun is believed to be the source of energy which powers our existence on Earth, but the supposed related neutrino emission from the sun is itself a problem. There is just not enough solar neutrino energy intercepted by our Earth to balance the energy books representing the solar hydrogen fusion hypothesis. It is submitted that the triton is the guardian of the secrets which govern our understanding of the cold fusion process encountered when deuterium is loaded into a cathode in a Fleischmann-Pons experimental cell. The triton has a lifetime of 12 years. That is a very important clue and it has caused this author to focus on the assumption that the triton incorporates a ground-state deuteron, which is the seat of the decay action. This means that the deuteron itself is subject to radioactive decay processes but, as will be shown, this decay action involves a proton creation followed by proton decay. What may then emerge as a cold fusion product is a tritium nucleus or the reestablishment of the deuteron in its orginal form. In other words, the deuteron appears stable, but it can develop into a triton by a natural lifetime process, albeit with very much higher probability if another deuteron in close proximity is available to sacrifice a proton. This proposal is not hypothetical. It is based on a theme developed in the author's earlier work, published long before the Fleischmann-Pons cold fusion discovery was announced. See, for example, the American Institute of Physics journal 'Physics Today', 37, p. 15 (1984). There the author drew attention to the P and Q scenario where a proton of energy P was attracted to an oppositely charged partner of energy Q. If each has a charge e bounded by a sphere of radius a determined by the J. J. Thomson formula (E = 2e2/3a), the total energy of the P and Q charge in surface contact is: P + Q - 3PQ/2(P+Q) For the binding energy term to be a maximum, P and Q must have a certain relationship. This is when 1+Q/P is the square root of 3/2. The reader may then verify that with P as 1836 the value of Q is 413, which is the combined energy of a pair of mu-mesons in electron units. Resulting from this
25.4.2005
Page 23 of 31
discovery the author has advanced elsewhere a theory of proton creation which explains how protons are built from the virtual muonic energy activity in the vacuum field. Note here that electron-positron creation and annihilation are ongoing activities in the vacuum field, the basis of quantum electrodynamics, and the mu-mesons are the 'heavy electrons' which hitherto have been seen in physics as having no role or function that could justify their existence in Nature. Their role is, of course, the most important of all, that of matter creation in the form of protons! Now, we are, in the description which follows, to see how this same process of proton creation is at work within a deuteron or a triton. The algorithm which the reader may keep in mind in the analysis which follows is the curious mathematical fact that 4Q, meaning four mu-meson pairs, if combined with the energy released by creating two (P:Q) systems from two bare P components, will be exactly that needed to create a new proton or antiproton P. To prove this write: P = 4Q + 3PQ/(P+Q) - 2Q Then rearrange algebraically as: P(P+Q) = 2Q(P+Q) + 3PQ or: 3P2 = 2P2 + 4PQ + 2Q2 = 2(P+Q)2 which is the above relationship between P and Q as calculated from minimization of energy potential. It follows, therefore, that if a particle containing two P nucleons is bombarded by the mu-meson vacuum energy background there is a condition where 8 mu-mesons will create a third P. This is tantamount to a fusion process occurring at room temperature which adds a nucleon to a deuteron. Note that the energy is 'borrowed' partially from the vacuum as a vacuum energy fluctuation and partly provided by the degeneration of two nucleons in creating the two Q dimuon components. The system will 'restore' by causing a proton elsewhere, as in a nearby deuteron, to decay, but for a transient period there will be a very active energy situation which can give basis for much that is observed in cold fusion phenomena. The remainder of this paper will develop the above theme by reference to the triton, and the verifying key which confirms what is said above is the resulting calculation of the 12 year mean lifetime for the transmutation just mentioned. This gives insight into the energy generation rate that can be expected in the cold fusion deuteron reaction. A deuteron will experience the mu-meson transmutation described on an average that is set by the triton 12 year lifetime. Since the deuteron is in the required ground state condition 2 parts in 7 of any period of time probable deuteron transmutation lifetime by this process is 42 years. However, one cannot exclude secondary nuclear reactions triggered by the excess energy transients of the above process. [Note: the 2 part in 7 factor is derived in the author's paper The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron, Hadronic Journal, 9 129-136 (1986). APPENDIX E of this Energy Science Report.] Note that the deuteron ground state is one in which the deuteron structure has two antiprotons sitting amongst three beta-plus particles, represented by (e+:P-:e+:P-:e+), and the process we are to consider is one where attack by 8 mu-mesons causes the outer beta-plus particles to become dimuon Q
25.4.2005
Page 24 of 31
charges as a newly created P charge is nucleated from a nearby vacuum lattice charge. The latter will be understood from the following detailed description. The Constant Vacuum In the Winter 1992 issue of 21st Century one reads of an interview with Martin Fleischmann and his Italian theoretician colleague Giuliano Perparata on the eve of the Third Annual Cold Fusion Conference. This was an interview which revealed that we could expect a backlash from the criticism levied at the pioneer work on cold fusion. It has aroused retaliation which will take the form of an attack on the weaknesses of much that has become accepted in theoretical physics. The following two quotations from that interview will serve to set the scene for the subject developed in this paper: 'There is something seriously adrift with modern theory. There is a lot of work to be done, lots more to be discovered.' 'Preparata pointed to the hyperfine structure constant, alpha, which relates the electrostatic and electro-magnetic fields and is crucial in physics. "I often ask myself," he said, not really joking, "What if the fine structure constant were like the Dow-Jones index and constantly shifted up and down? Then there could be no science and no rationality .... If it were not for constants such as the fine structure constant and the speed of light, then our universe would not exist.' Here then is a statement that should cause physicists to wonder and reason as to why the textbooks of science do not discuss the way in which Nature determines that fine structure constant and thereby is able to build our universe. The derivation of the value 137.0359 which is -1, where is 2e2/hc, e being the electron electrostatic charge, h Planck's constant and c the speed of light, is crucial to everything that is fundamental in physics. Next, in order of fundamental importance, there is the understanding which can come from the theoretical derivation of , the proton-electron mass ratio, as 1836.152. In a 1985 book entitled 'The Fundamental Physical Constants and the Frontier of Measurement' published under the auspices of the Institute of Physics in U.K. B. W. Petley of the National Physical Laboratory describes the theoretical attempts to derive these dimensionless constants and states at page 161: 'No doubt the theoretical attempts to calculate and will continue - possibly with a Nobel prize winning success.' Now, the reader may wonder how this concerns the triton and cold fusion. Well, perhaps Martin Fleischmann and Giuliano Preparata are unaware of the connection via this author's work, but its very essence is a vacuum medium that bombards us with action and is a seat of events that trigger photon creation, thereby determining , and proton creation which determines . The Physics Letters, 41A, pp. 423-424 derivation of was published in 1972 and the theoretical derivation of was published by the Italian Institute of Physics under the title: 'Calculation of the Proton Mass in a Lattice Model for the Aether', in Il Nuovo Cimento, 30A, pp. 235-238 (1975). The first paper derived in terms of a resonance in a fluid crystal structure of the vacuum and the analysis involved knowledge of the lattice cell dimensions. The underlying research had already at that time solved the problem of gravitation and revealed that a virtual pair of mu-mesons had association with each cell and were the building blocks for hadronic matter including protons. Of particular relevance to the calculation of the proton-electron mass ratio in free space is the way in which, as a rare occasion governed by statistical chance, nine mu-mesons come together at the seat
25.4.2005
Page 25 of 31
of a vacuum lattice charge to create a proton. Here then is Nature's arsenal by which it can act, even from within our bodies, to bombard matter with mu-mesons. These are energy quanta which act in concert to strike the body blow which converts a tritium atom into helium 3 and a deuterium atom into tritium, in the process creating a new nucleon in an act seen as fusion but by promoting the decay of one elsewhere. Indeed, we confront a scenario where Nature is constantly trying to create protons throughout space but it only succeeds where the energy equilibrium as between the sub-quantum vacuum underworld and matter has become unbalanced. Generally speaking, if a new proton is created an old one somewhere nearby must decay. Therefore, if the nuclear chemistry suggests that an intruder proton moves to fuse with the deuteron so creating a tritium nucleus, the real event is probably one where the mumeson attack on the deuteron has caused a proton to appear as a nucleon whereupon the energy equilibrium bookkeeper has 'ordered' the demise of that intruder proton. This may seem fantasy speculation, but the reader should be mindful of the power of the author's published research by which those and constants were derived. The calculations matched the partper-million precision of the measured values and were in exact accord. We can, therefore, proceed to study the triton with confidence and our objective, as with corresponding published work on the neutron, for example, is no less than the aim to confirm the theory by simultaneously deriving values for the magnetic moment, the mass and the lifetime of the triton. The reader can share in the author's pleasure of discovery by working through this exercise, because the triton, rather curiously, lends itself to straightforward analysis. It is necessary to engage in some preamble to explain the factors involved but to keep the focus on the objective the argument will advance directly to the calculation of these three values and the reader is asked to keep in mind that the ultimate objective is the calculation of the triton lifetime. The deuteron component of the triton stands as the target and so much of what is discussed is addressed at the deuteron transmutation as if it has the same lifetime in its ground state. The Triton's Vital Statistics The triton has a structure supporting three units of nucleon mass presenting an overall unit of positive charge e. Its mass is slightly less than that of three protons. Indeed, we should begin by working out precisely how much the measured mass differs from that of three protons as that provides the value we need to compare with the one derived theoretically. We will work in terms of mass expressed in terms of electron rest mass as a number ratio. The author's data reference is the 2nd Edition of the McGraw-Hill, Condon and Odishaw Handbook of Physics (page 9.65). Atomic mass of proton plus electron: ......... 1.00782519 Atomic mass of triton plus electron: ........... 3.01604971 Unit atomic mass in electron units: ............. 1822.888 This latter value was found by dividing the first atomic mass into 1837.152..., which is the proton mass incremented by one electron unit. If we now multiply the first-listed atomic mass by 3 and subtract the second-listed atomic mass, the result is 0.007426 and multiplication by the unit atomic mass in electron units gives 13.54. This, therefore, is the measured mass difference as between 3 protons plus two electrons and the triton.
25.4.2005
Page 26 of 31
It follows that the triton has a mass that is 11.54 electron mass units below the combined mass of three protons. Our task is to find the model form of the triton which allows us to calculate this mass discrepancy. The other items of data we need to extract from the same data source (page 9.93) is (a) the triton lifetime of 12 years, (b) the half-spin unit of angular momentum (presumed to be same as the proton) and (c) the magnetic moment stated in nuclear magnetons to be 2.9789. It is, however, better for us to avoid reliance on data that is based on indirect measurement and take note of the direct measure of the triton nuclear magnetic moment presented as a ratio in terms of the proton magnetic moment effective in the same reacting environment. This ratio, as quoted from the Dover 1966 text of 'Atomic Physics' by Harnwell & Stevens, is: 1.06666 The task ahead is then to guide the reader through the analysis by which the three measured numerical dimensionless values just presented as the triton's credentials are duly derived by pure theory. The Magnetic Moment of the Triton It is appropriate here to refer to the author's paper entitled 'The Theory of the Proton Constants', Hadronic Journal, 11, pp. 169-176, 1988. On page 174 of this paper the gyromagnetic ratio of the proton is deduced theoretically as being 2.792847367, which compares with the measured value of 2.792847386(63) and so is quite precise, it being computed from a proton modelled on a structured resonant state. This, in effect, is the proton's own magnetic moment expressed in terms of nuclear magnetons and so one can see that the 2.9789 triton magnetic moment above is derived from the measure 1.06666 and the independent measure of the proton's gyromagnetic properties. Now, when we have regard to the fact that the triton's magnetic moment is measured as a frequency ratio as between the reaction of a triton and a proton in the same magnetic field, there is the curious feature that the two frequencies have what appears to be a perfect integer ratio, namely 16:15, which is the near-unity ratio factor 1.06666. This causes one to wonder whether the interfering wave modulation which would develop harmonic interactions somehow locks the response of the triton onto a condition that is exactly set by this 16/15 ratio, even though the true triton magnetic moment with no proton reaction present is virtually that of three nuclear magnetons. With this doubt, there is little purpose in trying to derive the precise quantity 2.9789 and it suffices for our purposes to justify, if only as an approximation, the triton magnetic moment as being 3 nuclear magnetons. The interesting point to then take into account is that amongst all atomic nuclei the triton is unique as having by far the largest magnetic moment in relation to its nuclear angular momentum. The ratio is 6:1, whereas Ag108, which sits between the two stable isotopes of silver, has a half-life of 2.4 minutes and comes closest with an exceptionally high ratio factor of magnetic moment to angular momentum of 4.2. What is it, therefore, that gives the triton the magnetic moment of 3 nuclear magnetons based on a single half-spin unit of angular momentum?
25.4.2005
Page 27 of 31
The simple answer which is now suggested is that the triton comprises three nucleons two of which are protons and one of which is an antiproton. They all react magnetically in opposition to a magnetic field and so the two protons 'spin' one way and the antiproton spins the opposite way. The magnetic moments add to 3 units and the 'spins' add to a single half-spin unit of angular momentum. This then explains the magnetic moment property and, further, we have now an insight into the structure of the triton. The Structure of the Triton Once the structure of the triton has been pictured in our minds then we can proceed with the confirming analysis by calculating the triton's mass discrepancy and its lifetime. The interesting feature seen already is that we have not pictured the triton as comprising one proton plus two neutrons. Keep in mind the no-neutron syndrome of cold fusion! Three protons will not hold together even in a quasi-stable aggregation. This is why physicists have taken the easy course and assumed that it consists on two neutrons plus one proton with some kind of glue that introduces a negative mass binding energy. Such assumption has led them down a blind alley. We need to add something such as beta-minus or beta-plus particles or be bold enough to imagine a stable entity including antiprotons. The truth can only be found by discovering the structure which gives the right answers for the three measured parameters presented above. Discovery in this pursuit needs inspiration and intuitive analysis and it is here that the author must lead the reader directly to the solution and then show how the calculated properties prove that it has to be the correct structure of the triton. The triton does, in fact, comprise two protons plus one antiproton, and our only concern now is to understand the 'binding' that holds the three nucleons together but keep the proton and antiproton far enough apart so that they do not fuse and mutually annihilate one another. Now, here we are guided by the fact that independent analysis of the nature of the deuteron has shown that in its prevalent state it comprises two protons bound together by an intermediate betaminus particle, otherwise termed a positron. This is fully explained in the previous reference, the author's paper 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, 9, pp. 129-136 (1986). The less prevalent ground state comprises an in-line configuration of three positive beta particles separated by two antiprotons. We may be further guided by earlier work reported by the author in his book 'Physics without Einstein', published in 1969 by the author under the trade name Sabberton Publications. On pages 147-152 of that work there is a description of nuclear bonds, which the author termed chains, which took the form of an alternating sequence of beta-plus and beta-minus particles and which linked adjacent hole-cum-charge sites in the vacuum lattice which locked onto the atomic nucleus and caused it to form a shell structure. Indeed, this theme was further elaborated in the author's paper entitled 'The Chain Structure of the Nucleus', published in 1974, also by same publisher. The data there presented show that a charged meson can attach itself to a charged nucleon to release sufficient energy to account for its own mass-energy and further the total energy of a chain spanning between two vacuum lattice hole-cum-charge sites. Furthermore, there is a balance of mass-energy or mass deficit which one calculates as being some 12 electron mass units. In these circumstances, and having regard to the fact that we are trying to account for a triton mass deficit of 11.54 electron units, the author sees no point in going further than the assertion that the
25.4.2005
Page 28 of 31
triton has a single beta particle chain linking the antiproton and the proton pair, the latter regarded as being seated at an adjacent lattice site in the vacuum lattice system. The beta particle chains are deemed to be very much a part of the structure of large atomic nuclei. Each chain has up to 170 such particles corresponding to the fact that the vacuum lattice spacing is 108 times the beta particle radius. There are two of the author's papers of easy reference as background to this subject. They are: 'Aether Theory and the Fine Structure Constant, Physics Letters, 41A, pp. 423-424, (1972) and 'Theoretical Evaluation of the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 110A, pp. 113-115 (1985). As will be seen from those papers there is a factor 1843 derived from a resonance closest to a zero potential condition and representing the volume of a vacuum lattice charge in relation to a beta particle. Indeed, the derived value of the fine structure constant was given in the form: -1 = 108(8/1843)1/6 = 137.0359 The fact that the space occupied by the vacuum lattice charge can, given enough energy input, develop into 1843 beta particles from which a proton form can condense is crucial to the creation of the nuclear chains, but the action of creation of a proton depends primarily upon the mu-mesons that do the work. The concept of space conservation in charge particle transmutations is consistent with energy conservation, bearing mind that the pressure or energy density within the charge of the vacuum lattice particle is in equilibrium with the 'gas-type' pressure set up by the mu-meson pairs that, on average, populate each cubic lattice cell of side dimension 108 beta-particle radii. Thus the number of beta particle charge volumes that equals this cube volume is a measure of a factor N which is relevant to the inverse chance of a 'hit' as the annihilation and random position recreation of a mumeson recycles at the standard (Compton electron) frequency associated with vacuum energy charge pair creation activity. To evaluate some numbers, note that the lattice charge has a Thomson radius that is larger than the beta particle charge radius by a factor 12.26, which is the cube root of 1843. The energy of the lattice charge is therefore 1/(12.26) or 0.08156 electron units. The number of electron charge volumes in the unit cubic cell of the vacuum is (108)3 divided by 4/3 and so is 9,324,644. Dividing this by 1843 we find that there are 5059.49 lattice charge volumes of energy 0.08156 electron units in each cubic cell of the vacuum, which is 412.666 electron mass units of energy. This is double a mass energy a little below 207, thereby representing the combined mass energy of a virtual mu-meson pair that is the energy in each cell. The fundamental derivation of the 108 cell dimension parameter and the 1843 factor, the subject of the author's primary analysis of vacuum energy discussed in the above-referenced 1972 Physics Letters paper, therefore leads to the theoretical derivation of the mu-meson energy quantum. It tells us the energy content of the vacuum state. The triton, when created, lives amongst this activity and its rather special structure makes it vulnerable to decay owing to the bombardment by those mu-mesons. The core target for that bombardment is not the antiproton or the two proton nucleons in its composition. The target is the vacuum lattice charge to which the triton is attached. The deuteron, however, is also subject to such attack and here, too, the real target is a lattice particle in its near vicinity. An isolated proton or a deuteron does not need to develop a fixed association with a lattice charge because its mass has not exceeded a critical level above which the dynamic quantum 'Zitterbewegung' behaviour needs a collective balance by a graviton system. The phenomenon of gravitation is dependent upon the inertial reaction of vacuum particles in the form of gravitons which
25.4.2005
Page 29 of 31
have a mass-energy of 2.587 GeV, an energy value having an effective mass between two and three proton masses. This is fully explained in the author's works. See, for example, 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant', Physics Essays, 2, pp. 360-367 (1989). However, when the proton or deuteron is part of a water molecule the nuclear chain structure of the oxygen atoms will provide the lattice location in the vacuum field system. This is why the cold fusion events we see with free deuterons in a palladium host metal are not, so far as we can judge, occurring in water. When atomic nuclei exceed the mass of two protons they do, of necessity, share in a collective action requiring dynamic balance by a multiple graviton system and that action requires that their combination as a structured nuclear entity spreads itself over a multiplicity of vacuum lattice sites. The triton, therefore, has to have a nuclear beta particle chain able to bridge two lattice sites and it probably has two protons in close proximity that straddle the lattice charge of one site whereas the antiproton nucleon constituent is seated at the other lattice charge site. Tritium is, of course, radioactive whether in the molecular stucture of water or not and so it warrants respect and caution from a health viewpoint. The Triton Lifetime This structure already discussed now leads us to the calculation of the decay property of the triton. To proceed we restate part of the commentary in the introduction. In order to set up the nuclear bond in the form of a chain of beta particles a meson charge has to develop as a charge attracted to the proton. This meson charge is termed a Q charge and its energy is that of the unit cell energy, approximately 413 electrons as already explained. Two opposite polarity charges e, having energy E in electron units represented by P and Q and conforming with the J. J. Thomson formula: E = 2e2/3a, where a is charge radius, will, when attracted so as to be in surface contact at their charge radii, have a combined energy E' which is given by: E' = P + Q - 3PQ/2(P+Q) This formula is basic to proton creation and was mentioned by the author in Physics Today, 37, p. 15 (1984), so we are not introducing something new at this stage in developing the theory of the triton. In fact P and Q are in equilibrium as an optimum energy condition for which the negative term is a maximum when P is 1836 and Q is 413. The point of interest is that E' can be calculated to be 92.7 electron mass units below the value of P. In other words, given that there are two protons well separated by the diameter of the vacuum lattice charge (or a beta particle in the case of a deuteron), we can see how such a system, which features in the triton composition, can deploy twice the energy of 92.7 electron mass units to assist in a nuclear transmutation. This sums to 185.4 electron mass units. We then note that the stimulus of 4 pairs of virtual mu-mesons, each of 412.7 electron mass units will suffice with the 185.4 electron mass units to create a proton of 1836 electron mass units. In fact, the energy equation is rigorous in providing exactly the amount of energy needed, which is why the decay of a triton yields so little energy that the result has remained a puzzle to scientists.
25.4.2005
Page 30 of 31
The scenario of interest is then the action by which the triton can be the seat of a process by which a proton is created within the triton itself so as to force a transmutation. The condition we are considering is a coincidence event when 8 mu-mesons hit the lattice charge in the same vacuum cycle. If the result is the creation of a proton then the recovery of the equilibrium of the vacuum/matter interaction will involve the demise of a proton in matter nearby. The task in determining triton lifetime is simply that of determining proton creation probability in a vacuum lattice site charge within matter. Proton Creation Probability As already shown, it takes 8 virtual muons to trigger the action leading to the creation of a proton. The question is how to bring 8 muons together for this purpose. There is an active virtual muon pair in each cell of the vacuum medium, that is for each lattice charge (-e), the latter being neutralized, so far as we can sense in our matter frame, by a positive continuum background. If the positive virtual muon + enters the lattice charge it will momentarily, in the relevant action cycle, render that charge neutral by converting it to some neutral paired charge form. Therefore, to get 8 muon energy quanta to combine in some way, we need to have 8 lattice charges in close proximity in a state in which either all are transiently neutral or, alternatively, 7 are neutral and one is charged to a double unit level, as by being transiently primed by the addition of -. Now, the chances of one lattice charge being primed by either muon in its cell are 2 in 5059. There are 256 combinations of chance simultaneous priming of 8 such lattice charges in each action cycle. The follwing tabulation shows the virtual muon polarity combinations as distributed amongst the various mixed states. Only the first two entries under S in this table represent states that can satisfy the merger requirements by creating neutral energy quanta with a single nucleating charge. Thus there are 9 chances in the 256 for the conditions to meet the proton creation trigger requirement. In other words, in every action cycle at the Compton electron frequency we have 9 chances in (5059)8 of proton creation referenced on a particular lattice charge. S .. + . 1 ... 8 ... 0 8 ... 7 ... 1 28 .. 6 ... 2 56 .. 5 ... 3 70 .. 4 ... 4 56 .. 3 ... 5 28 .. 2 ... 6 8 ... 1 ... 7 1 ... 0 ... 8 This gives us a 'lifetime' in the sense that the attempt to create a proton can influence a decay process which sheds a proton, as already explained. That lifetime is: (5059)8/9(1.235x1020) seconds or 12.2 years The mean lifetime reported for the triton is 12 years and so this result is a quite remarkable
25.4.2005
Page 31 of 31
application of the author's theory. Discussion Given the above solution to the mysteries of triton decay, it needs little imagination to probe the possibility that a deuteron, in its prevalent state, as two protons sitting on diametrically opposed sides of a central beta-minus particle, could become subject to the stability of a nearby vacuum lattice charge and experience similar proton infusion. In this case, the deuteron would become a triton, whereas in the triton the proton infusion into the two-proton component destroys the beta particle nuclear chain and severs the link with the antiproton component, which thereby becomes involved in a decay which replenishes the virtual mu-meson population of the vacuum. The deuteron proton infusion process would be accompanied by the demise of a proton elsewhere, but what we would see with two deuterons in close proximity would appear to be one deuteron shedding a proton and a beta minus particle and the other deuteron acquiring a proton and shedding a beta plus particle, which overall amounts to an act of fusion. Two deuterons merge to create a proton and a triton by shedding energy as the two beta particles annihilate one another. To account for the nucleation of the Q charge forms the less prevalent deuteron ground state composition having five component charges is the best basis for the transmutation under discussion. The central beta particle binds the two proton forms whilst the outer beta particles transform into Q charges to release the extra energy needed to convert the 8 mu-mesons entering the lattice charge target into a proton. One can develop this theme by investigating the expected excess heat generation rate that could come from the 12 year decay rate for the deuteron ground state and one may further wonder how that process might be accelerated. However, the main conclusion reached in this work is that there is basis for understanding the cold fusion reaction and the focal issue here is the interpretation of the process by which the triton is naturally radioactive at room temperatures. It is believed that the account presented here will help with that understanding.
APPENDIX D [This is the author's paper The Theory of the Proton Constants which can be seen as reference 1988b on this website.
APPENDIX E [This is the author's paper The Neutron and the Deuteron which can be seen as reference 1986d on this website.]
25.4.2005
ES10PAGE0
CYCLOTRON RESONANCE IN HUMAN BODY CELLS
by
HAROLD ASPDEN
Sabberton Publications P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England Fax: Int+44-2380-769-361 ISBN 0 85056 011 X
file:///D|/Myweb/reports/ES10page0.htm [03/08/01 13:17:51]
ES10PAGE00
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1997 Section Title ...................................................................................... page Part I: 1997 Update Introduction ......................................................................................... 3 Part II: 1990 Review The Hazard Risk - A U.S. Perspective .............................................. 19 Molecular Mechanisms in Magnetic Medicine ................................. 20 Cyclotron Resonance of Hadronic Ions in Liquids ................... ........ 21 Killing Fields - Solving the Problem of Overhead Power Lines ....... 29 Explanatory Note ............................................................................... 34 The Harwen Blanket Switch - Electric Blanket Solution .................. 35 ELF Radiation and Biological Effects ............................................... 37 Note on the Schumann Resonance ..................................................... 41 Debatable Aspects of Cyclotron Resonance in Ionized Liquids ........ 42 Part III: Appendices I: Brainwaves and Alpha Rhythm ...................................................... 45 II: Power Lines and Health ................................................................ 49 III: Ionospheric Radiation ................................................................. 51 IV: The Proton Factor and Its Unknown Effects ............................... 54 V: U.S. Patent No. 5,151,577 ............................................................ 67 VI: Living Cells and Superconductivity ........................................ 68-70
*****
file:///D|/Myweb/reports/ES10.htm
PART I: INTRODUCTION
There are times when it is necessary to wander slightly from one's field of expertise to trespass briefly and as a stranger in a discipline that is sending signals into one's own territory. It has been suggested from evidence in the medical field that overhead electric power lines and electric blankets can be harmful to one's health and there are those expert in the science of electrical engineering who argue that low frequency electromagnetic radiation cannot possibly have any harmful effects. Self-appointed in the quest to reconcile differences of opinion in this debate, I once dared to express my opinion as an academically-trained electrical engineer as to why overhead electric power lines and electric blankets can pose a health hazard. My case was based on a combination of two circumstances. Firstly, I have contended for many years that the whole of our empirical knowledge concerning electrodynamic interactions is founded on evidence collected from experiments in which the main field reactions are set up by the motion of electrons. My thesis has been that, where reactions to electromagnetic fields are seated in heavy mobile ions, rather than electrons, then anomalies do arise. Indeed, there are anomalous forces set up in some instances, as reported in scientific periodicals of high repute, which exceed by a thousand fold the theoretical expectation based on electron theory. Secondly, given that the medical community now suspects that fields set up by overhead electric power lines can stimulate unwanted activity in human body cells, I ask myself whether the ions in our body fluids that must react to those fields are electrons as such or are of heavier molecular form. In the latter case, taking the ions found in water, namely the hydronium ion H3O+ and the hydroxyl ion OH, I can see that we are dealing here with the same electrical territory as that in which one experiences those high force anomalies mentioned above. Clearly, therefore, since the electrical engineer has failed to give account of the anomalous energy activity witnessed in plasma discharges where heavy ions are the reacting charge carriers, that engineer has no right to declare that the electromagnetic fields he is producing cannot be harmful. He simply does not know.
file:///D|/Myweb/reports/ES10.htm (1 of 70) [02/08/01 15:44:01]
All he can be sure about is that people working in the electrical power generation and distribution industry have no reason to worry about electricity affecting their health, so long as they keep well out of reach of live wires and their high voltages. He is, incidentally, all too aware of the characteristic smell of ozone owing to the ionization of air produced by an electrical discharge. It is a warning that something may be wrong and that he is getting too close to an electrical hazard. However, without such a warning the question is whether there is a less obvious influence which puts us at risk if we get close to electrical cables which are spaced apart, one carrying current in one direction and the other carrying current the opposite direction. That, by the way, is the feature which overhead power lines and electrical blankets have in common. In the electrical wiring used in the domestic power supply to electric cookers, electric fires, lighting etc. the current is not something that flows one way. It has to enter an appliance, do its work and then go back to its source. In the wiring system wires carrying current to the appliance are twisted closely around the wires carrying the return current flow. This means that their field effects cancel and the normal domestic power cable poses no hazard problem so long as the insulation in the cable is sufficient to withstand the voltages used and the current, which generates heat, is obliged to restrict its damage to blowing an occasional fuse in the protection system. Our health hazard concern, however, is with those overhead power lines and electric blankets. Remember here that the professional electrical engineer who maintains overhead power lines has expert knowledge of how electricity carried through metal wire by one set of electrons can interact with electricity carried through metal wire by another set of electrons. That is his trade and he knows it well. What he does not know anything about is how electricity flowing in the human body and carried, not by electrons, but by ionic particles, may interact with other such ionic particles in the human body and how their interaction can be aggravated by the electrical and magnetic fields which that engineer creates by his power distribution apparatus. Of course, he will say that he too is human and that his body is exposed to such effects, but then I urge him to consider whether he really does spend his working days close to overhead power lines which are energized. If he does, then I wonder how he contrives to do anything useful. Again I stress that here I am not referring to an energized cable which carries current along conductive strands in close proximity but in opposite directions. I am referring instead to a situation where he may sit close to, and virtually between, two widely-spaced electrical power lines each conveying uncompensated currents, as otherwise there is little field exposure. Dare I then point out that a baby's bottom, which is commensurate in size with the spacing between metal wire strands in an electric blanket, is the kind of exposure to unbalanced field effects of the kind which that engineer rarely, if ever, encounters in his power line work. He is wise enough to switch the power off before climbing up between those overhead lines. On the broader subject of electromagnetic fields, we all have exposure to the electromagnetic wave spectrum, which ranges through its radio and television frequencies, the infra red frequencies and on through optical frequencies and beyond. We know that if such radiation is concentrated to high intensities
then we can suffer. Physicists know that at the high frequency end of the spectrum, as one progresses through the ultra-violet range, there are X-rays and -rays which can be very harmful. However, for the very low frequencies used in power cables and the very weak electromagnetic fields they produce, electrical engineers and physicists see no reason for concern about a radiation hazard. Yet, as I say, since the basis of electrical science is founded on electrical activity seated in electrons and our body fluids involve activity seated in ions that are very much heavier than electrons, there is reason for doubt. Now, the stimulus for writing the text of this introductory essay of this Report No. 10 comes from a Letter to the Editor in the July/August 1996 issue of Electronics World (page 590). It was authored by Dr. David Fisher of Cardiff in Wales and was a declaration framed in an accusative context directed at anyone who believes in 'anti-gravity and perpetual motion (free energy)' with the finger pointed in my direction. Quoting from it: "I was, in fact, thinking of Dr. Aspden who, readers will recall, believes in this nonsense and has also proposed a 'cyclotron' theory in order to 'explain' the so-called link between electromagnetic fields and disease." This was probably a result of an article of mine published by Electronics and Wireless World, pp. 29-31 (1989). It was entitled 'Anti-Gravity Electronics'. The latter article had also attracted similar criticism, expressing doubts as to my wisdom as a professionally qualified physicist, for my views on the gravity theme. My attacker was C. Hellingman writing in Physics Education, 27, 112-115 (1992). In rallying to defend my case I wrote another article which was published by the Institute of Physics in U.K. in that same periodical, Physics Education, 28, 202-203 (1993). It was entitled 'The Law of Perpetual Motion'. As to my `cyclotron' subject that had featured in an earlier article of mine in EWWW, pp. 774-775 (September 1991). The title of that article was 'Power Lines, Cancer and Cyclotron Resonance'. Note that EWWW, or Electronics World + Wireless World, represents a staged period of gradual transition as the publishers of Wireless World decided to rename their periodical Electronics World. I am tempted to note here that the word `wireless' has gone out of fashion, along with the word 'aether', but remind you that Nature still needs the aether to sustain those wireless waves and no amount of electronics can eradicate its existence! This being Report No. 10, the final Report in this Energy Science Series, and the other reports all being concerned with energy matters in the context of electrical power and the fundamental physics involved, I am now going to digress somewhat in this introduction. Indeed, I have decided to present this Report in three parts, this Introduction being the first part. If the reader's interest is restricted to the health hazard issue posed, as by power lines, then the next few pages of this section up to page 9 should be skipped. I planned to publish and, indeed, did compile, a 28 page document bearing the title of this Report No. 10, some 7 years ago, in 1990. I was, however, distracted at the time by other pressing interests, such as the
research matters discussed in Energy Science Reports 2 and 3 in this series. The text of that 1990 document does, I now believe, warrant publication as it does add something of significance to the energy theme of the early Energy Science Reports. Also, I find I am obliged to react to the criticism, such as that of Dr. Fisher quoted above. Accordingly, I have decided to publish that 1990 document unamended as Part II of this Report and add a Part III which is really an Appendix comprising other items that have appeared in print and some that I have now published on Internet. These include a new commentary on Schumann Resonance, owing to recent input from A. G. Callegari of Much Hadham, Hertfordshire in England. Also there is a paper I wrote in 1988, as published in October of that year, which dates from a little before I became wedded to the relevance of the cyclotron theme. It is entitled 'The Proton Factor and its Unknown Effects'. I believe it will interest some readers, but I include it especially because my research on the energy theme tells me that energy in our universe is being recycled. Energy which finds its way into space as part of what cosmologists see as the running down of the universe as it expands into oblivion is really being repackaged and put into order in the quantum underworld that pervades all space. From that quantum sea of energy, protons and electrons, the components of the hydrogen atom, are being created to restore that lost energy in matter form, meaning that we are part of a universe that is a steady-state system. My interest in energy from a power generation viewpoint arises because I can see a way of intercepting the energy in a phase of the regeneration cycle, after it has become quantized but before it is released in proton form. As a side issue I then wonder whether the ongoing creation of protons (accompanied by the demise of protons) within atoms forming our body cells can imply a health hazard. If you, the reader, share Dr. Fisher's view and suspect that this is all nonsense, then do defer your judgement, at least until you know enough about my research to see the strength of my case. The physics involved has allowed me to deduce by pure theory the proton/electron mass ratio to the part in tens of million level of precision measurement. The 'proton factor' must not be overlooked in the study of potential health implications. If such ideas, which are rooted deeply within the discipline of physics, go beyond the scope of your interest, then it is time to jump on now to page 12. Otherwise, and particularly if you, the reader, are well versed in theoretical physics and so are ever ready to challenge an intruder who questions the state of that art as a sound foundation on which to go forward, then let me try to shatter your confidence. Do ask yourself why it is that all the fundamental particles known in physics decay and have a short lifetime, with the exception of the proton and the electron. The electron, however, can, within the period of one ten millionth of a millionth of a second jump from one side to the other of a theoreticallyimpenetrable potential barrier. It is called 'electron tunnelling', but who is to say that that the electron does not decay on one side of that barrier only to find that its energy and its charge are given to a newly created electron on the other side of that barrier? We can all live forever if physics can contrive to rejuvenate us by a recycling process! What I am really saying here is that the proton and the electron are
the basic forms in which matter is newly created from spent energy shed into the quantum underworld of the aether. Therefore, the proton and the electron can have finite lifetimes and suffer decay, but such events pass unnoticed because they are recreated in close proximity to their demise. They have a life after death! However, if protons shed from atoms in a molecule in DNA reappear in different atoms, not necessarily within that same DNA structure, might not that have some effect upon our health? I want simply to point out that physics, being an exact science, even in its interpretation of quantum mechanics, tends to see things as all 'black' or all 'white'. (Physics can 'see' Black Holes even though, if they exist at all, they are invisible and they can 'see' space in a contrasting light because they 'know' there is no aether even though something governs those wireless waves which ripple through it.) The proton has an immeasurably-long lifetime. The assumed age of the universe is not even as long as one trillionth of the mean lifetime of the proton. Yet, for all we know, the proton occupying a certain region of space may have a characteristic age measured in minutes or days, but not years. I believe the proton and its decay have a significant bearing upon our human condition but I am not here urging you to believe what I say, but rather just to suspect that physicists err by ignoring this possibility. The truths will emerge if we study the effects that proton demise and recreation may have and the appropriate arena for such study could well be the biophysical world where isotopic transmutations and molecular changes can have `knock-on' effects. It may not be easy to prove but the task will be all the more difficult if physicists cling too tightly to their textbook training and do not seek out the questions that they have never before asked and so have never answered!
Quantum Field Theory It is generally supposed that physicists know all that there is to know about electromagnetism and the related field theory, at least concerning the phenomena which intrude upon our immediate environment. Field theorists claim great achievements which can bewilder and, indeed, outclass the concerns of the scientist or engineer who has to deal with real problems faced in our daily routine. Field unification, the quest to understand the nature of the force of gravity and its link, if any, with quantum field theory and exotic high energy particles, as well as the creation of neutron stars and probing the physics of the Big Bang and Black Holes, are the territories that they see as warranting exploration. So, let us take a look at the overview presented by Victor F. Weisskopf in the November 1981 issue of Physics Today (pp. 69-85) under the title: 'The Development of Field Theory in the last 50 Years'. I refer to that because it describes the history of quantum field theory and, unlike most articles written on that subject, it actually exposes the weaknesses and uncertainties as they stood in 1981 and, indeed, as they
remain today. I have a personal reason for referring to this Weisskopf article, because, as a young electrical engineer interested in electromagnetism as a research pursuit, I was 'put in my place' repeatedly as I tried to publish my findings on topics which trespassed onto the territory of quantum electrodynamics. I was told that Einstein and Dirac had covered that ground and there was no chance that my research, which obliged me to think more and more about an energy form pervading the aether, could warrant the slightest attention. Eventually, in frustration, and having solved the mystery of unifying the electromagnetic and the gravitational force, I published my own books on the subject, including 'Physics without Einstein' in 1969 and 'Modern Aether Science' in 1972 and, later, 'Physics Unified' in 1980. Thereafter, and mainly because I took early retirement in order to return to academic research in the university in my home town, I was able to get a stream of scientific papers published but many of the more important papers are not to be found in the mainstream periodicals. The editors of those periodicals avoid anything controversial that might ripple the oceans of 'relativity' and 'quantum field theory' by introducing a sea of aether energy. However, in July 1996 I decided to publish 'Aether Science Papers', collecting together a selection of some of my more important published papers. It being impossible to argue theory to get the theoretical physics community to see the need for a `modern' quantum electrodynamic insight into the àetherial' world of the vacuum state, I am taking my efforts forward by seeking ways of tapping energy from that 'aether'. This, in the main, is the reason I have written this series of Energy Science Reports. This final Report No. 10, however, is more concerned with energy transfer processes that are anomalous in electronbased physics, but which can affect the fluids in human body cells. So, what does Weisskopf have to say about the weaknesses of quantum field theory? Well, it seems that it all began in 1927 when Paul Dirac gave birth to the theory of quantum electrodynamics. Already by then "Albert Einstein had put an end to the concept of aether" and already by then "the field-free and matterfree vacuum was considered as truly empty space." The quotations are of text taken from the Weisskopf article. Electromagnetic radiation posed problems but Max Planck had delivered the quantum theory as, without it, "total energy density becomes infinity; empty space would be an infinite sink of radiation energy". With the introduction of quantum mechanics "the vacuum gradually became populated...there must be zero-point oscillations of the electromagnetic fields in the vacuum state". Under the heading "Triumph and Curse of the Filled Vacuum" Weisskopf then writes "Dirac's daring assumption had most disturbing consequences, such as infinite charge density and infinite (negative) energy density of the vacuum". "These ideas seemed incredible and unnatural to everybody". "Even if we consider the filled vacuum as a clumsy description of reality, the existence of virtual pairs and of pair fluctuations shows that the days of fixed particle numbers are over".
Here Weisskopf is referring to the ongoing electron-positron pair creation and annihilation activity that features in quantum electrodynamics. Note the use of the word 'virtual', which is a convenient way of referring to something aetherial that is there but yet is not real in matter terms. It seemed then that the 'infinities' were posing problems, but that these were solved, as by arguing by symmetry that two theoretical systems coexist in the same space, one involving infinite negative energy density and the other involving infinite positive energy. "There remains, however, the unpleasant fact of the existence of vacuum fluctuations without any energy". "The infinities of the filled vacuum and of the zero-point energy of the vacuum turned out to be relatively harmless compared to other infinities that appeared in quantum electrodynamics when the coupling between the charged particles and the radiation field was considered in detail". Then it seems several assumptions were made to avoid problems connected with an infinite electron mass and some numbers pertaining to the anomalous g-factor of the electron began to fit what was measured. Here were "the signs of victory in the war against infinities". [A reader having a copy of my book 'Aether Science Papers' should refer here to pages 48-53 for a simple 'aether-based' account of the electron's anomalous g-factor that is superior to the QED derivation]. Weisskopf continues: "In spite of these victories there remain nagging problems in quantum electrodynamics. There are definite indications that we understand only a partial aspect of what is going on." "Will there be a theory that avoids renormalization by using non-perturbative methods? Or will a future unification of electrodynamics and general relativity heal the disease of divergences? There is no way to understand and derive the mass of the electron within today's electrodynamics. The problem has become even more acute since heavier electrons such as the muon and the tau-electron have been discovered. There is not the slightest indication why electrons with different masses should exist." [Again, I say, read my book 'Aether Science Papers' and you will see all the answers to all these issues, save that I do not unify electrodynamics and general relativity, but show instead that electrodynamic forces and gravitational forces are unified by the role played by an aether which has quantum electrodynamic properties. Indeed, the virtual muon form is the primary aether energy. It is seated in a central inertial frame intermediate the counter-balanced jitter motion oscillations of the matter frame (electrons and protons) and the graviton frame (tau-particles). The phenomena which are purported to support Einstein's General Theory of Relativity are also fully explained in terms of that same aether.] Later in his article Weisskopf ventures into the realm of the heavy bosons, notably the neutral Z boson. [This is high energy territory which concerns the 'supergraviton' of my theory and which I shall mention briefly at the end of Part III of this Report.] Concerning such theory, Weisskopf then mentions "spontaneous symmetry breaking". "It has the following remarkable property: Its energy is such that it has a minimum, not when the field is zero, but when it has a finite value...that would mean that the vacuum has a certain fixed direction in isospace." [I could not get my early papers on the aether theme accepted by orthodox journals because such a `fixed' direction was implicit in a dynamic system that has two-dimensional linear harmonic oscillatory motion
(i.e. circular) in its zero-point state of minimal energy. Einstein's theory did not predict the need for such a direction! You will soon see why that feature also has some bearing on the subject of this Report]. Weisskopf continues: "The situation is like that of a ferromagnet, in which a direction in real space is determined as long as the energy transfers are smaller than the Curie energy." [This was precisely the foundation on which I developed my aether theory, based on my research at Cambridge University in 1950-1953. I was testing energy anomalies in electrical sheet steels under varying mechanical stress conditions. Besides magnetization loss anomalies I knew there were stress energy anomalies to consider, but the standard theory of the ferromagnetic state, which relies heavily on Dirac's electron spin concept, needed to be adapted to have the 3d electrons of adjacent atoms sharing a component of synchronous motion. This model, which ran counter to the Dirac philosophy, was adopted as the basis of my aether theory which I began developing as soon as I left Cambridge. The aether itself is a 'crystal structured' system of aether charges in synchronized motion, a 'ferromagnetic' system in a sense, but the forces of attraction set up by the presence of matter are gravitational forces which are really electrodynamic forces characterized by the frequency of that synchronous motion, which happens to be that at which electrons and positrons are created. The embryonic form of this theory as it stood in 1959 is presented in my first publication on this aether theme 'The Theory of Gravitation', which I published in January 1960.] Weisskopf then moves on to QCD, `Quantum Chromodynamics', an effort to parallel QED, quantum electrodynamics in the realm of the proton, but the story advances relentlessly to a summary of the unresolved problems. "Is the renormalization procedure sound?" This is the name given to the trick used in QED to solve the problem of the infinities. "The answer to this question may save or condemn field theory". "The large value of the effective coupling constant of quantum chromodynamics at small momentum transfers causes serious problems as to the nature of the vacuum itself. The field fluctuations may turn out to be very large and may require new conceptions of the nature of the vacuum." "The present theories contain arbitrary constants. In QED it is the coupling constant 2e2/hc at large distances and the masses of the different electrons. Today three such electrons are known, but there may be more. There is no way visible at present to explain how their mass values may emerge from the field theories." "We have no explanation for the mass of the electron, that is the smallness of the ratio (1/1836) between the electron mass and the proton mass." "Our present view of elementary particles is plagued by the following problem: Nature as we know it consists almost exclusively of.. quarks (the constituents of protons and neutrons), and of ordinary electrons. ...But there definitely exist higher families of particles...They appear only under very exceptional circumstances that are realized during the early instances of the Big Bang, perhaps in the centre of neutron stars, and at the targets of giant accelerators. What is their role in Nature, why do they exist? Rabi exclaimed when he heard of the first of those 'unnecessary particles', the muon: "Who
ordered them?" Again, field theory does not seem to contain the answer to this question." "We will find out sooner or later whether field theory is able to clear up some of these outstanding problems. It may be that a very different approach will be required to solve the questions for which field theory so far has failed to provide answers. ... We have not yet been able to make sense of much of what Nature says to us." "Looking back over a lifetime of field theory, it seems obvious that we have learned much since 1927, but there is a great deal more that is still shrouded in darkness. New ideas and new experimental facts will be needed to shed more light upon the deeper riddles of the material world." This ends my quotations from Victor Weisskopf's 'Physics Today' article. Looking back over my own lifetime (I was born in that year 1927) I can but say that Weisskopf failed to realize that answers to almost all of those mysteries were of published record before 1981. My book `Physics Unified', published in 1980, gave the update as of that time. It tells you how to unify gravity and electromagnetism and validates the argument by showing how G, the constant of gravitation can be deduced in relation to the electron's electromagnetic charge to mass ratio by pure theory. The derivation of the mass of the virtual muon is a major feature of the theory and it is shown on pp. 115-116 of that book how from that one deduce the mass of the proton in electron mass units. It is found to be slightly greater than 1836.152. That coupling constant used in QED is a dimensionless physical constant measured to part per million precision. Using the aether theory disclosed in 'Physics Unified' that value is derived at p. 112 in full accord and with the same degree of precision. As to explaining the mass of the electron, that too is found in my published work, but mass is not a dimensionless physical quantity and so it cannot be derived by theory except as a ratio to other physical quantities. The task really boils down to explaining inertia and understanding why the electron is a favoured state of matter, given that the creation process of the proton is already explained. Finally, to conclude this digression into the world of the orthodox theoretical physics and its many mysteries which (dare I say it?) only my aether theory can resolve, I did not, at the time I wrote 'Physics Unified' in 1980 have a way of determining the mass of the super-heavy electron, the tau particle. I was then still busy working in my Director capacity in IBM's European Patent Operations, but my theory (see pp. 118-122 in my 1980 book) was yielding explanations for the creation of those short-lived `higher families of particles' mentioned by Weisskopf. It was only when I retired and began developing my theory further from a university base that the tau emerged in a rather beautiful form. It is vital to the gravity process, but to read about that requires reference a 1989 paper of mine, the eighth of the 14 papers reproduced in my book 'Aether Science Papers'. Weisskopf could not have written a better article from my point of view to set the stage for a presentation of my aether theory. But a stage and a performance need an audience and physicists are all too busy to pay attention. You must, however, now picture all those theoretical physicists in academia still trying to solve those mysteries and overcome the weaknesses of quantum field theory, whilst, I, knowing the solution, proceed here to address the real mysteries of physics, such as why overhead power lines pose a health hazard.
I would not write in such a strident style with its risk of offending the sensitivity of the elders of the scientific community were it not for the fact that at the age of 69 I feel I am obliged put my case with some force in order to claim attention. If that is seen as an excuse for ignoring the physics underlying my theory, then I lose nothing, as that is the way it has been for four decades now. If I can arouse interest amongst those who have to find a worthwhile future in researching theoretical physics, as in the student community, then that will be some gratification. However, to proceed and before coming to the documentary account in Part II of the initial version on which this Report is based, I will get this Report back on the track of its title by reverting briefly to that cyclotron question.
Introducing Cyclotron Resonance One perplexing question for any such student is that posed by claims that a strong permanent magnet strapped in close contact with the stomach can have a beneficial effect but only if it is correctly mounted with its north and south poles properly positioned. Why should a north pole of a magnet held against the body exert any action different from a south pole? As far as I know, the human body is not magnetically polarized, so if the action depends upon ions and their reacting motion in that field, the only factor of difference concerns whether those ions in our body fluids respond by moving clockwise or counterclockwise relative to the magnet's polar axis. This means that the response depends upon the perspective of whoever is viewing the action, whether from in front or from behind, and that surely does not solve the problem. There is, however, a topic I can discuss and one which features in my other writings that can be relevant here. See, for example, my Energy Science Report No. 8. I call it 'vacuum spin', but mean 'aether spin', knowing that this can induce electric polarization and, owing to that rotation, develop a magnetic field. The governing axis involved in this 'aether spin' is that needed for a 'fixed direction in isospace' which Weisskopf mentions. The very symmetry of the magnetic field set up by a magnet offers no scope for seeing the north and south poles as exerting any difference in their energy influence. The physicist's notion of the vacuum state gives no reference frame work that we can apply in trying to solve this problem. However, if we bring into play an aether with a preferred direction, then there can be differences in electrical induction arising from positive and negative ions reacting to the field set up by a magnet. I can see that àether spin' will develop in a stronger or weaker sense according to the orientation of the magnet relative to the àether spin' axis. This subject, however, is something that needs a great deal of evidence from observations which compare
effects at corresponding latitudes in the northern and southern hemispheres. My information on this topic was mainly gleaned from casual conversation with participants at various conferences dealing with other matters. Therefore I can only offer these tentative remarks on this magnet anomaly theme at this time. I am now going to jump ahead a little way by mentioning that I once ventured into a conference forum on the subject of the health hazards of low frequency electromagnetic fields to say why there is a problem. I spoke about this basing my comments on the paper reproduced later in this Report (pp. 16-22). My case was that there is a resonant reaction as our body fluids respond as if tuned to the 50 Hz or 60 Hz fields of the electrical power industry and that resonance is attributable to those hydronium and hydroxyl ions already mentioned. Water, incidentally, features in several other scientific anomalies involving unusual energy properties, but we will concentrate here solely on the theme of my talk at that conference. I declared that there was a kind of resonant effect similar to that produced by the cyclotron, the cyclotron being a device in which charged particles describe orbits when subjected to a steady magnetic field and pick up energy from a superimposed alternating electric field. Cyclotrons are used in high energy particle physics to pump enormous amounts of power into those charged particles. A physicist might find it amusing to hear the suggestion that our bodies can operate as cyclotrons but I believe the proposition is far more tenable than some of the other beliefs held by the physics community. I find it not only amusing but totally ludicrous for physicists to waste their time imagining what happened in the first 1042 seconds following the Big Bang, when the temperature of the universe was supposedly so high as to be equally meaningless. The operating frequency of an electron cyclotron can be more than 10,000,000 times that of the power frequencies of our domestic environment and the magnetic fields used in the cyclotron can be 1,000 times greater, but it is the ratio of these two large numbers that relates to the mass of the resonant particle. So, if there is a cyclotron reaction in the cells within the human body, the resonant ions would need to have mass of the order of 10,000 times the mass of the electron, which is the case for the molecular ions found in our body fluids. However, the point I wish to make here is the answer to a point put to me after I delivered my paper at that conference. The questioner stated that the theory of the cyclotron cannot apply to our body cells because it requires the orbital radius of the motion of ions to be about one metre. The radius r of charge motion in a cyclotron is determined by the balance of the force Hev/c and the centrifugal force mv2/r, from which the r is mvc/He. The cyclotron frequency in rad/s is He/mc. Here e/mc is the charge/mass ratio in electromagnetic units, v is the speed of the charge and H is the strength of the magnetic field. To find r, assuming it applies to ions moving at speeds set by the thermal activity with two degrees of freedom, we equate kT and mv2/2, where k is the Boltzmann constant and T is the body temperature in Kelvin. From this we can estimate v and find r by dividing by 314 rad/s, assuming
resonance at 50 Hz. Since m is of the order of 3x1026 kg and kT is 4x1021 joules we can estimate v as being 500 m/s. When this is divided by the power line frequency expressed in radians per second one sees that r is of the order of one metre. This is, I presume, one reason why those physicists who are attentive to the weak field health hazards of electrical power sources have not considered the cyclotron resonance hypothesis as relevant. In order, therefore, to defend my case I had but to muster the mathematical skills of my schooldays to come to the following argument, but I will present the result without using any mathematics. Imagine a particle to be enclosed in a confined space no greater than, say, 10 microns from boundary to boundary. Can that particle, in bouncing from the boundary walls as it proceeds on its course from one wall to the other, many thousands of times per second, have a motion that follows an orbital path of one metre radius? By this I am simply asking whether, if that particle is an ion constrained to follow a helical path of radius r centred on an axis parallel with the direction of a magnetic field, it can describe small arcs of that path between its collisions. The answer has to be: "Yes". Now, how does this differ from the cyclotron situation? The answer to that question is that in the cyclotron the ion is allowed freedom to describe a full circular orbit unimpeded so that, as it moves over one half of its orbit, it is accelerated by the electric field acting in forward direction and, as it moves over the second half of its orbit, it is still accelerated in its forward direction because by then the electric field has reversed its direction. There is phase-locking owing to the resonant tuning of the cyclotron frequency and the charge to mass ratio of the ion. As an aside here, it is noted again that the real mystery of this human cyclotron effect is that of understanding how one can have a resonance for a person situated under an overhead power line (or resting on a live electric blanket) in North America where the frequency is 60 Hz and also have resonance affecting a similarly situated person in Europe where a 50 Hz frequency is used. That was the formidable question that had to be answered! Explaining that was really why I was willing to stand before a conference audience to make my contribution to a discipline outside my main field of interest. Before coming to that detail in the main text, this matter of the scale of the cyclotron orbit has to be dealt with, because the ions in their thermal motion in our body cells simply cannot describe full orbits in synchronism with the weak field oscillations generated in homes close to overhead power lines. Well, imagine you are looking from above at a school playground and see thousands of schoolboys all rushing around and bumping into one another, bustling with energy and all moving at speed but all tending to veer to the right between collisions as they follow curves of the same radius r. What you will see might seem to be a state of chaos, but if you were to be viewing that from a platform which was rotating about your sighting position at an angular velocity exactly equal to that of the motion of the boys on the ground, only then you would be looking at the chaotic state of normal thermal motion. You see, there is a state of orderly circular motion superimposed upon the normal motion occurring when colliding particles travel in straight lines between collisions.
In other words, the ions moving in their basic thermal activity in the fluids in your body cells have a component of orderly rotary motion owing to the presence of the ambient magnetic field set up by body Earth. The fact that the mean free path, the distance travelled between collisions, is much smaller than that radius r, as determined by what is termed the Larmor formula, is irrelevant. It becomes relevant only in so far as we need now to consider how a pulsating electric field can have an effect. The main fact involved is that the angular frequency of that motion is the same, whether the cell housing the activity spans 100 metres or 10 microns. Suppose first that such a field were to be a steady electric field acting with a component directed in the plane of the orbital motion, that is at right angles to the direction of the magnetic field. The positive and negative ions would be displaced in opposite directions until there is equilibrium by the field reaction set up by charge displacement. Now suppose that the electric field oscillates in direction at precisely the angular speed at which the whole system of ions turns owing to the effect of that magnetic field. You will then see that the charge displacement is sustained. The charge displacement is not oscillatory in the sense that it passes through a zero value twice per cycle but is instead represented, in effect, by a dipole system rotating at the resonant frequency with its kinetic energy increasing progressively as the dipole spacing extends. The point of all this is the clear message that the combination of the Earth's magnetic field and the weak electric field effects of an overhead power line can induce a resonant response setting up a rotating electric dipole state within human body cells. There is a resonance condition and in the cyclotron used in high energy physics this pumps energy steadily from a weak field to build up high energies in particles which accelerate outwards as that radius r grows in proportion to particle speed. The same process applies to our dipole system formed by numerous charges in each of our body cells. The presence of an ambient electric field alternating at power frequency will pump energy into those cells, energy which sets up pressure across membranes at the cell wall. For experts, whether concerned with cyclotrons or with electrical power distribution, to deny that cyclotron-type resonance can occur in the human body, solely on the grounds that the cells in our bodies are too small, is, in my opinion, quite irresponsible. I make this assertion deliberately and with a conviction that stems from an analogous problem concerned with the nature of the magnetic field reaction in something as simple as a lump of copper! I will now digress briefly onto that subject before reverting to the health hazard theme. In simple terms, I ask the electrical engineer who denies cyclotron-type resonance in human body cells to tell me whether he has ever understood how a d.c. magnetic field can penetrate a lump of copper. There is one fast moving free electron in copper for virtually every atom present and, by the laws of electromagnetism, those electrons should all be deflected by that magnetic field to act in concert in setting up an enormous reaction field. The reason they do not cancel the field is because the energy deployment optimizes to permit them only to halve the magnetic field. Yet, even that halving effect is not recognized, so the electrical engineer lives on in ignorance of the truth, whereas the physicist sees only an anomaly in experiments comparing the magnetic moment set up by the electron reaction and the proportional angular momentum involved. The physicist refers to it as a g-factor (its value being 2), but what the physicist
cannot see is that all primary magnetic fields are really of double the strength assumed but they are invariably halved by that reaction of the electrons in orbit in their reaction to the applied field. Lacking such insight, it is then no wonder that those electrical engineers and physicists cannot cope with the more advanced problem of the ionic reactions in a human body fluid, where the reacting ions are not all electrons of the same mass and polarity. Instead, we are dealing here with a mixture of positive and negative ions having different masses. This introduces a recipe for a type of cyclotron reaction which is not governed by a single resonant frequency determined only by the mass of the ion and the frequency of the pulsating field. There is scope, given the extra parameters introduced by the dual ion composition, for a self-tuning action over a range of frequencies, which can develop that resonance which feeds power into the human system drawn from those weak fields that pulsate at power frequency. Explaining that is really is my main contribution in this Report, but I will aim to include other topics by which anomalous electrical phenomena can intrude into the health domain. For example, consider a facet of science where the space we occupy comprises something that is electrically charged, but neutralized by the displacement of ions in our body. Ostensibly, there is no net electrical field effective inside us, because everything is cancelled and is in equilibrium. However, now suppose that underlying space charge arises from a kind of induction process of cosmic origin and is liable to change over a period of time. Again, there need be no problem, because the ions in our body will adjust to neutralize the overall effect. Go now just a little further and suppose that for, say, six months of the year, the background space charge is of increasing strength, whereas during the other six months its diminishes in strength. The human body ions have to somehow find a surplus of one polarity for half the year and a surplus of the other polarity for the other half of the year. May it then not be that the body exhibits different responses to treatment in one such period from those experienced in the other such period? How do scientists cope with such anomalies, given that they pin their faith and their whole knowledge of electrical science upon empirical data confined to experiments on electron currents in metal wires? They will, of course, not have heard of a phenomenon which I call 'vacuum spin'. I believe that there is an aether capable of storing energy by developing a spin condition. That involves electrical charge displacement. Let me now speculate. There are in science phenomena referred to as 'Earth Lights'. Something can emerge from mountain sides, for example, which sets up a glow, as if a gaseous object exuded from the mountain side is burning away. Imagine that is a spherical aetherial form that has, within it, a radial electric field, because its core has electric charge. The air coextensive with that aetherial sphere will become ionized and so there will be a glow, wherever that aether sphere goes, until it disperses its energy by decay.
Now, that is a rather extreme manifestation of something that may be latent, almost everywhere where there is a source in which ions in motion interact with the weak magnetic field of the Earth to develop a rotary motion, leading in turn to that aether spin situation. The Earth itself may well have, internal to its structure, an intrinsic electric charge system associated with the induction of the geomagnetic field. Then a flow of water inside the Earth may become the seat of ionic displacement so that, for example, a stream of water may emerge from a hillside with an electrical charge transfer. I say: "may", well knowing that I am speculating here, but I did wonder about such a possibility when I read, quite recently, something sent to me by Dr. E. Larson of Northglenn, Colorado, USA. It was the text of a book by Owen Lehto entitled 'VIBRATIONS: A Practical Study of the Forces that Affect our Health', published in 1992 by Nutritional Research Center, P.O. Box 308, Keller, WA 99140, USA. Between pages 12 and 15 there is the story about putting two calves out to a field to graze. "The first calf was taken to a small knoll, where it started to eat contentedly. The second one was staked lower down on a flat piece of ground. The grass was slightly wet from rain the night before. I drove a metal stake into the ground and from this stake was a metal chain that went around the calf's neck. Instead of eating it began to run around in circles until it was able to pull the stake loose. It then ran up to where the other calf was eating and began to graze." Investigations to determine the reason for the calf's discomfort indicated the presence of something electrical. The author found that if he stood in the lower area of the pasture and allowed his right arm to hang like a plumb bob and held his left arm with his palm facing downwards, his right hand started to swing with a rapid counterclockwise motion. If he did this test at the top of the knoll the swing was clockwise. Further tests described in the book led to the conclusion that water in motion under the ground was somehow responsible for this phenomenon. Static electricity was in evidence. Now, I could dismiss this as being attributable to the Earth's electrostatic field. A field that can be as high as 500 volts per metre, particularly at night, exists and is a phenomenon long recognized by physicists. I have discussed this in my book 'Modern Aether Science' in Chapter 15 entitled 'The Earth's Electricity'. Contrary to orthodox belief it arises, not from the charging of body Earth by the periodic lightning discharges, but from solar radiation pressure which is absorbed by electrons. Although these electrons are in atoms that are electrically neutral overall, there is a displacement effect which puts the Earth's surface in a negatively charged state. The heat absorbed by the atmosphere during the day is sufficient to sustain this radiation pressure, even at night. The direct sunlight during the day can, however, partially ionize the air and cause the stored charge to leak a little then, which is why the fields are stronger at night than during the day. So, one could presume that such a field could be the cause of the distress of that calf. However, why do we all not experience such effects on a regular basis and why does the motion of water play a role? Well, I can but speculate. The feature of that knoll suggests an action which might involve what I referred to above as `vacuum spin'. A spherical aether form developing a spin condition inside a knoll and in some way attributable to a flow of water within that knoll could develop an aether charge distribution of one electrical polarity balanced by a charged state of the water having opposite electrical polarity. This
ES10PAGE00
'vacuum spin' could well also develop turbulence in the aether, resulting in the shedding of weak and invisible versions of those 'Earth Lights' I mentioned and that could the problem. The water flow would carry some of that electrical charge with it in its passage underground. Then one can glimpse a way of linking physics with what is claimed by those who practice dowsing. Our bodies are inevitably affected by all such extraneous electrical conditions that pervade the atmosphere and the very space we occupy. Indeed, as I shall indicate in Appendix VI on pp. 54-57, there could be activity within our body cells that involves a kind of electric motor action with superconductivity being in evidence. Also, there could be a low frequency field effect set up in the ozone layer which can further aggravate our existence (see Appendix III on pp. 40-41), but most of this Report concerns cyclotron resonance and the overhead power line and electric blanket problem. ********
The pages which now follow from here until the Appendix section constitute PART II of this Report and comprise a slightly edited but otherwise unamended collection of separate articles compiled by the author in 1990.
ES10PAGE14
THE HAZARD RISK
A U.S. PERSPECTIVE
The following are excerpts from 1988 and 1989 articles by Thomas F. Valone of Integrity Research Institute*, who has devised a 60 Hertz Magnetic Dosimeter expressly to measure exposure risks of weak but dangerous field conditions. "Since the New York State Power Lines Project, Scientific Advisory Panel's Report was released, (`Biological Effects of Power Line Fields') in July 1987, there has been an increased awareness of the potential health risks of 60 Hertz magnetic field exposure from power lines." "The study of Savitz confirms the results of previous studies to some extent and adds to the credibility that exposure to extremely low frequency magnetic fields might be the cause of childhood cancer" (Ahlbom et al, 1987)." "Another study which has also generated public concern is the finding that heating blankets and heated waterbeds are correlated to excessive miscarriages among pregnant women (Wertheimer and Leeper, 1986). This study has caused the manufacturers of these items to look into ways to design their products to reduce the magnetic field exposure for users. The average magnetic field ranges from 4 mG for heated waterbeds to 15 mG for heating blankets (Becker, 1985)." These concerns "have also sparked manufacturers to reconsider their designs of these products, though only one manufacturer is currently advertising reduced magnetic exposure." "With its implication in childhood leukaemia (Wertheimer & Leeper, Am. J. Epidemiol., 109, 273, 1979), childhood tumours (Wertheimer and Leeper, J. Bielectro. Soc., 7, 273, 1986) and, recently, learning disabilities (Wall Street Journal, p. B6 11 October 1988), the biological effects of electric power lines, both in the house and outside, are discovered by researchers." "The latest finding by the former president of the New York Academy of Sciences, Kurt Salzinger, indicates that rats exposed in utero to extremely low frequency (ELF) radiation showed signs of learning disabilities...a problem, he says, that 'didn't go away as rats got older'." * Address (1997): Integrity Research Institute, 1422 K Street NW, Suite 204, Washington, DC 20005, USA. Tel: 800-295-7674.
ES10PAGE15
MOLECULAR MECHANISMS OF MAGNETIC MEDICINE
The following is a quoted excerpt from an article of the above title which appeared in the April 1988 issue of U.S. Periodical MAGNETS. Its author is Lynn A. Surgalla of Department of Biophysical Sciences, School of Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo in U.S.A.
"ION TRANSPORT ACROSS CELLULAR MEMBRANES: A number of researchers have reported effects of time varying magnetic fields on the ion flux through membranes. Blackman et al (1982) reported that a 16 Hz sinusoidally varying magnetic field caused increased efflux of calcium ions from chick brain tissue in vitro. It has been purported in recent papers (McLead and Liboff, 1986; Liboff, 1985) that the influence of externally applied, low-level magnetic fields on biological ion transport can be explained by cyclotron resonance theory. The cyclotron resonance frequencies for several biologically important ions such as calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium, etc., all fall in the 10-100 Hz range when the static magnetic field is in the amplitude range of the earth's field. There is experimental evidence that cyclotron resonance in cells exists (Thomas et al, 1986). The calculated cyclotron resonance frequencies of the various ions were found to coincide with the experimental frequencies which induced ion flux through cell membranes (Liboff, 1985)." References Blackman, C., et al, Radiation Research, 92, 510 (1982). Liboff, A. R. "Cyclotron resonance in membrane transport" in "Interactions between Electromagnetic Fields and Cells": (Chiabera, Nicolini and Schawn (Eds.) Plenum, London, p. 281 (1985). Mclead, B. R, Liboff, A. R., "Dynamical characteristics of membrane ions in multi-field configurations at low frequencies", Bioelectromagnetics, 7, 177 (1986). Thomas, J. R., Schrot, J., Liboff, A.R., "Low-intensity magnetic fields after operant behaviour in rats", Bioelectromagnetics, 7, 349 (1986).
file:///D|/Myweb/reports/ES10page15.htm (1 of 2) [02/08/01 16:49:39]
ES10PAGE16
CYCLOTRON RESONANCE OF HADRONIC IONS IN LIQUIDS

H. ASPDEN Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southampton, Southampton, England.
ABSTRACT Although cyclotron resonance is believed to be the cause of harmful effects on the human body when subjected to weak low frequency electromagnetic fields, a crucial problem is why evidence in America and Europe gives similar concern, bearing in mind that a frequency resonance is involved and the power frequencies of 60 Hz and 50 Hz used on these continents are different. A possible solution to this scientific problem is presented and, in addition, a simple practical solution which should eliminate the health hazard from electric blankets and, by analogy, underfloor electric heating systems is proposed.
INTRODUCTION A major problem now developing in biochemistry is that posed by the harmful effects of weak electric and magnetic fields, evidenced by the higher incidence of cancer and leukaemia in the vicinity of overhead electric power lines and even from proximity with underfloor electric heating systems and certain electrical appliances such as electric blankets.
It has been suggested that cyclotron resonance effects in the body fluids and particularly the bloodstream causes a build up of ion energy which promotes unwanted penetration or rupturing of cell membranes. On the other hand, in a healthy body suffering from a bone fracture, the accelerated actions caused by these fields might even aid the healing process. It is, therefore, important that we develop a better understanding of the cyclotron process involved.
ES10PAGE16
CYCLOTRON RESONANCE What we mean by 'Cyclotron Resonance' is the concerted action on charged particles of two independently acting fields known to the electrical engineer. Firstly, there is the steady field which constrains the thermal motion of the particles so that it has a cyclical or oscillatory component at a frequency governed only by the field strength and the particle mass. Secondly, there is an alternating field which, with the cyclotron resonant state, is in tune with that frequency. The cyclotron is a machine used in high energy physics to accelerate charged particles which move in circular orbit about the axis of a magnetic field whilst an alternating electric field having a frequency equal to the orbital cyclic motion of the particles pumps energy into them to cause them to go faster and faster. A weak A.C. field in voltage terms can produce particles with energies equivalent to those obtainable using enormous D.C. voltages and what is now to be discussed is the replication of this process in the ionized liquid in a human body which is ever subject to the Earth's magnetic field and can, under certain circumstances, be exposed to harmful weak A.C. fields at mains power frequency.
THE ION FREQUENCY It is clear that the primary factor in producing cyclotron resonance in our bodies is the Earth's magnetic field. This has a steady value wherever we are on the Earth's surface and differs little from a 50 T (microtesla) (0.5 gauss) field. Its direction does vary with both latitude and longitude owing to the angle of dip of the Earth's field and the fact that the geomagnetic poles are offset from the geographic poles. This direction is not relevant so far as the active random motion of ions in our body fluids is concerned. By a gyromagnetic process these ions will, in some measure, share in responding to that geomagnetic field to set up a reaction field by moving in helical paths about the field axis. It is characteristic of this cyclotron reaction process that the angular frequency of the response in the helical orbits is simply Hq/m, this being the product of the field strength H and the electromagnetic charge q to mass m ratio of the ion involved. The ion mass which matches a 50Hz power frequency is approximately that of the ions dissociated in aqueous solutions, namely the positive hydronium ion or the negative hydroxyl ion. The extraneous oscillating fields, whether electric or magnetic, can pump energy into a resonance building up the penetration power of the ions, but only if that power frequency is a good match for the particular cyclotron frequency of the ions present in that Earth field. The awkward question then faced is why there should be problems arising from power frequencies which can be precisely 60Hz in USA and precisely 50Hz in U.K. If 60Hz has harmful effect in the geomagnetic field in USA, then why should 50Hz be harmful in U.K. where the geomagnetic field has the same strength? This question is the main thrust of this paper.
ES10PAGE16
THE HADRON-LEPTON GYROMAGNETIC REACTION Our electromagnetic theories have been established on the basis of experiments performed by using electron currents or magnets which owe their magnetic field to internal electron motion. Electrons are leptons which means that they can interact with a field by creating and annihilating charge pairs of their own lepton form. The heavy positive ion nucleated by an atomic nucleus owes its net charge to a different particle form known as the hadron. The question arises as to whether hadrons interact magnetically as do leptons. Now, there are sound theoretical reasons for understanding how the electromagnetic interactions with which we are familiar can apply to the lepton-lepton interaction and the hadron-lepton interaction. However, there is equal reason to suspect that the hadron-hadron interaction is different and this seems to be indicated by experiments involving discharge currents in aqueous solutions. What this means to our cyclotron problem is that, if the Earth's magnetic field has its source in hadron charge and the reacting ions are hadrons, then the hadron-hadron interaction is affecting the cyclotron reaction and it is not truly determined by a formula based on the Lorentz force law. In general terms it must be realized that an applied steady magnetic field will develop reactions in ionized liquids which are partly produced by negative ions (lepton charge) and partly by positive ions (hadron charge). Thus if these react differently the resultant magnetic field which determines the forces on the reacting ions may effectively have a different strength from that deemed to apply in determining the cyclotron resonance frequency. More to the point, if the resonance can deploy energy between the two types of ion to optimize the action, then that effective field strength can adjust within limits so as cause the cyclotron resonant frequency set by the ion mass to conform precisely with the driving power frequency. This is the basis on which the damaging effects can stem from the same ion type, whether we have a 50Hz power frequency or a 60Hz power frequency. The task is, therefore, to analyse this proposition and to see how those limits are set, so that remedial design techniques can be found for eliminating the dangers involved.
PRIOR RESEARCH ON GYROMAGNETIC REACTION EFFECTS A consideration of magnetocaloric effects and gyromagnetic reactions leads one to question whether the basic g-factor of 2 is really due to Dirac's mathematical concept of electron spin. There are very sound reasons (including the fact that positrons in an electron gas respond as if they have twice the mass of the
ES10PAGE16
electron) for accepting that there is a half-cancelling field reaction. What this means is that, when we measure the gyromagnetic reaction and find that it is twice the value we had expected from basic theory, we should not look for new physics by formulating `spin' as an abstract concept. Instead we should realize that what we assume to be the magnetic field is not just that we apply by powering an electromagnet. It is really the difference between the field we apply and the natural field reaction of the free ions present. It seems probable that the field reaction invariably halves the primary field action and that we have not realized this and related what is measured to the primary action only. This is justified by the simple expedient of matching the reaction component of the kinetic energy of the reacting ions with the field energy of the resultant magnetic field. For optimum energy deployment the primary field action is invariably halved by reaction of Maxwell's displacement charge in the vacuum or by conduction electrons in copper. The question, however, is whether that halving effect applies to the positive, as opposed to the negative heavy ions in electrically dissociated liquids. The action of the negative ion is likely to be dominated by the surplus electron, whereas the action of the positive ion will be dominated by the surplus charge of the proton. In physics, the proton, as a hadron is different in properties from the electron, as a lepton. They do respond differently and anomalies are showing up in certain experiments involving electrical discharge through water. Hence there is a serious doubt about reaction effects in dissociated aqueous solutions. Subject to the latter doubt, and concerning the field strength halving effect just mentioned, all this means is that the calculation of any magnetic field action of current must introduce that g factor of 2 to enhance the field strength before it is halved by the inevitable offset reaction. The physical process involved in the interaction of moving charges is that of retarded energy transfer and this can be affected so as to enhance the primary magnetic field if a reaction field sets up effects which transfer energy in the reverse direction. This is all embraced by the inductance property of the primary circuit and it will be understood that, except where the core is ferromagnetic, the magnetic field energy calculated in the normal way in terms of the magnetizing current is a measure of that energy fed into the inductance. However, the actual magnetic field determining the Lorentz force on an ion in a liquid may be different or, if we prefer, the Lorentz force may not be that prescribed by use of the formula as it applies to interactions in free space. In order to understand the lepton-hadron involvement in this process we will perform an analysis assuming that the primary field is leptonic in nature and that the reaction is partially leptonic (by an energy share factor ) and partially hadronic (by a factor 1-). Hadron-hadron interactions should not, it would seem, then be regarded as contributing or even present and yet this is not so. First, imagine that is zero. We suppose that there is a primary field of strength gHp produced by a solenoid surrounding the test substance. We think the field produced is Hp but it is really gHp. Hp is that expected from the current action. g is an unknown factor involved in the inductance reaction. The net field strength, allowing for the reaction field Hr is denoted H. Therefore:
ES10PAGE16
gHp - Hr = H ............... (1) Now, the Lorentz force acting on the reacting leptons of charge q and mass m sets up an equation of motion: Hqv = mv2/r .............. (2) where r is the helical orbit of the reacting lepton and v is its speed in orbit in the plane normal to the field axis. The reacting magnetic moment is g times the reacting lepton density summation of qvr/2 and this translates into a reacting field component if, in the gaussion units used, we multiply by 4. Using equation (2) to express mv2/2 as Hqvr/2, the reacting field component becomes: Hr = 4g(E/H) ............... (3) where E is the kinetic energy density associated with the orbital reaction v motion components. It was suggested that energy deployment was optimum, meaning that E will tend to a maximum as potential energy minimizes. Therefore the task is to substitute (3) in equation (1) to see how H adjusts. 4gE = gHpH - H2 ............... (4) E/H is zero when gHp = 2H, but we imagine that, apart from a minor diamagnetic or paramagnetic reaction in a non-ferromagnetic substance, there is really no recognized diminution of the field strength owing to the gyromagnetic reaction. We then see that Hp and H are equal and this means that g must be 2. Thus the g-factor of 2 evidenced by gyromagnetic experiments is explained without recourse to the abstruse formalism of the relativistic Dirac formulations. Note, however, that E is then equal to H2/8, which is the magnetic field energy density stored electromagnetically. Clearly, it is the reacting orbital ion or other reacting charge that is the agent for feeding inductance energy back into a magnetizing solenoid when it is demagnetized. Also, instead of adopting this energy optimization argument we could simply have declared that E was (Hp)2/8 and put this in equation (4) to find that if g = 2 then H = Hp. The question now faced is what happens if that reaction field is partly attributable to hadrons, meaning that is not zero. To proceed, we will assume, pending further discussion, that the g = 2 factor applies for fundamental reasons. We examine the situation where there is a mix of single polarity (negative) lepton-related ion reaction and a single polarity (positive) hadron-related ion reaction. Note that we are not here discussing what is known as 'nuclear magnetic resonance', where the resonant spin states are set up inside the atom. Instead we are dealing with the case in which the atom has become ionized and is in free motion. The lepton-produced component field H derived from equation (1) is: H = gHp - f[]Hr ........... (5)
ES10PAGE16
and this is further offset by a hadron reaction component (1-f[])Hr. Here f[] is a function of representing reaction field strength apportionment, whereas is field energy density apportionment. However, the f[]Hr term can be written as 4gE/H, because the lepton interacts normally with both the lepton and hadron components of H. On the other hand, the (1-f[])Hr term can be written as 4(1-)E/Hp, because the hadron interacts in the normal electromagnetic way only with the lepton component of H specified by equation (5). Put g = 2 and E = (Hp)2/8. Then we obtain: H = 2Hp - (Hp)2/H - (1 - )(Hp)/(2) .............. (6) Evidently, if = 1 then H = Hp, as expected, but if = 0 then H = (3/2)Hp.
In other words, if the leptonic ion reaction predominates the effective H field governing cyclotron action is close to that normally expected, but if the hadronic ion reaction predominates the cyclotron action can occur at a frequency up to 50% larger than that normally expected. Evidently, if this ion reaction process has been correctly interpreted, there is then reason to understand how the power frequency that perturbs the cyclotron action in a liquid can influence the apportionment of the reaction energy density E between the two types of reacting ion to seek out a cyclotron resonance intermediate that of the two ion types. The energy exchange optimizes to assure maximum energy transfer. There is no need for a perfect frequency tuning with the specific individual ion mass properties and the background D.C. field. The only condition is that the positive ions involved must have masses which for the power frequency used need, for cyclotron resonance, a D.C. field that lies between 66.7% and 100% of that given by the cyclotron formula. Typically, therefore, the hydronium ion at 50Hz requires a D.C. field of between 41T and 60T, whereas at 60 Hz the field has to be between 49T and 74T. For the hydroxyl ion the 50Hz range is 36T to 54T and the 60Hz range is from 44T to 66T. Bearing in mind that the geomagnetic field is of the order of 50T we then see that the 50Hz and 60Hz power frequencies are virtually the ideal frequencies for activating the harmful effects of cyclotron resonance. Conversely, if these frequencies were to be doubled and the ion types specified are the ones which really are the prevalent variety causing the problem, then these field requirements would double and cyclotron resonance in the geomagnetic field could not occur. It is not suggested that A.C. power frequencies, as such, should be doubled. Rather, the proposition is that the powering of harmful heating appliances, such as electric blankets, should involve the use of an unsmoothed full-wave rectified version of the normal A.C. power frequency supply. This would
ES10PAGE16
eliminate the harmful frequency and leave a double frequency and higher harmonic frequency power supply with much weaker current amplitude. The main heating effect would be that of the D.C. component and no cyclotron resonance with the hydronium or hydroxyl ions could occur. CONCLUSION This paper has discussed cyclotron resonance in relation to the harmful effects of weak A.C. fields. Electric blankets are particularly prone to such problems because the electric current is carried by wires which are spaced apart. In a normal electric flex the current flows one way in one wire and returns through another wire twisted around the first wire. The result is that there is really no resulting electromagnetic field to worry about because the field of one wire cancels that of the other. This is not the case for the electric blanket, where the wires can be several cm. apart and therefore result in a field which penetrates well into a body resting on that blanket. The paper has addressed the key issue of how cyclotron resonance can apply both to the 60 Hz and 50 Hz environments. The explanation has brought to bear fundamental theoretical issues which the author has been studying and advocating for many years but which theoretical physicists will regard as controversial. However, less controversial is the belief that the health hazard is connected with cyclotron resonance and the practical remedy need not depend upon acceptance of the author's theoretical proposition. Certainly manufacturers of electric blankets would be well advised to provide suitable power converters in their blanket switches which eliminate the 50 Hz and 60 Hz frequencies. The cost of such a modification would only be a few percent of the cost of the blanket and this is seen as the first and easiest step forward that one can take in facing up to the real health hazard problems posed by the weak low frequency fields to which we are all exposed. REFERENCES The following references are not identified in the above text but they will give background to the matters raised above. F. Ogden, 'Killing Fields', Electronics World and Wireless World, p. 3 (January 1990). A. Philips, 'Killing Fields - Introduction', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 96-97 (February 1990). S. Best, 'Killing Fields - Epidemiological Evidence', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 98-111 (February 1990). R. Coghill, 'Killing Fields - Biophysical Evidence', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 112-119 (February 1990).
ES10PAGE16
A. Philips, 'Killing Fields - The Politics', Electronics World and Wireless World, p. 120-124 (February 1990).
APPENDED NOTE CONCERNING THE g-FACTOR Why should g be 2? Although physicists tend to view this as something relying on the mathematical analysis deeply involved with the relativistic-quantum electrodynamics of Paul Dirac, this author believes that the true answer probably arises from the energy transfer processes as charges in motion interact. The point is that energy supplied to activate the charges producing a magnetic field has to find its way into the orbits of the reacting ions. The energy makes this journey via the Coulomb field interactions of charge. Energy does not travel from one charge to the other along an infinitely thin line drawn between the two charges and the energy cannot travel at faster than light speed. Were we to assume that energy does travel directly along that line at the speed of light, then it can be shown that g = 1. However, the real journey is a mean distance to the distributed Coulomb field system of exactly the intercharge distance and this is followed by a second leg of travel of identical mean distance from the Coulomb field to that other charge. This doubles the journey time and so the Coulomb retardation which accounts for the Lorentz force and thereby makes g = 2. It is beyond the scope of this paper to give a full analysis of this action, but it can be understood by first reviewing how the Lorentz force can be deduced from the Coulomb interaction, as shown in detail elsewhere by the author, and then taking account of certain arguments used by the author to explain aspects of the gravitational interaction. The latter is not simply a propagation of energy to give basis for the deployment of magnetic field energy, but is one step advanced from this, since the gravitational interaction is a magnetic interaction and the magnetic energy redeployment with changing mass positions is an onward iteration of the primary process. The essential point is that there is a retardation effect that is greater than that assumed by line of sight propagation between the interacting charges.
ES10PAGE22
KILLING FIELDS - SOLVING THE PROBLEM OF OVERHEAD POWER LINES
H. ASPDEN Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southampton, Southampton, England. The health hazard posed by living in close proximity to overhead electric power lines and attributable to cyclotron resonance induced in human body cells by weak electromagnetic fields can be eliminated but only if we cease to use our 50 Hz or 60 Hz frequencies and rely on D.C. exclusively or double the operating frequency to 100 Hz or 120 Hz.
INTRODUCTION
The fact that cancer has been linked to electromagnetic radiation from power lines and appliances has now been recognized by the US Environmental Protection Agency [1]. A recent editorial in Electronics World [2] reports how, in 1974, epidemiologist Dr. Nancy Wertheimer established a connection between child leukaemia victims and 7600 volt feed lines to pole mounted transformers feeding house supply systems. This was later followed by a sequence of articles including 'Killing Fields' in their titles [3, 4, 5, 6] giving a devastating account of the risks posed by living under the influence of the effects of what are, in fact, weak electromagnetic fields. The problem has been traced experimentally to a resonance effect akin to what is known in physics as 'cyclotron resonance' [7, 8, 9]. In a cyclotron a modest cyclic field can be caused to accelerate a moving ion to enormous energy levels by a gradual resonant build up process which taps energy from the weak field pulsating in harmony with the orbital frequency of ion motion in a steady magnetic field. In the human body that steady field is the Earth's magnetic field and the ions in motion are those chemical ions in solution in our body fluids and present within our body cells. The activating field conducive to resonance is that extraneous electric or magnetic field set up by an overhead power line or an appliance
ES10PAGE22
such as an electric blanket, where the wires carrying compensating currents are well spaced. It is this spacing that is crucial to the existence of those small but hazardous weak fields. The question we now face is not so much that of understanding the cause, but rather one of eliminating the problem. Pending a discovery of a solution, those expressing responsible opinion on this matter are cautiously pointing out that, assuming electromagnetic radiation does have an effect, it can only be to help to proliferate cancers already present. This, however, is not a convincing assertion, given that we probably all have a latent capacity to develop cancer cells if exposed to fields which can accelerate transmutations. This article addresses directly the straightforward issue of eliminating the possibility of cyclotron ion resonance brought about by A.C. field influences in a domestic or normal commercial environment, where the only prevalent D.C. magnetic field is that provided by body Earth itself. Concerning electric blankets or underfloor heating, these can be remedied by the expedient of using D.C. power excitation or even full-wave unsmoothed rectified A.C. as by using what the author terms the `Harwen switch' [10]. This is simply a two pole switch having a bridge rectifier incorporated in the switch housing on the output side. However, the solution to be applied to overhead power lines, short of conversion to high voltage D.C. transmission, is not so easy in view of the very substantial voltages and currents involved and the heavy capital investment in existing structures.
THE HAZARD FREQUENCY RANGE Cyclotron resonance cannot occur if the hazardous frequency range lies outside that of the exciting field. We are singularly unfortunate in that the 50 Hz or 60 Hz frequencies, which relate to the two-pole structure of the magnetizing rotor fields of synchronous alternators running at a sensible design speed of 3,000 or 3,600 rpm, happen to be close to that of ions in our bodies responding to the Earth's 50 T magnetic field. The cyclotron formula requires that the angular frequency of the resonance should be simply Hq/m, where H is the strength of the geomagnetic field and q/m is the charge to mass ratio of the ion. For unit atomic mass on the C 12 scale q/m is 96 million coulombs per kg. Therefore, if H is 50 T, an ion of unit atomic mass and the normal unit charge will have a cyclotron angular frequency of about 4800 rad/sec or about 760 Hz. Table I shows the resonant cyclotron frequencies of single ions of different forms when subject to the steady geomagnetic field.
ES10PAGE22
TABLE I Ion hydroxyl OH Mass Frequency 17 45-67 40-60 33-50 32-47 22-33 19-29 19-28
hydronium OH3 19 sodium Na chlorine Cl potassium K calcium Ca 23 35 39 40 magnesium Mg 24
The lower frequency expressed in Hz is that at which a single presence of such ions in solution causes the thermal or Brownian motion of the ion to build up pressures by virtue of the transfer of energy as the ions accelerate to higher and higher speeds in weak but sustained perturbing fields having that resonant frequency. Independently, this author has shown that the inter-reaction processes involved when two dominant forms of ion are present can cause one ion form to develop its own field and so coact with the geomagnetic field to bring about a resonance at a frequency up to 1.5 times higher than that for a single ion, by a self-tuning of the system. This is indicated by the higher frequency listed. In other words, over a limited frequency range above that of natural resonance of the single ion form, there will be perfect resonance of one of the ion forms even though the external frequency is not exactly as required for that form assuming that H is exclusively the geomagnetic field strength. Whilst it is then easy to picture cyclotron motion of the positive and negative ions individually there are problems in imagining how they can build up their energy and set up pressures owing to their reacting orbital motion in the earth's weak magnetic field. The question at issue is that of why the oppositely charged ions, which travel clockwise and counterclockwise, respectively, do not simply collide to share their energy. That is the puzzling facet to the experimental evidence supporting the cyclotron resonant effects. To overcome this, in a simple pictorial sense, it may suffice to consider the positive and negative ions as grouping, respectively, in a sequence of alternate parallel planes defining their freedom of action by restricted motion about the field axis. This will minimize collision probabilities. The result is then equivalent to having two concentric solenoids producing augmenting reaction fields, with the ion type of larger mass constituting the outer solenoid. The author is aware of the extensive experimental research which has focused on ion forms involving Ca, Na, etc, but what may have been missed in this prior research is the appreciation that water forms its own ion form in that it dissociates into hydroxyl and hydronium ions as listed in Table I. It would seem, at least to this author, that the prevalence of such ions and their rather special relationship to the 50 Hz and
ES10PAGE22
60 Hz frequencies, both of which they encompass by their combined effect, and as illustrated in Table I, has to give the underlying basis for field-induced activity in body fluids. However, this is not a critical point. What is critical is the need to realize that no normal free and prevalent ion form in our body fluids has a resonant condition which corresponds to 100 Hz or 120 Hz. Only lithium of atomic mass 7 if it were present in solution as a free single-atom ion could come near to satisfying the resonance requirement. In this situation, bearing in mind that the very prevalent hydroxyl and hydronium ions, which are the natural dissociated ions of water, are probably the dominant cause in the hazard risk at 50 Hz or 60 Hz, it can reasonably be presumed that a hazard free situation prevails at 100 Hz or 120 Hz. Therefore, as a simple expedient, the object should be to eliminate the 50 Hz or 60 Hz basic frequency and operate instead at twice this frequency. Now, this is may not seem to be a feasible solution, except for the electric blanket or underfloor heating situation where full wave rectified unsmoothed 50 or 60 Hz A.C. will allow heating to rely on a mixture of 81% D.C. and 19% A.C. mainly at 100 or 120 Hz. In the case of the overhead power line, unless one can think in terms of screening power lines, which seems uneconomic, or using normal closely wound cable forms, as used underground, the most appropriate, but drastic, remedy long term is to adopt a new standard frequency for power generation and supply, such as 100 Hz.
THE FUTURE Given that weak electromagnetic fields at the power frequencies 50 Hz and 60 Hz do pollute our environment in the sense that they make it hostile for the chemistry of our body functions, there is no real choice other than making sure we live well removed from power lines or accept the higher incidence of cancer and leukaemia as tolerable. Hopefully the future will see technology advance, perhaps on the warm superconductor front, to the stage where overhead power lines will carry D.C. in preference to A.C. To the extent that converters are then used to generate A.C. domestically or industrially for special purposes, that conversion can be to 100 Hz to avoid risk. More likely, however, since appliances needing to be powered by A.C. are not like underfloor heating or electric blankets with well-spaced current and return currents productive of stray fields, the hazards of the latter can be avoided by powering by D.C. In the meantime, this author has considered taking the precaution of adapting the switches on his electric blankets to include, on the output side, a full-wave bridge rectifier to eliminate heating the blanket with
ES10PAGE22
hazard-producing current at 50 Hz, even though the power is drawn from a 50 Hz mains supply. On reflection, however, the best course seems to be not to use an electric blanket at all, an action which, if followed by many others should spur manufacturers to cause them to add such a hazard-eliminating feature to their blankets. As things stand they prefer to ignore the problem until its solution becomes an industry standard. Table II below shows how the power supplied to a purely resistive load is divided between the frequency components of an unsmoothed full-wave rectified sinusoidal 50 Hz voltage source. TABLE II Frequency Power 0 100 200 300 400 81.0569 18.0127 00.7205 00.1323 00.0408
Finally, the author is all too conscious that the personal views expressed in this article concerning the simple remedy of using a modified electric blanket switch is more a matter of opinion than something easily supportable by test data. All that can be said is that if those many researchers who point to cyclotron resonance are correct, then it makes sense to power those field producing appliances, and particularly the electric blanket, with a frequency that lies outside the possible hazard range.
REFERENCES [1] S. Shulman, 'Cancer Risks seen in Electro-magnetic Fields', Nature, 345, 463 (1990). [2] F. Ogden, 'Killing Fields', Electronics World and Wireless World, p. 3 (January 1990). [3] A. Philips, 'Killing Fields - Introduction', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 96-97 (February 1990). [4] S. Best, 'Killing Fields - Epidemiological Evidence', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 98111 (February 1990). [5] R. Coghill, 'Killing Fields - Biophysical Evidence', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 112119 (February 1990).
ES10PAGE22
[6] A. Philips, 'Killing Fields - The Politics', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 120-124 (February 1990). [7] L. A. Surgalla, 'Molecular Mechanisms of Magnetic Medicine', Magnets, 3, 14 (April 1988). [8] A. R. Liboff, 'Cyclotron resonance in membrane transport,' in: Chiabera, A. Nicolini, C., Schawn, H.P. (Eds.): "Interactions between Electromagnetic Fields and Cells" (Plenum, London) p. 281 (1985). [9] B. R. Mclead, A. R. Liboff, 'Dynamical characteristics of Membrane Ions in Multi-field Configurations at Low Frequencies', Bioelectromagnetics, 7, 177 (1986). [10] U.K. Patent Application No. 9002718 (7 February 1990).
EXPLANATORY NOTE
A contracted version of the above article has been published in Electronics World + Wireless World, at pp. 774-775 in the September 1991 issue. The U.K. Patent Application of reference [10] was deemed by the U.K. patent examiner as constituting two inventions and eventually published by the U.K. Patent Office on November 27th, 1991 as Serial Nos. 2,244,393 and 2,244,394 but neither were followed through to grant. On the other hand, a corresponding U.S. Patent Application was granted on September 29th, 1992 as Serial No. 5,151,577 (see Appendix V below), but the author has decided that commercial restrictions on the use of such an invention are not warranted and has allowed that patent also to lapse. It is hoped that the invention will be used freely by manufacturers of electric blankets. The author at the time this 1990 section of text was written had formed a company in U.K. named HARWEN LIMITED to take forward research on various inventions in the new energy field, including the device to be used to avoid the hazard risk with the electric blanket. At the outset it was also sought to register in U.K. the name HARWEN as a Trademark on Part A of the U.K. Trademark register. The examiner accepted that HARWEN was an ìnvented word' which qualified for registration, but imposed the proviso that I secured a sanction from Harwell, the seat of the atomic research activity sponsored by the U.K. government. I then discovered that the U.K. Atomic Energy Authority had taken extreme precautions in themselves registering a series of trademarks, virtually as a defensive action, to block anything external which might possibly seem connected with Harwell. In these unexpected circumstances and knowing that I would be mounting efforts to encroach upon the power generation field by my patent filing, I thought it prudent to abort my use of the name HARWEN and not solicit the sanction from Harwell that would allow me to proceed with trademark registration. It was for this reason that I then changed the company name to THERMODYNAMICS LIMITED. I hope this note will therefore explain the use of the word HARWEN as used in the next item in this Report and, incidentally, and for the record, as used a 1990 paper in Speculations in Science and Technology [13, 295-299 (1990)] entitled 'The Harwen Energy Radiation Regenerator'. The latter is a subject unrelated to the electrical blanket theme.
ES10PAGE27
THE HARWEN BLANKET SWITCH

A remedial design aimed at eliminating harmful electric effects. While scientists are still struggling to understand how the very weak electric fields set up by electric blankets can possibly be linked with miscarriage or leukaemia, the HARWEN switch offers a safeguard against the likely cause, which is `cyclotron resonance'. The switch includes a converter which converts all the power into a form which excludes the harmful frequency range before the electricity reaches the spaced wires which set up the fields that can act on the user's body cells. Question: What is cyclotron resonance? Answer: The cyclotron is a machine used in high energy physics to accelerate charged particles which move in circular orbit about the axis of a magnetic field whilst an alternating electric field having a frequency equal to the orbital cyclic motion of the particles pumps energy into them to cause them to go faster and faster. A weak A.C. field in voltage terms can produce particles with energies corresponding to enormous voltages. Question: What has that to do with the human body? Answer: The replication of this cyclotron resonance process can occur in the ionized liquid in a human body which is ever subject to the Earth's magnetic field and can, under certain circumstances, be exposed to harmful weak A.C. fields at mains power frequency. The enhanced activity resulting from the consequent energy transfer sets up pressures which can cause penetration of cell walls and thereby produce abnormalities. Question: Why are electric blankets singled out as being harmful? Answer: There are stray field effects at mains frequency because manufacturers find it safer to space the wires carrying currents in the forward and reverse directions, whereas in normal power supply cables the wires lie close together. Question: What is so special about the mains frequency of 50 Hz? Answer: It is characteristic of the cyclotron reaction of a moving electric ion that the angular frequency of the reacting motion is simply Hq/m, this being the product of the field strength H and the electromagnetic charge to mass ratio of the ion involved. The ion mass which matches a 50Hz power frequency is approximately that of the ions dissociated in aqueous solutions present in the human body, as in the blood stream, namely the positive hydronium ion or the negative hydroxyl ion. The extraneous oscillating fields, whether electric or magnetic, can pump energy into a resonance building up the penetration power of the ions, but only if that power frequency is a good match for the particular cyclotron frequency of the ions present in that Earth field and 50 Hz is critical in this regard.
ES10PAGE27
Question: Does not the problem arise also in U.S.A. where the mains frequency is 60 Hz? Answer: Yes, but there is reason to understand how the power frequency that perturbs the cyclotron action in a liquid can influence the apportionment of the reaction energy density between the two principal types of reacting ion and so seek out a cyclotron resonance intermediate that of the two ion types. It can be argued that cyclotron resonance will occur when the ions involved have masses which, for the power frequency used, needs a D.C. field that lies between 66.7% and 100% of that given by the cyclotron formula. Typically, therefore, the hydronium ion at 50Hz requires a D.C. field of between 41T and 60T, whereas at 60 Hz the field has to be between 49T and 74T. For the hydroxyl ion the 50Hz range is 36T to 54T and the 60Hz range is from 44T to 66T. Question: Is the Earth's magnetic field in the danger range for both 50 Hz and 60 Hz power supplies? Answer: Yes. The geomagnetic field, which penetrates into our houses and our bodies, is of the order of 50T. This means that the 50Hz and 60Hz power frequencies are virtually the ideal frequencies for activating the harmful effects of cyclotron resonance. Conversely, if these frequencies were to be doubled and the ion types specified are the ones which really are the prevalent variety causing the health risk, then these field requirements would double and cyclotron resonance in the geomagnetic field could not occur. Question: So how does the Harwen switch work? Answer: It incorporates a semiconductor device which converts the mains power into an unsmoothed fullwave rectified version of the normal A.C. power frequency supply. This eliminates the harmful frequency, puts 81% of the power into D.C. and the rest of the power into a double and higher harmonic frequencies of much weaker current amplitude. No heat is wasted and no cyclotron resonance with the hydronium or hydroxyl ions can occur. Question: Does this mean that the switch offers guaranteed assurance that there will be no harmful effects arising from the blanket? Answer: No. It will be quite some time before scientists can be sure about this matter and the risks are small anyway. The Harwen switch is a simple and cheap way of taking a precautionary measure, bearing in mind that the evidence points to a problem with normally powered blankets. The problem is elusive and, though the design of the Harwen switch is based on physics, scientists generally are very slow to respond to changes which involve revising existing theory. Question: Will all electric blanket manufacturers need to offer some such precautionary measure aiming to reduce the health hazards? Answer: Certainly manufacturers of electric blankets would be well advised to provide suitable power converters in their blanket switches which eliminate the 50 Hz and 60 Hz frequencies. The cost of such a
ES10PAGE27
modification would only be a fraction of the cost of the blanket and this is seen as the first and easiest step forward that one can take in facing up to the real health hazard problems posed by the weak low frequency fields to which we are all exposed.
____________________________________________________
The following paper by H. Aspden was published In volume 12, the 1989 issue of Speculations in Science and Technology at p. 17.
EXTREMELY LOW FREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION AND BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
ABSTRACT: Although there is a vast amount of evidence to show that extremely low frequency electromagnetic (ELF) radiation is a health hazard, there is no currently accepted physical reason why this should be so. One possible explanation is presented, based on an existing theory for the gyromagnetic reaction anomalies. INTRODUCTION: The analysis in this paper brings together three separate physical phenomena in an attempt to explain why ELF radiation is harmful to health. The phenomena with which we are concerned are: (a) The well-researched and documented evidence that ELF radiation can cause leukaemia, enhanced DNA synthesis, mechanical vibration of brain tissue, tumours, calcium transport across cell membranes, chronic stress and other disorders. (b) The gyromagnetic oscillations which exhibit the resonance of an atmospheric field cavity enveloping the Earth. (c) The gyromagnetic reaction that opposes any magnetic field that penetrates through ionized gas plasma, ionized liquid solutions or even the vacuum if the latter contains active charge that can be displaced according to Maxwell's equations. It is already established that there is a link between (a) and (b), as discussed in a review paper by T. F. Valone [1]. The seriousness of the connection between ELF radiation and health is such that Valone reports on the development of a special ELF Spectrum Analyzer the object of which is to provide an instrument capable of detecting and analyzing electromagnetic fields having frequencies ranging from 10
ES10PAGE27
Hz down to 0.01 Hz. In Valone's paper there are more than 20 references that support the statement in (a) above. Here, however, we present just one such reference besides the Valone reference itself. This is to a paper in SCIENCE by A. R. Liboff et al. [2] entitled `Time-Varying Magnetic Fields: Effect on DNA Synthesis'. So far as the (b) phenomenon is concerned this relates to what is called the 'Schumann resonance' [3]. There is a fundamental frequency of about 7.8 Hz arising from the time it takes for electromagnetic radiation trapped within the ionosphere-earth cavity to propagate around the body Earth. 186,000 miles per second and a wavelength of about 24,000 miles, corresponding to the Earth's circumference, gives the 7.8 Hz frequency. This resonance is known to regulate in some way the timing of the biocycles. Valone states: 'It has been noted that the basic oscillation frequency of the brain (alpha rhythm) is the same as the Earth's fundamental resonant frequency.' THE GYROMAGNETIC REACTION: In reading Valone's fascinating review of this subject the author's attention halted at: 'ELF magnetic fields on the other hand pass right through the body without any appreciable attenuation but ironically have been found to have many significant biological effects.' It is this statement which is, indeed, an accepted proposition in established physics that this author finds can be challenged. The reasons are of record in the first volume of Speculations in Science and Technology in a 1978 paper by the author entitled 'Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism' [4]. The reader will, of course, see no connection between ferromagnetism and the human biocycles. However, the point is that the author gave very good reasons for suggesting that a steady or low frequency magnetic field acting an a medium containing charge in motion would cause that charge to react to the extent that the reaction kinetic energy density was equal to the magnetic field energy density. In a fuller treatment of the theory involved it is argued that it is this reaction that feeds the inductive energy back to the magnetizing system as it is de-energized. Furthermore, in asserting priority to deploy kinetic energy to match the magnetic field energy density, the reacting ions having the greater mass will take priority in asserting the reaction. It is not proposed here to enter into the full physical support for this contention, as reference [4] should suffice to sustain the proposition. However, what we can do is to show why this reaction effect is very relevant to the ELF hazards. The crucial formula governing the reaction is that associated with the cyclotron notion of a charge reacting to a steady magnetic field of intensity H. In the cgs system of units the cyclotron angular
ES10PAGE27
frequency is given by Hq/m, where q is the electromagnetic unit of electron charge of a typical ion and m is the mass of that ion. Therefore, if we are looking at the effects of the field H on a saline solution, for example, we will find that there is a characteristic frequency of reacting motion for each type of free ion in that electrolytic solution. Consider the chlorine ion as one prevalent in a resonance attributable to the presence of sodium chloride. This has a mass of very nearly 6xl023 gm, whereas q has the numerical value 1.6x1020. It follows that the angular frequency of the motion will be 266(H) rad/s or, as a frequency, about 42(H) Hz. Already, therefore, we have reason to see that there is the possibility of resonance between this frequency and that 7.8 Hz fundamental of the Schumann resonance, but that such a resonant condition will only occur at or very near to a specific value of H, which in the case of the Cl ions is (7.8)/(42) or 0.19 gauss. THE ELF RADIATION INTERACTION: Now the Earth's magnetic field has an intensity of about 0.5 gauss (i.e. 50 T) and, though this is not the same everywhere on the Earth's surface, a value of this order is the steady field applicable wherever we choose to be. Consider then the effect of a slowly varying magnetic field that is of sinusoidal form and has an amplitude of, say, 0.4 gauss. In this context 50 Hz is slow. The excursions of the combined field will pass very slowly through that critical value of 0.19 gauss twice per cycle. This means that the electric field pulsations at 7.8 Hz associated with that geomagnetic cavity resonance will combine with the rhythm of the reaction ion motion at exactly the same frequency to build up resonant lateral pulsations at exactly that 7.8 Hz frequency. On the other hand, if the disturbing field has a high amplitude or a very rapid cycle of change, the passage through the 0.19 gauss threshold will be very rapid and there will be no progressive build-up of oscillations. Even allowing for the fact that the opportunity for resonance occurs more often, owing to the increased frequency, the progressive build-up has no opportunity to establish a strong concerted cyclic displacement of the ion population in, for example, the human blood stream. What this amounts to is that strong electromagnetic radiation at power frequencies or weak radiation at high frequency will excite no ion resonance with the 7.8 Hz field. However, ELF radiation of small magnetic field amplitude can be a cause of pulsations that might well promote such resonance and affect cell behaviour in our bodies. This seems consistent with the evidence presented in (a) above. There is, of course, scope, based an the theory presented, for examining how the type of free ion present in a reacting medium might be sensitive to different critical magnetic fields. The use of controlled ELF signals of different amplitudes might then operate selectively in developing the resonance under discussion. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, given a physical basis for the way in which ELF radiation operates to affect our health, such as that just presented, we have then the means by which to devise verifying tests and even equipment that can reduce or eliminate the hazards.
ES10PAGE27
We will not speculate on that here. The author does, however, believe that there is something of basic scientific importance in this biomedical connection with the gyromagnetic reaction. Generally, physicists believe that in a metal conductor, where the electrons are the free ions, there is no such thing as `free electron diamagnetism'. They argue this on statistics but with the hindsight knowledge that there seems to be no attenuation whatsoever of the applied magnetic field. The author has reason to believe that the magnetic fields produced by isolated charge in circuital motion are twice as strong as predicted on conventional theory. This affords the scope for a reaction effect that normalizes the net field at its unity value. The optimum reaction in terms of energy deployment leads to that factor of 2 and ensures that just enough ions react to half-cancel the primary effect. This is why experiment shows that there is an anomalous g-factor of 2 when the angular momentum change in a steel rod is related to the change of magnetic moment of the orbital electrons deemed to account for the change of magnetization of that rod. The orthodox theory has led to the notion that a point charge can set up magnetic moments by spinning but it takes a specific and somewhat abstract mathematical treatment to give basis to such a proposition. One would not normally be able to make sense of a statement that a point can spin. However, this could be an erroneous interpretation, in which case we see scope for using the cyclotron theory to explain the ELF-resonant ionic reactions in, for example, the human blood stream. In a strange way, therefore, the mysteries of the health hazards of ELF radiation might be connected with the mysteries of the ferromagnetic or gyromagnetic state. The anomalies may well have a common solution on the lines indicated above. REFERENCES: [1] T.E. Valone, 'Electromagnetic Fields and Life Processes', Paper presented at the MFPG Symposium on Technological Innovation at the National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD.,USA an 15th September 1987. [21 A. R. Liboff, T. Williams, D,X. Strong and R. Vistar, 'Time-Varying Magnetic Fields: Effect an DNA Synthesis', Science, M, 818 (1984). [31 W. 0. Schumann, 'On the Radiation Free Self Oscillations of the System Earth-Air Ionosphere', Z. Naturforsch., 72, 250 (1952). [4] H. Aspden, 'Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism', Spec. Sc. Tech.,1, 281 (1978).
ES10PAGE32
NOTE ON SCHUMANN RESONANCE

H. Aspden The Schumann resonance ELF hazard discussed in the previous section does not apply to problems connected with electric blankets or proximity with overhead electric power lines. It is an action which occurs wherever one is positioned on Earth, because it derives its power from oscillations in the ionospheric cavity enveloping the whole of body Earth. It is in the category of the ever present cosmic radiation which, to some extent, must contribute to our limited life expectancy. It is therefore a natural hazard, rather than one which man has created by design of electrical appliances or distribution systems. However, we must recognize that the hazard effect from this Schumann resonance relative to that of electric blankets or overhead power lines is small, bearing in mind that it provides the statistical background or data norm on which the hazard risks of electric blankets and power lines are measured and found to be excessive. While one could think in terms of neutralizing the Earth's magnetic field and any extraneous D.C. field in our homes and workplaces, that is a formidable proposition which lies outside the bounds of practicality. However, we can, as has been shown earlier in this report, take simple precautionary measures to overcome the blanket problem. Concerning, the effect of overhead power lines, this is a topic already discussed on pp. 22-26. [Added Note: More will be said about Schumann resonance on pp. 35-37 (Appendix I). It is suggested that in the upper atmosphere in the region of the ozone layer, where oxygen molecules are ionized, there could be cyclotron resonance activity developing effects which are superimposed upon the basic Schumann resonance phenomenon.]
ES10PAGE32
DEBATABLE ASPECTS OF CYCLOTRON RESONANCE IN IONIZED LIQUIDS

H. ASPDEN Although there is a developing belief that cyclotron resonance of ions in body fluids plays an important role in biological systems, and this is claimed to have experimental support, certain other experiments aimed expressly at detecting such resonance are reported to give a null indication. Thus Durney et al [1] attempted to measure the effects of resonant magnetic fields on transport of ions across simulated cell membranes. They used an electrolyte containing either calcium, potassium or sodium ions and varied the field strengths at 100 Hz or lower. They measured membrane capacitance and electrical conductance only to conclude that, as these did not vary by as much as 1%, there was no evidence of any resonance. One must, therefore, ask the question as to why the cyclotron action is presumed to be evidenced by discernable electrical displacement. One should not assume that the resonance process is the same as that of free electrons in solid conductors. In this latter case the positive ions are not free to move as they are in a liquid. In so far as the cyclotron action stimulates cell growth or cell damage in biological systems this can presumably be attributable to the concentration of thermal energy into the ions as opposed to the neutral molecules in solution. In a sense, since there are positive and negative ions which must neutralize one another macroscopically, there can be no significant electrical displacement, but that does not mean that there is no enhanced activity by the ionized components of the system. The effects could be those we associate with temperature, as if some molecules are at a much higher temperature than the mean value applicable to the body as a whole. Of course, a critic will argue that the ions will collide and the heat become dispersed by being shared according to conventional thermodynamic principles and statistics. However, here one must remember that the cyclotron action involves ordering of motion so that collisions are less likely and, furthermore, there is a case for saying that the usual three degrees of freedom applicable to thermal interaction is reduced to two. If that were so then in the ultimate situation, and without adding any heat energy, the effective temperature could rise dramatically by tens of degrees. We need then to be mindful of the possibility that temperature anomalies can present themselves where ionized aqueous solutions are tested under conditions conducive to resonance. This author has suggested [2] that resonance can involve a band of frequencies, including 50 Hz and 60 Hz, for mixed ion mass conditions such as must always apply because the positive ions are always matched to negative ions and their masses are always different. This, in itself, will make detection of a resonance peak virtually impossible. Looking then for temperature anomalies one could even suspect that weak environmental fields at the laboratory power frequency could excite some very curious effects in water which contains an ionizing agent.
ES10PAGE32
The cold fusion scenario comes to mind here, but one needs also to take note of research on force anomalies discovered by various researchers. Zinsser, for example, using a signal generator of special design [3], found that pressure across the plates of a capacitor having water as a dielectric decayed very slowly when the system was switched off after being primed to resonance by an oscillatory field. The purpose of this note is to warn against genuine research endeavour becoming polarized by null findings which merely disprove a particular hypothesis. In the cold fusion world, the orthodox nuclear physicist cannot abide the thought that there can be atomic fusion without neutron emission. Since no neutrons are found, the cold fusion discovery is discredited. In the case of cyclotron resonance in ionized liquids, we must not presume that this can be sensed by direct electric fields effects. What matters in cold fusion research is whether there is a true excess of thermal action and what matters in the weak field hazard research is whether there is enhanced action that can damage our body cells. Theory can also get in the way of the truth. A critic of the cyclotron resonance theme could say that the radii of the ion orbits would need to exceed by far the mean free path of the ions, pointing out then that collisions must occur because positive ions orbit one way and negative ions orbit in the opposite sense. This brings us to a debatable issue. It could be the ordering of the collective motion of the opposite polarity ions that puts their motion about the magnetic field axis in different planes orthogonal to that axis and in an alternating sequence along that axis. As to the orbital radius involved, that can simply apply to the small arcs traversed by the ion motion between collisions. Whatever the reason, our theory must adapt to the truths of experiment pertaining, not to ion acceleration in a cyclotron as such, but to the activity in an ionized liquid in reacting to a magnetic field. If accepted theory is given a God-like reverence and applied to overrule what we might propose then we cannot progress in our research. We must therefore begin to take more interest in how resonant cyclotron effects in ionized liquids can be sensed, possibly in terms of such resonance being used as a catalyst in aiding chemical reactions. Much may depend upon the containing cell and particularly its cross section in relation to the cyclotron ion notion. One may also wonder if this research can be extended to the broader technological fields, where anomalous energy-related actions supposedly occur in aqueous solutions. This author finds it very difficult to credit the claims of those who try to run car engines on water by using engine power to generate electricity, in turn used to excite resonance by which water molecules are dissociated to yield hydrogen and oxygen to then power the engine by combustion. However, it would be foolish to ignore such claims completely merely on academic principle. After all, someone might well find that there are creative forces in our body chemistry by which the chaotic field energy of our body heat and the environment can produce that dissociation which precedes combination to grow new cell structure.
ES10PAGE32
References [1] C. H. Durney, A. A. Anderson, A. A. Peterson & J. Janata, 'Cyclotron Resonance and the Effect of Low-Level AC-DC Magnetic Fields on Electrical Impedance and Ion Transfer in Bilayer Phospholipid Membranes', Paper in Session A-16 of BEMS Tenth Annual Meeting, Stamford, Connecticut (June 1923, 1988). [2] H. Aspden 'Power Lines, Cancer and Cyclotron Resonance', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 774-775, September 1991. [3] R. Zinsser, U.S. Patent No. 4,085,384.
ES10PAGE35
APPENDIX I
The following Research Note dated March 31st 1997 was published in the author's Web pages on Internet. BRAINWAVES AND ALPHA RHYTHM Schumann Resonance Did you know that there are electric field effects in the atmosphere that affect your brain? We need to solve the mystery of why it is that your alpha rhythm, as measured by detectors sensitive to brainwaves, has a frequency equal to that detected by the study of weak electric field oscillations in the atmosphere. The frequency is 7.8 Hz, about one sixth or one seventh of the frequency of electricity supplied to your home. It was Tesla who first discovered those atmospheric oscillations. He even embarked on research to exploit the phenomenon, aiming to transmit power to homes everywhere around the world by low frequency 'radiowaves'. That was deemed to be a venture that could put power companies out of business. How would they be able to charge for the service? So now we have to concentrate instead on the power of our own brainwaves to progress in the world of `free energy'. It was Schumann's research reports which gave formal scientific recognition of this physical phenomenon of our atmosphere and so it has the name 'Schumann Resonance'. When I first heard about this from Tom Valone at a conference I attended in Canada in 1988 I was mildly interested. I was there to air my views on how one might be able to generate power using magnetism as a catalyst in tapping aether energy. I was told not to use the expression 'free energy' in the title of my talk as that might destroy my credibility! So I was a little restrained in my pursuit of the technological implications of my `brain child' and atmospheric resonance effects were not uppermost on my mind - or so I thought! What I did learn was that the Schumann resonance was deemed to be a phenomenon occurring as electromagnetic waves travelled around the Earth in the concentric spherical cavity between the Earth's surface and the ionosphere. If one takes the circumference of Earth and compares it with the speed of light then one finds that electromagnetic waves travelling around body Earth would set up a kind of standing wave resonance effect at 7.8 Hz. This is the alpha rhythm frequency. So we, meaning our brains, may be phase-locked in some way with body Earth and its atmosphere. The expression `phaselocked' means that everything in this merry electrical dance is in step and moves at the same frequency. Aspden Resonance Dare I now put my name on another interpretation of this resonance phenomenon? I leave it to you to judge. Firstly, as background I note that in 1988 my interest in aether theory led to contacts between me
ES10PAGE35
and Dr. P. E. Rowe of Mashpee, Massachussetts, USA . I had a theory which explained how protons were created from the aether. Dr. Rowe had experimental evidence that protons were created inside his electrical discharge tubes which he operated at 50,000 volts and he too believed the aether was the source. It seemed to me that he had found a way of focusing the work done by the aether in creating matter so that, in a sense, he was harnessing the power of Creation! I saw in this also the danger of effects on our bodies if we were near enough to electric power lines to be in the 'proton creation zone', but far enough away not to be electrocuted. I then wrote the 1988 paper 'The Proton Factor and Its Unknown Effects' here reproduced in Appendix IV. I had forgotten 'Schumann Resonance' because my mind was on my own theory and protons, deuterons, neutrons etc. There was not much I could do anyway, even though I was aware that if protons could be created inside my body in existing atomic nuclei I might suffer some consequences. I wondered about DNA and whether its chemistry took account of isotopes. It may have been A. A. Berezin, an academic researcher in Canada, who pointed out that there were more people in the world than possible DNA combinatons of atoms in the DNA molecule but yet we were all different. The implication I saw in this was that there could be different isotopic combinations in the DNA structure. Maybe the odd deuteron replacing the proton in the hydrogen atom in DNA can make a difference! If so, then the odd proton causing a transmutation to a deuteron could make the odd DNA molecule a misfit in our composition. Would that promote cancer? I do not know but I do know that someone somewhere should be researching that possibility. I may have done no more on this theme if it had not come to my attention that an electric blanket manufacturing company had sought certain assurances from staff members of the Electrical Engineering Department at my local University. They wanted to be assured that the electrical and magnetic fields produced by their blankets were so weak as to be non-harmful to health. I was a Visiting Research Fellow in that Department pursuing my own research on energy from a technological viewpoint, but I was not consulted on that question, nor was there any reason for such consultation. Measuring those electric and magnetic fields is quite straightforward, given the necessary test equipment. In my opinion, thinking about the matter privately, it was not sufficient just to measure the strength of those weak fields and assume that they could do no harm. If the medical world said there was evidence of a problem, then there was a problem! Now an electric blanket and an overhead power line have something in common. Unlike the cables which come into your home and in which the forward current carrying wire is wrapped around the return current carrying wire, the overhead power line and the electric blanket have these wires well spaced. In one case it is to reduce the risk of bad contacts causing hot spots and so a fire hazard. In the other case it is because the voltages are so high that the wires need to be well spaced to preclude arcing. The point neverthess is that, if wires are well spaced, they do set up stray pulsating electromagnetic fields at the power frequency. They may be too weak to matter in normal physical terms but they may be too strong to be tolerated in biophysical terms! The reason for this is 'resonance'. Now, I like to think that I am not stupid. I also have an aptitude for understanding something new, otherwise I could hardly have spent my working life in the world of
ES10PAGE35
invention. As a corporate patent attorney in the high technology world of electronics and power engineering one needs to be able to grasp what is new and find a rational way of describing it in terms meaningful to a patent examiner. So, the obvious question, if resonance is involved, is why electric blankets and overhead powerlines have harmful effects in U.K. and in USA, where the electric power frequencies are 50Hz and 60Hz respectively. To answer this I asked myself what was different about the human body versus action in a metallic conductor when it came to reaction to a low frequency alternating magnetic field. Now, although I was experienced in patent attorney work, I happen to have a Ph.D. for experimental research on the energy anomalies involved when metal reacts to such fields. I was aware of a kind of resonance in copper or iron when subjected to a magnetic field, what is termed a diamagnetic reaction, which occurs even in a steady d.c. field. In copper or iron there are free electrons moving about and setting up that reaction. In our bodies, in our blood, there are instead relatively-very heavy ions that set up that reaction. If there are two types of reacting ion present then, within a limited range, one can screen the field of the other to the extent needed to adjust the effective field to the optimum resonance of one or other of the ion masses. I knew this could explain the 50Hz-60Hz resonance question. The expression 'Aspden Resonance' refers to my suggestion that the field oscillations in the Earth's atmospheric cavity, as bounded by the ionosphere, are encouraged by cyclotron resonance involving ionized oxygen or ozone. Now, I say cyclotron resonance here, but I must qualify that statement. In physics there are two Larmor formulae. The first, which is called the 'Larmor formula', is the one applied to the cyclotron. It applies to the effect of fields which pump energy into the ion motion. The second formula, that termed the 'Larmor precession', applies to an action in which the motion in orbit is perturbed, with the result that the plane of the orbit alters the direction of the axis about which the ion moves. This sets up a radiated field disturbance at the precession frequency, which is half that of the cyclotron resonance frequency given by the 'Larmor formula'. Now, owing to the Earth's magnetic field, the 'Larmor precession' frequency of the ionized oxygen molecule, which comprises two oxygen atoms, would be about three times that attributed to the basic Schumann resonance. Also the ionized ozone molecule, which comprises three oxygen atoms would imply a precession frequency that is about twice the frequency of the basic Schumann resonance. In short, therefore, there would be harmonics of the basic cavity resonance set up and the relative strengths of the components observed in the harmonic spectrum of radiation should tell us whether this interpretation is viable. To take this further I need to deflect your attention along different routes according to choice. You may choose to follow my account of the basic cyclotron resonance theme, which may hold the secrets of the hazards we risk from using electric blankets or living too close to overhead power lines. Alternatively, you may be more interested in the question of those brainwaves and the Schumann resonance and Aspden resonance topics. The latter has a special interest from the viewpoint of my aether theory. A feature of my theory is that there is a phase-lock throughout domains in space set by the range of gravity force. The phase-lock merely implies that electric charges are all moving in a common rhythm, keeping their separation constant and so not exchanging energy. I predicted long ago that this was an ongoing
ES10PAGE35
state in the aether. As can be seen also from the pattern of electron field cavity resonance illustrated on page 51 of my 1996 book 'Aether Science Papers', the phase-lock action is at work in containing the electron's energy in a way which explains what is known as the anomalous g-factor of the electron. Therefore the Schumann resonance theme, which involves a phase-lock having a much smaller frequency than that of the aether or the electron, has a special significance in defining an enclosing boundary, not just for a weak form of radiation, but also for the aether system which is carried along by body Earth. Already, in the bulk of this Report we have concentrated on the basic cyclotron resonance theme, which is about the hazard risks that can be avoided. The other theme linked to the Schumann resonance will be discussed further in the following pages in Appendix III. *****
ES10PAGE40
APPENDIX II The following Research Note dated January 22nd, 1997 was published in the author's Web pages on Internet.
POWER LINES AND HEALTH

The above is the title of an article in the November 1996 issue of Physics World. Its authors are John Swanson, David Renfrew and Nigel Wilkinson, who belong to the Technology and Science Division of the National Grid Company in U.K. They conclude that, though it would be arrogant and rash of physicists to argue that, because we have not yet been able to think of a possible physical mechanism, it is impossible for there to be an effect.. however, the absence of a mechanism and reproducible laboratory results inevitably means .. scepticism'. I note that in their article they say that various resonant mechanisms involving the Earth's static (magnetic) field have been proposed, for example ion cyclotron resonance of the calcium ion. Of this they declare that such cyclotron resonance cannot actually occur in a cell as the orbit of the ion would have to be more than 1 metre (in radius). This shows that they have not understood the physics of cyclotron resonance as applied to ionised liquids. To pump energy from a pulsating electric field into a system of ions moving in a magnetic field the only governing condition is that the pulsating frequency is in or near to resonance with the natural frequency of the ion in orbit in that field. The cyclotron as used in high energy particle physics pumps energy into an ion by increasing its speed and so it orbital radius. If we are not seeking to put that energy exclusively into an ion output stream, it matters not if there are collisions limiting the mean free path to sub-micron-sized dimensions. There is still energy transfer from that field to the ion system. To understand this it may be that a mathematician will be required to supplement the "skills of physicists alongside those of biologists, epidemiologists and engineers" (quoted as the last words in the referenced article). You see, if there were no magnetic field, the ions in collision in the fluids in our body cells would merely move in straight lines between those collisions. A straight line is a curve of infinite radius! If, however, a magnetic field is present, then that same rectilinear motion would apply if the system of ions in motion could be viewed from a reference frame rotating about the magnetic field axis at the cyclotron frequency. Each and every positive ion would share a motion as if the whole of the fluid in the cell were rotating at the same angular velocity. Collisions would not cause a clockwise moving ion to take up anti-clockwise motion. It follows therefore that the superimposition of a 50Hz or 60Hz pulsating electric field attributable to an overhead power line will act selectively in pumping energy into those ions moving with the field. The ions on one side of a cell will gain in speed in their cyclotron orbit (or rather, minute arcs of such an orbit), whereas those on the opposite side of the cell will reduce in speed. However, owing to the
ES10PAGE40
rotation, if there is a match between the cyclotron frequency and the frequency of the pulsating field, the ions on one side of the system which gain energy will have moved around to the other side as the field reverses direction and so will continue to gain energy. This is an escalating effect in which the ions gaining in speed acquire more energy than is lost by those losing speed. Overall, there has to be energy transfer and a net heating effect concentrated by the cyclotron resonance process. Note further that, if a mathematician amongst those ions were to run around in circles, speeding up on one side of the orbit and slowing down on the other side, but yet keeping a steady angular velocity about a central point, his mean position would have to be displaced in the plane of motion owing to that constraint of a fixed angular velocity. Cyclotron resonance ensures that the angular motion has a constant rate, notwithstanding any changes in kinetic energy. Angular momentum of ions is not conserved in a cyclotron situation, because as the ions are accelerated to faster speeds they spiral outwards. Now, there is research in new energy physics which points to anomalous energy inflow from the field environment if electric charge can be held displaced in stable concentrations inside an electrically conductive medium. This is found in systems involving rotating magnets and in plasma discharge devices. There is clearly a scientific mechanism by which one can predict the setting up of electric fields in human body cells primed by the pumping of energy by cyclotron action. For my part I have, some years ago, addressed the more difficult question of why there can be similarly-harmful cyclotron resonance in U.K. and U.S.A. where the power frequencies are 50Hz and 60Hz, respectively. Explaining that is the primary question, but there is an explanation based on the dual presence of positive and negative ions of different molecular masses. Understanding how the cyclotron frequency adapts over a limited frequency range in such circumstances raises fascinating questions of basic importance, but directly connected with the gyromagnetic reaction phenomenon found in ferromagnetic substances. I shall be writing more on this subject in due course, but I emphasize here that the authors of the above Physics World article have not understood the cyclotron mechanism as it can apply to human body cells and they must rethink their views on the way in which weak electric fields from power lines can interact with a weak geomagnetic field to pump energy into the resonant ions in our body fluids. *********
ES10PAGE40
The following Research Note dated March 31st 1997 was published in the author's Web pages on Internet.
APPENDIX III
IONOSPHERIC RADIATION
It was in August, 1996 that I received a communication from A. G. Callegari of Dane Bridge Nursery, Much Hadham, Herts SG10 6JG, England. It was dated August 2nd and concerned his experimental findings on the measurement of 'Schumann Resonance'. What he had to say led me to look up the comments expressed by Tom Valone in his paper "Powerline EMF Radiation and Your Health" (Proceedings of United States Psychotronics Association Conference, 1990), my copy being a pamphlet version issued by Tom Valone from the Integrity Research Institute, 1377 K Street NW, Suite 204, Washington, DC 20005, USA. I began to make sense of a figure (Fig. 2 on p. 15 of that pamphlet) which gave a radiation intensity spectrum of the frequency pattern for the observed Schumann resonance. My concern was that the fundamental frequency component peaking at roughly 8 Hz was about 10 per cent weaker in strength than the second harmonic component which peaked at about 15 Hz, whilst the third harmonic at 20 Hz was about 85% of the strength of the fundamental component. The fourth and fifth harmonics seemed to be at 26 Hz (55% strength) and 33 Hz (30% strength). Now, this simply should not be, unless there is some factor at work other than the action setting up the fundamental oscillation. The Callegari communication indicated that he was using a frequency counter model WFC 308 made by Wisher in Taiwan. It specified that no antenna was used, by which I inferred that there was no resonant circuit which could distort the frequency spectrum of the signal to be analyzed. It then stated: "Frequencies in the range 7.06 to 8.45 Hz have been measured continuously at this site since January 1993, except in February 1996, when values increased suddenly to a temporary range (13.4 to 14.25 Hz) which lasted for about half a minute before falling back to the saturating value. Relaxation from that
ES10PAGE40
value appears to be semi-asymptotic of the order of 15 minutes. Analysis of existing data shows strong correlations with Schumann resonance, atmospheric and Telluric temperature changes and discontinuities, brain-wave frequency band limits (theta to alpha and alpha to beta), .... " The letter then added the comments: "I've just acquired a second WISHER 308 counter in which frequencies have displayed mostly (90%) in the range 15.5 to 16 Hz, with occasional jumps (10%) up to about 17 to 19 Hz - rarely below 15.45 or above 19.5 Hz." This suggested to me that with the newer equipment he was getting a more reliable measure of the stronger signals in this low frequency range, possibly supporting the indication in Tom Valone's paper that the second harmonic of the Schumann resonance was stronger than the fundamental component. I wrote to him, expressing my thought that the oxygen and ozone in the ionosphere might be a radiating source supplementing the basic Schumann resonance, thinking also that variation in concentration of a different mix of O(18) and O(16) isotopes might account for the anomalous frequency shift. At the time, it was on my mind that the London newspaper, The Times, had in their August 8th issue just declared that life had been discovered on Mars, the evidence being a fossil-containing fragment which came from that planet and contained the heavier form of oxygen, O(18). Then, by letter dated August 26th, Callegari reported his investigations on his new equipment used in a test run between 4.00 pm and 4.11 pm on that same day. He had a reading every 2.56 seconds and the measurements showed little variation about a mean of 15.79 Hz. Now, based on the Larmor precession formula, w = Hq/m, the angular frequency resulting from motion of an ion in a magnetic field H of strength 0.5 gauss (the Earth's magnetic field), would correspond to 768/N rev/s, where q is the unitary electromagnetic charge of an ion and m is the mass of the ion, which mass is also N atomic mass units. N is 16 for an isolated oxygen atom, and 48 for ionized ozone. Since 768/48 is 16, this tells us that ozone in the ionosphere could be a source of electromagnetic radiation at 16 Hz. Now this is virtually that second harmonic frequency, bearing in mind that the 0.5 gauss Earth's magnetic field strength is only a close approximation. However, there is the very clear message here that this could explain why there is a dominant second harmonic in the radiation intensity spectrum associated with the Schumann resonance. Going even further, we can look at the oxygen molecule in its ionized condition in the ionosphere and expect that to produce radiation at the frequency 768/N Hz, where N is 32. This would indicate radiation at 24 Hz. This would be the third harmonic frequency associated with the Schumann resonance. A strong fourth harmonic could then arise as a second harmonic of the ozone radiation, but a fifth harmonic of the Schumann resonance is not so easy to explain. I do, however, feel that I have made out a good case for asserting that the ionosphere, besides providing a cavity for setting up the Schumann resonance, has another way of generating ELF radiation. If tests were
ES10PAGE40
made in polar regions where the ozone layer is absent, then that second harmonic associated with the Schumann resonance should fall off in strength. That would confirm this theory. In conclusion, identifying this new interpretation of the anomalous strength of that second harmonic by the name 'Aspden resonance', I express the opinion that neither the Schumann resonance nor the 'Aspden resonance' warrant concern from the hazard risk point of view. Unlike cyclotron resonance in our body cells attributable to overhead power lines and electric blankets, there is really nothing we can do in any event by way of a preventive measure. ******** The reason this Research Note is dated 31st March 1997, bearing in mind that what has been presented dates from August 1996, is the deferment of its preparation to the time when this Energy Science Report No. 10 is ready for publication.
ES10PAGE42
APPENDIX IV
The following paper was published in The Toth-Maatian Review at pp. 3725-3734, vol. 7 (1988)
THE PROTON FACTOR AND ITS UNKNOWN EFFECTS

H. ASPDEN Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southampton, Southampton, England. ABSTRACT: By speculating on a theme related to the proton, the mysterious appearance of hydrogen gas in high voltage electric discharges and the proton structure of atomic nuclei, it is shown that we have reason to doubt the way in which experts portray atomic nuclear structure. There are uncertainties as to how protons can migrate through solid matter and how they can suddenly appear in a discharge environment and possibly disappear from nearby substance to keep a balance. These uncertainties can cloud our knowledge of how our body cells might be affected in physical environments in which this proton factor is of concern, and particularly the danger to health should one live in close proximity to overhead high voltage electric power lines. INTRODUCTION: There is a developing concern that people living very close to high voltage overhead power lines can suffer from medical problems related to those specific environmental conditions. This has been the subject of research that does give reason to believe that there are health hazards associated with the near presence of such power lines. The general assumption is that the problems arise from the effect of the magnetic fields that penetrate into the dwellings closely adjacent to these high current sources. However, though there is some evidence that magnetic fields, and particularly weak or low frequency magnetic fields do have some effects on our body chemistry, the general expert opinion is that such fields are not harmful. Furthermore, those who work near powerful electrical power generators or in electro-chemical plants should be equally subject to hazards associated with magnetic field effects. The difficulty with any investigation on this subject is that it involves several professional disciplines and this makes any objective research dependent upon an interaction between several scientists of very
ES10PAGE42
different skills and training. It takes an exceptional person in any one such field to make any progress in dealing with an unknown phenomenon and the chances of bringing the right people together in the several fields involved are very small. One needs the knowledge of the electrical power engineer, the physical chemist specialist in electrical effects on matter, the relevant medical experts and, perhaps surprisingly, the nuclear or atomic physicist familiar with isotope transitions. It is the latter proposition that is the basis of this paper, because whilst we think that the magnetic fields account for the hazards of living in proximity to an electric power line, it might well be that there are certain atomic transitions some of which are induced in the atmosphere if not directly in our body cells, so affecting the air we breath and, indirectly, our health. A general comment that is often made is that the weak magnetic fields set up at tens of metres from an overhead power line can be little different from those arising from power equipment in the home, including fluorescent lamps, and that any electromagnetic radiation effects can hardly be different in intensity from those set up by television tubes. Indeed, they may be little different from the strength of the Earth's magnetic field and there is no escape from that, however far we might live from an overhead power line. This magnetic field consideration does not apply, however, to the chemical effects, such as the action of the corona discharge which occurs continuously around the power line. One well-known effect of this is to convert atmospheric oxygen into ozone in the open air. The gases in a fluorescent lamp and a television set are contained within sealed tubes so even if they are affected by a discharge of current they will nevertheless be contained and so cannot be harmful. However, in making this comparison it should be kept in mind that the voltages employed in such domestic appliances are far below those of the primary transmission lines used by the electrical power industry. However, the task of investigating the effects of ozone is not seen as a primary problem warranting our attention in this paper. What we wish to discuss is a more `way-out' possibility that stretches our insight into physics to the limit or, as some might say, beyond the limit and into the realm of pseudo-science. Where health considerations are concerned we cannot afford to confine our minds to what, in science, is practical and proven. We know all too little about what it is that causes our bodies to deteriorate with age and if pseudo-science can give us a tentative insight into àetherial' processes that can have a physical effect on our body cells, then such research can be of value. The thoughts outlined in this paper are based upon some disconnected observations that might come together to offer us a totally new insight into a more basic cause for the medical upsets that stem from the proximity of the electric power line. It is stressed that what is proposed is speculation and that the views are aired here only so that those who make decisions as to what research should be funded can decide whether to include this subject in their list of options. The general reader can, of course, make his or her own judgement as to whether any such research can possibly be conclusive if it does not extend into the field to be described below.
ES10PAGE42
THE BASIC PROPOSITION The activity in an electrical discharge that is powered by some 50,000 volts has been found to lead to the mysterious appearance of what seems to be hydrogen having no clearly determined source. This is an experimental observation in the laboratory and those researching this subject have tended to the view that the hydrogen comes from hydride compositions formed by the metal substances that comprise the electrodes associated with the discharge. There are, nevertheless, problems with this interpretation, problems which have led one experimental investigator Dr. Paul E. Rowe [1] in U.S.A. to urge that the vacuum is itself a source of the protons which, together with electrons can account for the anomalous appearance of hydrogen. It needs little imagination then to ask how it can possibly be that a proton, which has an intrinsic energy that we know from the formula E = Mc2 to be equivalent to the power of one electron accelerated through 938 million volts, can be created by the action of a 50,000 volt discharge. One answer to this could be that the proton is not created in isolation. Just as electrons can tunnel through potential barriers which, in theory, they should not cross, so it may be that the proton can be transposed in some way from a position A to a position B by an influence far weaker than that needed to match the rest-mass energy. Protons, like electrons, if left alone have no measured lifetime. They seem to live forever and yet electrons paired up with positrons can be annihilated and recreated in the vacuum field. Whether such a process is involved in the barrier tunnelling is a matter of speculation but the fact is that electrons can 'tunnel' mysteriously through barriers that should keep them contained. Therefore, given that it is an experimental fact that hydrogen does appear, as it were, from nowhere, it does not seem at all outrageous to suggest that a proton can appear at B accompanied by the demise of a proton at A. Whether the aether is the source of that proton at A is debatable, but if it is not the aether then the source must be the nucleus of an atom of matter in the near vicinity. Therefore, thinking of that medical problem, if a proton can appear mysteriously in the corona discharge close to an electric power line, a proton in matter, possibly in human cells nearby will disappear. An atomic transmutation, an isotopic transition, may well initiate activity in that human cell that could initiate cancer, but this is where one needs that specialist knowledge. What do we know of the effects of substituting isotopes of the same atom in a living cell? Research on this must have been performed but this author, being more a specialist on electromagnetic actions in the context of physics or engineering has no knowledge of any research literature in this field. In particular, research must have been performed on the effects of consuming heavy water, meaning water in which the hydrogen atoms have atomic nuclei that are constituted by deuterium rather than the proton. As far as the author is aware it has been suggested by Berezin [2] that different isotopic combinations in a DNA molecule are essential to give basis for our human differences since the number of such possible combinations is vast, whereas the basic molecular chemical composition of DNA does not offer a sufficient variety of human forms. This suggestion comes from an electrical expert rather than a biochemist or medical specialist and so it must be viewed as mere speculation. However, if the generation of
ES10PAGE42
DNA involves the replication of the exact isotopic combination in each of our bodies, then any isotopic transmutation that occurs in a spurious way, as by an atom shedding some of its mass to become a different isotope, must initiate a mismatch that could signal trouble medically. The point of the above discourse is merely to show that a research theme pursued by Rowe, which involves an interest in a fundamental chemical problem, may have relevance to the medical concerns that arise from living close to an electric power line. Yet, no amount of research on the adverse effects of a magnetic field on our bodies can possibly lead to the proton transmutation that has just been suggested. Hence, if there is anything in this proposition, such research effort will be looking in the wrong direction and will not resolve the problem. THE UBIQUITOUS NEUTRON We will next digress into the field of the atomic nucleus to ask whether we really know enough about the composition and structure of such a nucleus to pass judgement on the thoughts expressed above. The idea that a free proton can appear suddenly in an electric arc as an event corresponding to the demise of a bound proton elsewhere is likely to attract scorn from a nuclear physicist. There is the question of the binding energy involved in such a transmutation and such energy is not by any means minute. It certainly involves energy quanta that we associate with powerful gamma radiation, that is, energy far in excess of that of X-rays. The nuclear physicist would ask how enough energy is fed to the atom in a human being to cause it to release the proton, especially if the only source of energy we are considering is the electric voltage of a power line several metres away from the affected atom. Now, we must respect the knowledge of the nuclear experts, bearing in mind that they have successfully harnessed the nuclear energy of the atom in their atomic reactors and they have had at their disposal some very powerful tools for probing atomic structure. However, there is something very simplistic in the way the nuclear physicist looks at an atomic nucleus and the non-specialist in these matters should find it interesting to take what could be a rather cynical look at their picture of the atom. Firstly, the atomic nucleus has an electric charge that comes in units of the positron charge, the positron being like an electron but positively charged instead of negatively charged. Secondly, the atomic nucleus has a mass which indicates that it is assembled from a number of `nucleons' that are roughly of mass equal to that of the proton. The proton is, in fact, the nucleus of the most prevalent isotope of hydrogen. Thirdly, the radioactivity of some heavy atoms involve powerful emissions which can induce an artificial radioactivity in other atoms and lead to the appearance of a neutron. This is a very penetrating particle, just a little more massive than the proton. It has a limited mean lifetime of 898 seconds and no electric charge. It is a particle that can have lethal effects and it is, of course, the catalyst that jumps from one atom to another and stimulates fission in atomic reactors.
ES10PAGE42
Now, given the above facts, is it not surprising that our nuclear physicists were satisfied by a very simple algebraic calculation which said that if an atomic nucleus has Z units of charge and A units of nucleon mass, it must comprise Z protons plus (A-Z) neutrons? Why should we suppose that all matter and, indeed, our very body substance is full of those lethal neutrons that somehow only live for 898 seconds when they escape, but yet, for some reason that no one bothers to explain, are happily enjoying a much longer lifespan as part of our personal atomic substance. One would think that we should be exuding tremendous amounts of radiation if we were so full of neutrons. We should be intensely radioactive. Moreover, would one not think that, if neutrons have a dominant presence in atomic nuclei, the atomic elements that are naturally radioactive would emit neutrons, rather than the alpha particles. Alpha particles are, in effect, the nuclei of a helium isotope? Dare we venture to suggest that there are no neutrons in the atomic nucleus of any atom? Let us say, instead, that the neutron is a particular excited form of the antiproton (a proton that has a negative charge) that has an electron-positron entourage that includes a surplus positron to assure overall electrical neutrality. Such a neutron only exists outside the atomic nucleus because it comes into being as an antiproton in the nucleus is driven out. The reason we are discussing this is simply that we are striving to understand how our body cells can suffer transmutations at the level of the atomic isotope. The word isotope merely signifies the forms of different atomic nuclei that have the same charge (Z value) but different masses (A values). If we have to talk about neutron exchange to discuss isotopic transformation then we are not speaking from the same energy criteria that apply if we really should be speaking about proton or antiproton substitution. The proposition put here in this paper is that there are no neutrons in the atomic nucleus. This is the independent research theme that this author brings to this study for combination with the findings of Dr. Rowe. INSIDE THE NUCLEUS Physicists cannot be sure what there is inside an atomic nucleus. If they bombard it with other particles to see how these scatter then it takes some very powerful particles to detect anything and then they cannot be sure that the energy of those particles has not caused its own transmutations and made the atomic nucleus something different from its natural self. So let us just consider the options if we look for a different solution to that simple algebra mentioned above. Firstly, Z could be the measure of the number of positrons that have clustered together to form the core charge of the nucleus and there could be A neutrons in a surrounding cloud. The problem with this is that the basic hydrogen nucleus is not seen as a positron plus a neutron, but is in fact a proton. Hence the logic of building atoms from protons and adding some neutrons. Now let us try a second line of argument. This time we will take note of the theory that Dirac advanced
ES10PAGE42
according to which the vacuum itself contains sites occupied by charges that cancel one another. When an electron is removed from such a site, the `hole' that is left behind is a positron. So, we take out Z electrons to form a 'hole' of Z units of positive charge. The electrons go to form the atomic shells of electrons surrounding the nucleus. Then how do we account for the mass number A? Well, all we need to do is to substitute A antiprotons for the negative charges that occupy sites close to the centre of the nucleus. This may sound very speculative and it still does not quite fit our picture of the isolated proton when Z = 1 and A = 1, but it is a possibility. Note that in this latter case we avoid the presence of neutrons in the nucleus, but recognize that, if an antiproton escapes as an electron moves in to take over its site, the antiproton can jump into the site vacated by the electron and be seen to move through space in similar successive jumps, just as if it were an antiproton in company with a positron. This is similar to the form of neutron envisaged above. Still speculation? Well, let us take note of the fact that the neutron might be electrically neutral as judged by its electric field seen from a distance but it exhibits a magnetic moment in spin that implies that it has a negative charge. The model of the neutron advanced above has, in fact, been used as a basis for calculating the neutron mass, the neutron magnetic moment and the neutron lifetime [3]. All three of these quantities were found to be in full agreement with their measured values, even to the precision of the part per million measurements of the magnetic moment and mass. So there is an extremely good case for saying that the nuclear physicists have got it wrong. Instead, the atomic nucleus with Z greater than unity does comprise a halo of A antiprotons neutralized by occupancy of positive sites in the vacuum field. Given Z, what then determines A? Physicists have no answer to this on conventional theory. However, we have a simple argument that develops the link. In developing this argument it is preferable to regard the nuclear charge as a true charge cluster. Firstly, suppose that we have a single spherical shell of A antiprotons seated at a radius r around the central positive charge Ze, where e is the magnitude of the unit electron charge. The potential energy, according to Coulomb's law, is then -AZ(e)2/r for the antiproton-nuclear charge interaction and (Ae)2/2r for the interaction between the antiprotons. The sum of these energies is crucial to the stability of the atom. The positive energy term cannot exceed the negative term if the atom is to be stable. The reason is that an additional antiproton coming into the nucleus would sense the full attractive force of the Ze charge of the core acting along a radial line from the centre of the nucleus, but it would only sense a half effect from the 2Ze repulsive shell of distributed antiprotons. These act from side directions or from a further distance, so weakening their force action, but at the critical threshold even the weakened force can outweigh that of the central core and preclude increase of A. So far as the action between the antiprotons and the positive `holes' is concerned, this appears not to affect the stability of the nucleus. It is as if the àether' involved at such close quarters cannot set up or withstand the short range forces that are under consideration. In any event, there is an argument that the single shell of antiprotons can contain twice as many units as the central charge core. Should the atom have a large A value then the distribution will be more nearly uniform over a solid sphere of radius r. Then the first term becomes (3/2)(AZ)(e)2/r and the second term (3/5)(Ae)2/r.
ES10PAGE42
It can be seen from these considerations that the value of A must increase with Z over a range from A = 2Z to A = 2.5(Z), excluding Z = 1. Above this range the atom is unstable. Now, as anyone can see by inspecting the periodic table applicable to atoms, the argument just presented does hold true for actual atoms. Starting with the more abundant isotope of Helium, with Z = 2 and A = 4, we progress to Bismuth before encountering unstable atoms. Bismuth has a Z value of 83 and its abundant isotope has an A value of 209. This is just on the threshold of the 2.5 factor. This theory of the atomic structure is published elsewhere [4, 5], but it does serve to show that there is a very good case for saying that what appear to be antiprotons form a neutral cloud around a nuclear core charge by occupying positive `holes' in the vacuum field. To allay the criticisms of the nuclear physicist, it should be mentioned that there are two atomic elements in the mid range of the periodic table that do not exist naturally on Earth. Technetium (Z = 43) and promethium (Z = 61) are only identified by the fact that they are created by unnatural processes as byproducts of atomic fission reactions in atomic reactors. These two atoms are short-lived for reasons that actually verify the theory underlying the 'aether' physics advocated by the author, as explained elsewhere [6, 7]. Even so, their A/Z relationship strictly conforms with the theory just presented. It is just that technetium and promethium have an instability that has nothing whatsoever to do with the overloading of the nucleon number A in relation to Z. PROTONS IN THE BODY Our next problem, if we are to suppose that protons can be created by transfer from nuclei in our body cells is to explain how the antiproton can possibly become a proton. The answer to this is quite simple. Once the antiproton is free it really has captured a positron to become a neutron and we well know from experiment that a neutron decays into a proton and an electron. These are the ingredients which constitute the hydrogen atom. Apart from this, however, there is the clear possibility that a source of protons exists by the actual migration of protons or even antiprotons through the metallic conductors that form the electrodes or power lines setting up the arc discharges into which these particles penetrate. A free proton and a free antiproton would annihilate one another but we are not here concerned with a mix of matter of this kind. However, imagine that such annihilation could occur in some limited sense. That would constitute an energy source and set up a neutron field. It may even explain some of the incredible anomalies reported in powerful electric discharges studied with the object of measuring the electrodynamic force reactions involved. There is reported evidence that the forces on the heavy ions can be several thousand times greater than any expected from conventional electron interaction theory [8, 9 10]. There is definite evidence that protons gain more energy when involved with a powerful electron field than they should, by a factor of thousands of times [11]. Physicists are still researching this subject, but their interest lies in fusion reactors or the star war scenario of powerful railgun accelerators for launching missiles into space. Of
ES10PAGE42
particular relevance is the discovery that the most powerful anomalous forces can be developed by an electric discharge in water, this being a direct indication that the protons in the hydrogen constituent in water can become involved in the process [12]. Surely, there may be some effects triggered by such anomalous power amplification that can cause the 50,000 volt discharge of an overhead power line to induce the sporadic activation of protons to levels which could cause isotopic change in, say, the oxygen atoms in the ambient air or in the moisture of that air. If a free proton is created to produce, with an electron, a hydrogen atom and ultimately a molecule of hydrogen gas, the trade-off could be the demise of a nucleon from an oxygen atom, changing the oxygen17 or oxygen-18 isotope into oxygen-16. A similar alternative trade-off could involve a hydrogen-2 isotope in a water molecule converting to hydrogen-1 or, in a carbon dioxide molecule, carbon-13 converting to carbon-12 or nitrogen-15 converting to nitrogen-14. One could think that by breathing such specially activated air the human body could develop a contamination that would manifest itself in due course as the activated atoms reverted to their original state. However, this proposition must be ruled out because the lower-nucleon valued isotopes are by far the most prevalent and, in a sense, one could think that, in normalizing more atoms, this would work beneficially from a health viewpoint. THE PROTON CREATION THEORY However, yet another possibility emerges from the consideration that in space, whether we consider outer space, the space within our body or that close to an overhead power line, there could be certain activity of what is known as the zero-point field that actually is trying to create protons constantly everywhere. The zero-point field is a reality that features in what is known as stochastic electrodynamics. It is an energetic field that exists everywhere even at absolute zero temperature, 273 degrees centigrade below the freezing point of water. According to Dr. Harold E. Puthoff of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, Texas: "The amount of energy associated with this (usually unobserved) background is conservatively estimated to be of the order of nuclear energy densities or greater. ..... One example is a unique zero-point quantum force between closely spaced metal plates, known as the Casimir force, which results from unbalanced pressures in the zero-point energy due to the presence of the plates. .... Now yet another indication of the reality of this ubiquitous energy density has turned up, while at the same time resolving a long-standing mystery from the early development of quantum theory. (Puthoff here refers to his paper in Physical Review [13] which explains why electrons in atoms do not radiate their energy) ... The significance of this observation is the understanding that the very stability of matter itself depends upon, and verifies the presence of, an underlying sea of electromagnetic energy of almost inconceivable magnitude, a vast reservoir of random energy that is universally present throughout space." With this as the active situation today how can we believe that research on the harmful effects of electric power lines based on the orthodox teachings of electromagnetism, meaning an absence of energy when
ES10PAGE42
no detectable field is present, can possibly focus on the truths of the effects involved? Suppose that the proposition that the aether is trying to create protons everywhere all the time is true. A full theoretical basis as to why this should be so is given elsewhere [14, 15], but that need not concern this speculative enquiry. The reason that protons are not materializing all the time is simply that there is a limiting energy threshold that has been reached. The aether tries to create protons but any that are created in the zero-point energy field immediately decay. Their existence is very transient, but sufficient to account for the missing matter that cosmologists believe pervades the universe and sufficient to provide the attenuation of radiation that we associate with the Hubble redshift, the basis of the Big Bang theory [16]. Now suppose that we do provide that local stimulus that can momentarily upset the energy balance. Maybe we can create protons and this will lead to that mysterious appearance of hydrogen found by Dr. Rowe in the electric discharges. However, the zero-point energy balance of the vacuum field might reassert itself and cause the overall number of protons (or antiprotons) to be kept constant. Then there would be a proton decay in the near vicinity and possibly in the substance of the human body, especially if the hydrogen atom was the favoured source. Organic substances and water contain hydrogen and so protons with their full unbound rest-mass energy, corresponding to the energy involved in their creation. Again, a nuclear physicist will say that protons are stable and do not decay, but so he will tell you that electrons also are stable and do not decay. Yet electrons can vanish on one side of a potential barrier and reappear on the other and they can be annihilated with their antiparticle to yield 1.022 million electron volts of energy. So who is to say that a proton cannot behave in much the same way? The fact is that the number of protons in a vast tank full of a special organic chemical can reduce as neutrinos are intercepted, but the protons are upgraded to neutrons which decay back into protons. This does not mean that the protons cannot decay, especially if they can eventually reappear elsewhere inside or outside of that same tank or even appear ab initio by some zero-point energy fluctuation to be followed by a balancing decay. It is only if we make the right assumptions as to what phenomena occur during such events that our means of detection of decay are of any significance. THE WAY AHEAD It has to be conceded that as yet our scientific knowledge, especially on matters of fundamental importance, is incomplete. We have probably encountered all the obvious scientific phenomena by now and, in the main, have theories that are adequate for our practical needs. However, there are surely phenomena that have yet to be discovered and it may be that we are not looking for such discoveries because they do not fit what we regard as obvious patterns based on accepted theory. In these circumstances it is going to be very difficult to make further progress. We cannot, under any circumstances, afford to ignore the occasional and possibly accidental exposure of any unusual phenomenon. Nor should we be too complacent about what is regarded as established theory, bearing in mind that much of the theory evolved very rapidly as a matter of expediency before the fullest facts were assimilated. In particular, we must stand ready to change our theories. Experts on existing facts and
ES10PAGE42
theories are not authorities on what may be future more embracing theory based on new discoveries. How can we be sure that an atomic nucleus contains Z protons and (A-Z) neutrons, especially when we know that neutrons live for an average of 898 seconds and decay into electrons and protons? Why not say that there are A protons and (A-Z) electrons in an atomic nucleus, bearing in mind that this gives the atom the same overall condition? The author prefers the Z group positron core with A antiprotons occupying positive `holes' in the structured vacuum field surrounding the core, but the way ahead is to find the true answers. Also, and of more importance, is the basic question of determining whether those mysterious hydrogen atoms that Dr. Rowe has detected in electric discharges come from the vacuum medium or are fully accounted for by a flow through the metal circuit feeding the electricity. This is straightforward experimental work that needs funding to get at the truth. If Dr. Rowe is proved correct and the protons and accompanying electrons do come from the vacuum medium, the 'aether', then that will be an Earth-shattering discovery that would penetrate the complacency of our scientists in authority. They would respond to such a discovery, if it were fully verified, and we could expect to see progress on the subject of our discussion. If, on the other hand, the mysterious hydrogen source is traced to the flow of protons through the metal then we may still need to urge for that extra research. Firstly, we would need to establish whether the flow is a true flow similar to the migration of electrons through the metal conductor. If it were to be a chemical effect of hydride compositions merely exuding hydrogen then there is little basis for any hazardous condition such as we have contemplated. However, apart from what Dr. Rowe says, it does appear that there is some evidence that there is a true flow of proton-sized charge carriers. Tests by Winchester [17] show that hydrogen gas continues to be produced provided the voltage of the discharge is high enough and the damage to the cathode leaves sufficient cathode to act as an electrode. Winchester's research, therefore, leads us to suspect that there is a flow through the circuit rather than a mere surface effect of release of hydrogen from hydride compositions. Skinner [18] went further in his research. He confirmed the mysterious appearance of hydrogen and was led to state: "This experiment repeated at various times since and with different metals showed beyond doubt that the source of gas was solely in the cathode." This is an intriguing factor because, if we are thinking of positively charged protons being supplied as part of the current flow, these should come from the anode and not the cathode. Here, then, we have evidence that it is a flow of antiprotons that we are considering.
ES10PAGE42
Skinner then referred to further experiments of which he said: "Experiments described below indicate that in this case the anode absorbs at the same rate as the cathode evolves hydrogen." This was further confirmation of a flow that could be taken to involve antiprotons. Skinner's paper then proceeded to show experimentally that the quantity of hydrogen involved obeyed Faraday's law: "All metals show that the hydrogen is liberated for a time at a rate sufficient to carry, as negatively charged atoms, the whole current between cathode and gas." Yet, though this was Skinner's experimental conclusion, it is difficult to believe that the full-bodied hydrogen molecule has acquired an extra electron and is literally dragged through the metal circuit in preference to a simple flow of electrons. The antiproton is something else. It is very small in physical size and could well respond with a preferential conductivity in flowing through the interstices of the metal. The antiproton once within the arc discharge would suffer the anomalous energy transfer from the electron gas in the discharge, as already mentioned [11]. It could easily acquire sufficient energy in a 50,000 volt discharge to combine with a positron produced in company with an electron by the zeropoint field fluctuations and so form a neutron. The latter survives for an average of 898 seconds before decaying into a proton and an electron. The result is the production of hydrogen and there is still an electron surplus to carry the current to the anode. The energy released by neutron decay will revert to the zero-point field to keep things in balance, but the driving force has been that 50,000 volts. The neutron can travel quite a distance in that 898 seconds and can find its way into living cells. However, if produced in the open air close to the overhead power line it might decay by combination with nitrogen-14 to produce carbon-14 plus the proton. Carbon-14 has a half life of about 5600 years. It is known to be produced naturally in the atmosphere and has a general equilibrium. Besides this it has found its way into the carbon dioxide of all living plants. Hence the basis for radioactive carbon dating. That equilibrium arises presumably from the neutrons produced by cosmic radiation bombardment that spreads the effects in a weak concentration worldwide. So, is it unrealistic to suggest that there is a much more intense local creation of carbon-14 owing to the sustained excitation of an overhead power line? Is it unrealistic to suggest then that an excess of radioactive carbon-14 can build up in the bodies of people living close to those overhead power lines? Radioactivity can be harmful to one's health. Maybe if these people are carbon-dated they will be found to have aged prematurely? Maybe too much carbon-14 can distort the DNA cell composition in our bodies via an isotope effect as considered by Berezin [2]. This then is the scenario that we should be examining, especially if our scientists are confident that magnetic fields are not the culprits causing the anomalous health problems of those living in the near proximity to corona-discharging power lines.
ES10PAGE42
The author acknowledges the stimulus for what is reported in this paper provided by information supplied by Dr. Paul E. Rowe of 7l West Way, Mashpee, MA. 02649, USA. Dr. Rowe's opinions on the aether as the source of protons are based on his experiments, as yet unreported in published work, and in reaching this conclusion he is fully cognizant of the prior work of Winchester and Skinner. REFERENCES [1] P. E. Rowe, Private Communications including "Yes, Virginia, There is an Ether! Perhaps.", the latter including a section entitled "Evidence for Gas Production in a Vacuum" (to be published). [2] A. A. Berezin, Private Communication. [3] H. Aspden, 'The Theoretical Nature of the Deuteron and the Neutron', Hadronic Journal, vol. 9, pp. 129-136 (1986). [4] H. Aspden, 'Modern Aether Science', (Sabberton, P.O. Box 35 Southampton, England), Chapter 14: The Nuclear Aether, pp. 139-143, l972. [5] H. Aspden, 'The Theoretical Nature of the Photon in a Lattice Vacuum' in `Quantum Uncertainties: Recent and Future Experiments and Interpretations' Ed. W. M. Honig et al, NATO ASI Series B: Physics Vol. 162, (Plenum Press, New York), pp. 345-359 (l987). [6] H. Aspden, 'The Missing Atoms: Technetium and Promethium', Hadronic Journal, (in press). [7] H. Aspden, 'Atomic Fission', Electronics and Wireless World, vol. 94, p. 332 (l988). [8] P. Graneau and P. N. Graneau, 'Electrodynamic Explosions in Liquids', Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 46, pp. 468-470 (1985). [9] P. Graneau, 'Ampere-Neumann Electrodynamics of Metals', (Hadronic Press, Nonantum, MA.) 1985. [10] P. Graneau, 'Railgun Recoil and Relativity', J. Phys.: Appl. Phys.: vol. 20, pp. 391-393 (1987). [11] J. D. Sethian, D. A. Hammer and C. B. Wharton, 'Anomalous Electron-Ion Energy Transfer in a Relativistically-Beam-Heated Plasma', Physical Review Letters, vol. 40, pp. 451-454 (l978). [12] P. Graneau, 'Harnessing Thunderpower', Breakthrough, Vol. VI, No. 1, January 1 1988. [13] H. E. Puthoff, 'Ground State of Hydrogen as a Zero-point-fluctuation-determined-state',
ES10PAGE42
Physical Review D, vol. 35., pp. 3266-3269 (l987). [14] H. Aspden, 'A Theory of Proton Creation', Physics Essays (to be published). [15] H. Aspden, 'The Theory of the Proton Constants', Hadronic Journal (to be published). [16] H. Aspden, 'The Steady-State Free Electron Population of Free Space', Lett. Nuovo Cimento, vol. 41, pp. 252-256 (l984). [17] G. Winchester, 'On the Continued Appearance of Gases in Vacuum Tubes', Physical Review, Vol. 3, pp. 287-294 (1914). [18] C. A. Skinner, 'The Evolution of Hydrogen from the Cathode and its Absorption by the Anode in Gases', Physical Review, vol. 21, pp. 1-15 (1905). *********** [1997 update concerning the above references: I have no information concerning eventual publication of Rowe's paper [1]. Reference [6] was published at pp. 167-172 of volume 10 of the 1987 Hadronic Journal. Reference [14] appeared at pp. 72-76 of volume 1 of Physics Essays in 1988. Reference [15] appeared at pp. 169-176 of volume 11 in the 1988 Hadronic Journal. All of the 14 author's papers that have appeared in Hadronic Journal and Physics Essays are reproduced in full in the author's book 'Aether Science Papers', ISBN 0 85056 0152, published in July 1996 by the publisher of these Energy Science Reports.] [Concerning the anomalous effects observed in plasma tube discharges and typically those implicit in reference [11] above, it is noted that Energy Science Report No. 8 in this series concerns a Canadian invention which generates electricity using a plasma discharge tube. There is substantial excess energy produced and one can only infer that its source has to be the aether. Hopefully this technology of the Correa invention which is the subject of U.S. Patents Nos. 5,416,391. 5,449,989 and 5,502,354, granted in 1995/1996 to Dr. Paulo N. Correa and Alexandra N. Correa will now be developed commercially. This author (H. Aspden), in deciding to write these 10 Energy Science Reports, realized that only a major breakthrough by which the existence of a real aether medium can be proved by tapping its energy commercially, can arouse the physics community from their slumbers in their relativistic dream world. This Report No. 10 is the last such report, because events on the New Energy front must run their own course at their own pace and there is little more that this author can do to encourage interest in these matters. Our future health and well being depends upon a sustained source of non-polluting energy and an understanding of how the aether contributes as a creative force. Harold Aspden, March 29th, 1997].
ES10PAGE54
APPENDIX VI LIVING CELLS AND SUPERCONDUCTIVITY

Although unrelated to cyclotron resonance as such, there is another kind of resonance that may intrude upon the workings of cells in the human body. It is best described as 'Supergraviton Resonance', there being a physical mechanism by which molecules or small groups of molecules can, owing to a dynamic interaction with the aether, develop a resonant condition which converts heat into electricity. This is at the very heart of the action which accounts for what is known as 'warm superconductivity'. In summary, all matter has a quantum jitter motion connected with the Planck's constant of action and this needs to be balanced dynamically. The balance comes from the transient existence of gravitons and a heavy molecule needs to induce the supergraviton form so as to optimize the action. Gravitons and supergravitons are states where a kind of pseudoparticle is created by borrowing energy from the aether. It is the electromagnetic interaction of these graviton forms that accounts for the force of gravitational attraction between particles of matter. Now, the key point of relevance here is that the supergraviton has a high mass effect, equivalent to 102 atomic mass units and, in performing the dynamic balancing act with a heavy molecule, the spread of the action of several supergravitons can reduce the effective mass value to 101 amu. There is supergraviton resonance when the mass of the molecule is an integer times this 101-102 value. In this state of resonance any collisions between the molecules or between molecules and free electrons, as in electrical conduction though a metal, will result in energy (the random motion we see as heat) being deployed regeneratively into setting up electric fields which can sustain electric current flow without loss. That is the state of superconductivity but the generation of a flow of electricity in organic matter that is nonmetallic is also possible and, if heat can convert into electricity in the human body, that should be of interest to those who read this Report. I do not intend here to present what has not already been published and so the following items may seem disconnected, especially where they are partial exerpts quoted from a longer text. They will, however, serve as a guide to my other work on this subject and be helpful to those wishing to study these ideas further. ******* New Energy News is a monthly newsletter published by the Institute for New Energy, P.O. Box 58639, Salt Lake City, UT 84158-8639, USA. On page 2 of the October 1995 issue there is a note entitled 'Cold Fusion is a Live Issue' (author: H. Aspden) which explains how, in April 1989, I had developed a paper, published later that year, about the technological applications of the supergraviton and had extended it to have bearing upon the 'cold fusion' theme. The latter phenomenon is the anomalous generation of heat in the cathodes of electrolytic cells containing heavy water. The l02 factor was the basic feature of that paper. My note on 'Cold Fusion is a Live Issue' followed a item I had entitled 'Eureka-An Energy Echo
ES10PAGE54
from a Cathode' in which I referenced Professor Alec Broers discovery in IBM in 1965 of using lanthanum hexaboride as a cathode which, for example, could make electron microscopes durable. Tungsten cathodes as used in earlier work burned out after a few hours. The point of my note was that the composition of one lanthanum atom and six boron atoms had a molecular mass of 203.78 amu. This is twice 101.89. Heat was being regenerated as electricity and so the burning process was eliminated. Now, in my note on the live issue, after extending the same argument to show why superconductivity at room temperature accounts for the very powerful permanent magnet properties of samarium cobalt, I reported searching through a commercial listing of chemical compounds based on sodium (for reasons detailed in the note) to find a compound which was recorded as having a molecular mass close to 102 amu. The best one I could find was sodium polyphosphate, recorded as 101.96 amu. Ideally I was hoping to find a compound of which all atoms were of single isotope form. Oxygen was 99.8 per cent pure in this respect and sodium and phophorus both fitted that requirement. That led me to write the following: "Now, what has this to do with cold fusion? The answer, very simply, is that sodium is known to transmute into magnesium in living cells and the action is known to involve as a catalyst ATP and ADP, adenosine triphosphate and adenosine diphosphate, which play a major role in energy conversion in living matter! See the mention of ATP by Gerald Lindley at p.17 in the September 1995 issue of New Energy News. It is apparent that the 102 mass resonance seems to hold the key to this mystery in plant life and within our bodies". Lindley, in that September 1995 issue of New Energy News, drew attention to the biological molecule ATP as having a molecular mass equal to that of 5 supergravitons. He went on to explain how earlier work by Solomon Goldfein in the 1970s had brought the magnesium atom into play as a nucleus about which four ATP molecules were stacked. Lindley argued that the whole complex had a mass that was an integer multiple of 101.846 amu which he said "further supports Aspden's proposal of a supergraviton mass of 101-102." Responding to that I went in search of more facts about the ATP topic or related research and, from a lead in something written by Solomon Goldfein, I came to read a 1976 paper by Alfred A. Wolf and Ernest H. Halpern (Proc. IEEE, pp. 357-359). In referring to it Goldfein had said that, in theory, cholesterol molecules might form locating channels in which they might combine with a sodium ion to form a structure superconductive at 350 Kelvin. That was speculation, and I was getting out of my depth in trying to understand these curious molecular forms that are outside my technical discipline. I was, however, really surprised when I saw in that IEEE paper that six different bile salts were superconductive, sodium doxycholate having the highest transition temperature of 277 Kelvin. As I remarked in my note in New Energy News (November 1995, pp. 5-6) "Here was room temperature superconductivity of record in 1976, ten years before the discovery of the 77 Kelvin warm superconductivity was announced! Moreover, the action was in substances in living matter in which sodium is believed to experience cold fusion by transformation into magnesium, the subject discussed by Goldfein!"
ES10PAGE54
My research during the years 1994 through to date has been on efforts to build an electric motor that can extract energy from the thermal background, including the heat condition latent in the aether. However, my interest in the motor theme, the supergraviton and its role in unifying electromagnetism and gravitation, as well superconductivity, caused me to be alert when I read an article in The Times just two days before writing these words. It caused me to send the following communication to the Editor of New Energy News and I present it as the final item in this Report. THE MOTORS THAT KEEP US ALIVE On the day (March 24th 1997) I was concluding the final pages of my latest Energy Science Report No. 10, 'Cyclotron Resonance in Human Body Cells', the London newspaper, THE TIMES, published an item on page 15 headed `Wheel power: The circle of life'. It was reported, by reference to "the current Nature journal" that each of our body cells houses a tiny motor - "the smallest motor in creation - an enzyme that rotates to do its work and is only five millionths of a millimetre across". "The enzyme consists of seven components - a central axle, and six sub-units wrapped around it to form a collar". "The inner component is free to spin inside the collar". "What is stunning is that it is the very first time rotation has been demonstrated in an enzyme". As the motor turns "the molecules of ATP are produced like sausages from a machine". "Biochemists know how quickly this reaction goes, so it is possible to work out how fast the motors should spin - 20 revolutions per second". Although this is hardly New Energy Technology it touches upon something reported earlier in the pages of New Energy News and seems worthy of further comment. Energy from the food we eat is converted by the enzyme ATP synthase into chemical energy in the form of ATP. Well, we must now wonder how chemical energy manages to set something rotating. In contributing to our internal body heat it would keep any 'loose' ions in the ATP molecules active in their random thermal motion. It then needs no more that the ever-present geomagnetic field to perform, as it should, according to the Larmor formula, as used in cyclotron theory. The ions are deflected into a reacting orbit and the beauty of all this is that the rotation around those orbits occurs at an angular speed which is the same whatever the speed of those ions. To get 20 revolutions per second in the Earth's field, which approximates 0.5 gauss, those ions need a mass of 39 amu, which identifies potassium. The motor speed observed by the Japanese researchers who discovered this phenomenon was lower than this 20 rev/s owing to a drag effect imposed by the technique of measurement. We know, however, that the actual speed of a basic d.c. motor is lower under load than it is under no load conditions, so my guess is that these motors in our bodies are trying to run faster than 20 rev/s. 32 rev/s in a 0.5 gauss field would identify magnesium (mass 24 amu). I then note that on pp. 17-18 of New Energy News, September 1995, Lindley refers to the "stacking" of molecules of ATP around an Mg ion as suggested in the 1970s by Solomon Goldfein who said of biological ATP that it "met the criteria for a microscopic cyclotron".
ES10PAGE57
AUTHOR'S CONCLUDING NOTE I hope that what I have written will prove of interest to those concerned about the physics which govern our lives and, as this Energy Science Report No. 10 is the last such report I shall be writing, I further note that I will now concentrate for a while on publishing my research findings on Internet, where I plan to provide full references and abstract information concerning all my prior published work. My Internet Web page access address is: http://www.energyscience.co.uk
Information about my books and other Energy Science Reports in this series is provided on those Web pages.
This report was first issued on 31st March 1997.
DR. HAROLD ASPDEN SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB, ENGLAND
TESLA VERSUS EINSTEIN

H. Aspden, 2005 Introduction As we celebrate Einstein in the centenary year since he introduced his Theory of Relativity there are those of us who see little to celebrate because we believe that Einstein blocked the way forward in our quest to tap energy from the aether. The aether is the energy source accounting for the creation of our universe but Einsteins theory caused scientists to replace the aether by abstract mathematical notions. Hence there has been no acceptance of the aether as a possible new energy source, needed as our oil reserves are eroded. It is timely, therefore, to review the claim made by Nikola Tesla that he had devised and constructed an automobile that was powered on aether energy. Some Quotations Whereas the general public, including almost all of the scientific community, accept Einsteins theory without question, essentially because that has become the popular opinion in the light of E = Mc2 having significance connected with the atomic bomb, that formula relating energy E and mass M by the speed of light in vacuum is easily derived without any use of Einsteins doctrines. See my monograph entitled Physics without Einstein: A Centenary Review which is of record on my website www.aspden.org However, I am not the only one who regards Einsteins theory as an obstruction rather than an aid in our understanding of fundamental energy science. The following quotations therefore seem appropriate as an introduction to what follows. Tesla maintained his belief in the aether as the source of all substance. This, he thought, was the fundamental, unifying theory of physical things. He was quite unable to accept Einsteins theory of relativity and curved space. The Secret of the Creative Vacuum by John Davidson [1] There is incontrovertible evidence, for example, from a number of sources, that neither the gravitational constant nor the speed of light in a vacuum are constant after all. Since Einsteins theory of relativity is founded upon these two assumptions, if either one of them is shown to be incorrect, then Einsteins theory is seen to be more relative than he thought! In short, like Newtons observations, it would be wrong, as a fundamental model. The Secret of the Creative Vacuum by John Davidson [2] It may come as a shock, but Einsteins theory of relativity is not part of the design of nuclear weapons! ...... High school science students are conditioned to ridicule the concept of a nineteenth-century luminiferous aether with eye-rolling and giggling. But is this a contemptible idea when
compared with the new and improved terminology of gravitational masses warping the fabric of space-time? A Dissident View of Relativity Theory by W.H.Cantrell [3] Einstein plagiarized the work of several notable scientists in his 1905 papers on special relativity and E = Mc2, yet the physics community has never bothered to set the record straight in the past century. Albert Einstein: Plagiarist of the Century by Richard Moody, Jr. [4] Insofar as the theory is thought to explain the result of the Michelson Morley experiment, I am inclined to agree with Soddy that it is a swindle; and I do not think Rutherford would have regarded it as a joke had he realized how it would retard the rational development of science. Relativity - Joke or Swindle? by L. Essen [5] Einstein: 1902-1909 During these years Einstein was employed by the Swiss Patent Office as a technical expert (third class) until 1906 and then technical expert (second class). So his famous scientific papers of 1905 were written midway during that period of his life before, in 1909, he became an associate professor at the University of Zurich. Bearing in mind that the Swiss Patent Office registered patents without rigorous examination for novelty or merit, except for those concerned with clocks and watches, one must wonder if that was the work which kept Einstein busy in those years. If so, and since he is acclaimed for the scientific achievement of upsetting our understanding of time itself, it is an interesting observation that the 20th century gave birth to one of the greatest inventions ever made concerning clocks. It was that of Dr. Essen, the Director of the Time and Frequency Division of Britains National Physical Laboratory. He invented the atomic clock and so ought to be an authority on the measurement of time. That last quotation was by Dr. Essen. Somehow scientists say they can verify Einsteins theory by conveying atomic clocks around the Earth in aircraft but nowhere in their analysis of their experimental findings do they show in truly physical terms how acceleration affects the rhythm of electron motion in the atom. It is no wonder therefore that Dr. Essen was outspoken concerning his disbelief in Einsteins doctrines. Now, of course, it is not the distortion of our understanding on the nature of time that has obstructed scientific progress. Rather it is the effect Einsteins theory has had on our understanding of how energy is stored in what we see as empty space. Somehow we can inject energy into the vacuum and then recover it on demand, this being the property of electromagnetic inductors. The major question scientists face is whether that energy we feed into space is the same energy that is returned to us on demand. Or could it be that we feed energy into an existing universal pool of energy and are allowed to withdraw only the amount we have put on deposit. Should that universal energy pool exist in reality then it is logical to suppose that somehow it accounts for the creation of matter and so our universe, in which case the challenge is to try to tap energy from that pool. With Tesla in mind that is the subject of this paper, but at this point, merely as an aside remark since I have just mentioned clocks, it is of interest to note that I was, not long ago, asked to contribute some input on my interest in the energy theme as a participant in a television presentation being directed and filmed by an Australian group who, having
travelled around USA and Europe interviewing several others, had arrived in London in U.K. I arranged for my interview to be at the Institution of Electrical Engineers, where, outside the entrance, they could film a statue of Michael Faraday to whom we owe the discovery of energy storage by magnetic induction. However, after that interview, and to my complete surprise, I was asked to accompany the film crew to the archives of the British Museum, where I would be shown a perpetual motion machine that was several centuries old. It was a large clock, some six or seven feet high, that never needed winding up. I had never heard of it but soon got the message that they expected me, on camera, to stand in front of the clock and explain how it worked. At this point I should explain that, whereas Einstein had experience examining patents, my career after my early research years at Cambridge, was spent in the patent profession explaining in detail how inventions worked and defining the legal patent claims that are the basis of protecting and so convincing Patent Office examiners as to the merits of those inventions. I was a Patent Attorney and my employers were the English Electric Company until the end of 1959, followed by IBM thereafter. Even so, with no prior brief from the inventor of that clock or any technical description, having had a glimpse of the clock, I heard myself explaining how it worked. It was a grandfather-type clock having a pendulum and was operated by a weight that, by falling very slowly under gravity, powered the mechanism that operated the hour and minute hands. There were two such weights. As one was discharging its energy over a period of weeks and months, so the other was being lifted by a device that was sensitive to changes in atmospheric pressure. That device comprised an enclosed glass chamber partially filled with mercury and coupled to a vertical displacement tube sealed at one end, there being a vacuum cavity above the mercury in that tube but a vent at the top of the main chamber which exposed the surface of the mercury to atmospheric pressure. With ongoing change of air pressure, barometric pressure, the displacement of the mercury shifted weight from one side of a balance to the other side, thereby exerting force through an arm which, by its motion, effectively wound up the clock in respect of one of its two weights, pending interchange of roles. Had the mercury not been removed by the Museum for preservation reasons, it would be, as it had been, a machine in perpetual motion powered only by the energy of our environment, but hardly a method which offers practical prospect for solving the worlds developing energy problems. A machine before Einsteins time, but a message also that says: Energy is available for exploitation if we probe into the depths of our environment and can visualize that deeper physical underworld of space, the aether. Thanks to Einstein, scientists have lost interest in that aether, but, thanks to Tesla, there are some of us who are still interested! Teslas Pierce-Arrow Car Those who have written about Teslas research have told us about his deep interest in atmospheric electricity, extending even to the possibility of transmitting real electrical power by natural propagation through the atmosphere. He was a genius and an inventor who has left his imprint on the electrical power industry, especially by his invention of the a.c. induction motor. On November 17th, 2004, I was sent a letter by Don Kelly of the Space Energy Association in USA. He tells me there is now hope that there will soon be a final resolution of Nikola Teslas excellent Pierce-Arrow car project of 1931, at Buffalo, N.Y.,
meaning how it worked. This car I, understand, was demonstrated and tested back in 1931 and shown to operate at high speed not with a normal fuel supply, but by power drawn from a mysterious source, which Tesla implied was aethereal atmospheric electricity. Tesla did not reveal its design details and so its secrets. Don Kelly suggests that the clue to its operation may be found in Teslas two 1901 U.S. patents, Nos. 685,957 and 685,958. They portray two radiant energy input sources, one from an X-ray tube as an example of power input to the patented device. Don Kelly notes in his letter: We have now slowly come to the conclusion that Tesla used both of these methods, i.e. the natural antenna method, and the artificial way, via multiple (12) vacuum (X-ray) tubes within the car. At some point Tesla must have decided to use only one 6 foot high antenna, and use the collector radiant energy as the input to his 12 X-ray tubes. Now, from my point of view, it is a very formidable task to try to decipher how Teslas car really did function, based on little or no information other than that outlined above. However, frustrated, as I am, by the seemingly universal dedication to belief in Einsteins theory, notwithstanding its blocking action on the aether energy front, I will try to build a picture of the kind that one sees in a patent specification, even though I have no input from the inventor (Tesla) and no sight of the working embodiment (the Pierce-Arrow car). The focus of attention, as I see it, is (a) a large inductor (what Don Kelly refers to as the 6 foot high antenna which I understand was mounted at the rear of the car), (b) 12 vacuum tubes, though whether they were X-ray tubes is speculation in the light of patents dated 30 years earlier, and (c) a multiple set of large capacitors. Don Kellys letter indicated that a 60 kw level of power output would be needed and that he had information that a substantial large capacitor, or multiple smaller capacitors needed to be in place as well as means for converting d.c. to a.c. to power the engine, which I presume was a three-phase induction motor, this being Teslas brainchild. Speculation by Deduction Take a large inductor and assume a steady d.c. current flow through it. Ignore for the moment the possible energy source. Using capacitors how can one generate threephase a.c. power output? We need to switch the d.c. current to feed current into each of three capacitors sequentially during a complete cycle of the a.c. generated. During periods when a capacitor is not receiving current we need to discharge it through the input winding of one phase of the motor. Each capacitor needs therefore two switches and that suggests a role for the vacuum tubes. So here we see the need for six tubes, not twelve, Why did Tesla need twelve? I will presume that the tubes were of a type commercially available and that their rating may only have been half that needed to power his car at speed. So six tubes would suffice to explain the design principle but twelve were used, six sets of two in parallel, to get the required power output. The alternative interpretation is that Teslas motor was a six-phase machine. That said, where is the source of energy? We can presume, as Tesla may have done, that the inductor, being a large coil having many turns and mounted vertically at the
rear of his car, air-cored or possibly iron-cored to enhance inductance, was somehow tapping electrical power from atmospheric electricity. Note that the Earth has an electric field extending high into our atmosphere and known to be of the order of hundreds of volts per metre. This has not been seen as a source of useful power or harmful. After all we surely would find current flow in lightning conductors even in the absence of thunder and lightning were this the case. One can wonder if, by setting up a vertical field oscillation at 2 or 4 kHz, or so, we might develop a resonance effect owing to oscillations between the Earths surface and the ionosphere, which somehow causes possible energy output to escalate to useful levels, but I am sceptical as to that possibility. So where else can we look for that energy source. Don Kelly suggests it might be those 12 tubes. Might they have really been gas discharge tubes? In that case I am mindful of the research findings of Paulo and Alexandra Correa [6], but here again I am sceptical because the Correas use tubes of special fabrication and had such a property been evident from a tube commercially available back in 1931 then its excess energy property would surely have been discovered long ago. I am then left to consider the capacitors as the seat of the power input and this is something that really arouses my interest. The reason is that, in 2002, with some considerable confidence, I spoke openly at a conference suggesting that I had reason to believe that, by pulsating the energization of a capacitor of concentric electrode design, we could tap energy from the aether [7]. I saw this as replicating a phenomenon involved in the creation of our sun, whereby setting up a radial electric field induces aether spin and taps energy from the aether that is retained in the spin of the sun before much of it is shed in imparting angular momentum to the planets. Unfortunately, tests using a.c. excitation of such a capacitor failed to verify what I had predicted. So I now wonder if Teslas electrical circuit in that car had a feature that makes this capacitor theme viable, a feature I had missed in my own research efforts? Well, further speculation and analysis now points to a possible answer and revives my hopes in the capacitor theme, as I now explain. Induction of Aether Spin There are two essential factors that must apply if I am right in thinking Teslas power source was those capacitors in his Pierce-Arrow car. The first is that the capacitance has to be much higher than seems possible for the air dielectric capacitor that I had in mind and the second is that the there must be a retardation effect involved in setting up the aether spin within the capacitor. The reason for this is that the induction of the spin is not spontaneous in response to the setting up of the radial electric field, as I had assumed, but involves delay and this precludes operation at 100 kHz which was the basis of the tests made. Operation at much lower frequency means the need for much higher capacitance to achieve the required power output. Note that my theory indicated that energy could be tapped from the aether owing to that radial field displacing the quantum orbital motion of aether charge and the need for phase lock as between that charge within the capacitor and the charge in enveloping aether. This meant either a vibratory effect that had to be contained with no spin or the development of aether spin giving a vibration-free and smooth deployment of energy. The spin condition implied import of kinetic energy from the aether to augment the electric energy priming the capacitor, with that kinetic energy being non-recoverable by the aether external to the
capacitor during electric discharge and so being shed by augmenting the output voltage to deliver more energy than was supplied as input. I now suspect, in the light of further theoretical analysis and the inferences I draw from hearing about Teslas Pierce-Arrow car, that the onset of the radial electric field creates a torque action within the capacitor dielectric, which stems from the aether it contains but is restrained by the fixed structural form of the capacitor. This torque, however, could be effective in initiating an aether spin that develops progressively from the spin axis and spreads outwards until it extends throughout the whole concentric form of the dielectric. The reason is that energy is needed to notch the aether particles cell by cell at the slip boundary between the aether in spin and aether within the dielectric but still not spinning. The energy is returned in each notching cycle but to set up spin spontaneously for all the aether contained within the dielectric demands too much energy and so the required result emerges only from a stage-by-stage progression. From such considerations I can see it was a mistake to hope to achieve aether energy output operating at 100 kHz. This whole theory is based on the creation processes and spin induction associated with the creation of stars and planets which is a one-off halfcycle operation as compared with operating at a.c. power frequencies in electrical apparatus. So what frequency is possible with aether energy delivery? I cannot estimate this until I delve into the theory of that notching effect, but for the time being I will assume, with hope, that the 60 Hz frequency that dates from Teslas time is an operable frequency. That may have been the frequency of his car motor corresponding to top speed. This leads now to the problem of capacitance. Whereas capacitance of the order of a nanofarad was what I had in mind with 100 kHz operation, it seems that I now must think in terms of hundreds of microfarads, given also that I doubt if Teslas circuit was operating at the high a.c. voltage of 10 kV. Here there has been revision of my thoughts on the use of a dielectric medium between the capacitor electrodes as opposed to mere air. The electric field that governs aether spin could well be very much higher than is evident from the capacitor voltage because the charge polarization of the dielectric offsets the primary field and what we measure is the difference. This would have a very substantial effect on the amount of energy tapped from the aether and so points to the need to use a capacitor insulator of high dielectric constant. As a further thought I see there is much to be gained by pulsing the capacitor with unidirectional current rather than the normal sinusoidal current we associate with a.c. operation. This would keep the aether spin ongoing in the same direction but oscillating about a mean level. Accordingly, my interpretation of Teslas Pierce-Arrow car has this feature. Finally, and concerning how a capacitor can deliver more output energy on discharge than during the charging stage, given the inherent power source, I can but suggest that, whereas charge input occurs in the normal way, it is desirable for the input voltage to be switched off before discharge begins and also desirable to force the current out in a controlled manner during discharge. Excess energy delivery can only be by virtue of an excess voltage in the output phase. All this points to the need for an inductor of high inductance which keeps the level of current flow constant and can absorb voltage pulsations but, by switching, diverts the current between input periods and output periods as between the several capacitors. What Tesla may have done to produce his three-phase output power, even though thinking he was exploiting aether energy input to his inductor, may, fortuitously and without him knowing it, have been the ideal way of operating those
capacitors in their aether energy-tapping role. I am, of course, assuming that he used large capacitors having concentric electrode construction such as are normally associated with high voltage operation. Maybe they incorporated a special kind of dielectric and here, I recall reading somewhere in connection with more recent over-unity energy claims, about experiments using barium titanate as dielectric, it having a very high dielectric constant. Also one sees, I believe, the use Leyden jars in the circuits used by the Swiss Methernitha community in their over-unity energy activities, an encouraging sign [8]. As to the stress now placed on d.c. operation I can further add that, after publishing my first proposals concerning a concentric capacitor having potential for anomalous energy effects, I heard from a German engineer experienced in d.c. power supply via coaxial cables, as used by underground railways, that he had observed that in servicing such power lines it was not sufficient merely to short-circuit the cable to discharge it once power had been switched off. Experience had shown that the cable could surprise one by recovering its voltage and it took quite a while for the energy stored in the cable capacitance to discharge fully, far longer than one might expect. A coaxial cable operating at high voltage d.c. is, of course, a concentric capacitor and so, if I am right in what I outline above, it should exhibit such an anomaly. Conclusion I have been prompted to write this by Don Kellys communication concerning Tesla and this is my answer. Whether this inspires those with the resources to research the subject further, only time will tell, but, to be sure, there is so much money being spent building high energy particle colliders to probe the secrets of creation on Big Bang theory, that one might hope that a little governmental funding could be spared to explore this free energy theme. It is founded on aether spin which itself already accounts for many features pertaining to the creation of the solar system. Big Bang research can only lead to taking risks that bring about destruction and take us no nearer to the technology that can one day tap aether energy. Tesla, it seems, achieved that objective, but we prefer in this year 2005 to celebrate Einstein, who blocked the way forward on the aether energy front, whereas Tesla is more deserving. Hopefully, by 2031, the centenary anniversary of his PierceArrow car, our scientists will be wiser on this question of the aether and its energy resource. References [1] J.Davidson, The Secret of the Creative Vacuum, C. W. Daniel Co. Ltd., pp. 171-172 (1989). [2] J.Davidson, The Secret of the Creative Vacuum, C. W. Daniel Co. Ltd., p. 177 (1989). [3] W H Cantrell, A Dissident view of the Theory of Relativity, Infinite Energy, 10, Issue 58, pp. 6 & 8 (2005). [4] R M Moody, Jr., The Secret of the Creative Vacuum, Infinite Energy, 10, Issue 58, p. 34 (2005). [5] L. Essen, Relativity - Joke or Swindle? (1988) reprinted in Infinite Energy, 10, Issue 58, p. 23 (2005). [6] P. Correa & A. Correa, The Search for Free Energy, Simon & Schuster, pp. 218-222 (2001).
[7] H. Aspden, The Physics of Perpetual Motion, Infinite Energy, 10, Issue 55, p. 19 (2004). [8] K. Tutt, The Search for free Energy, Simon & Schuster, pp. 92-93 & pp. 285-292 (2001). H. Aspden February 28th, 2005
THE CREATION OF THE PROTON

H. Aspden, 2005 Introduction Although particle physicists think they can probe the mysteries of creation by building mammoth accelerators costing billions of dollars to produce high speed impact of protons they do not have any theory giving insight into how those protons themselves are created. So they proceed in wild attempts to create other forms of matter thinking that will tell them how the universe itself was created. It is just the same for the problem of gravitation, given that cosmologists can justify vast expenditure in probing the depths of remote space based on their unproven notion that gravitation applies without moderation within very dense matter deemed to exist in so-called neutron stars. Yet they still have no theory showing how G, the constant of gravitation, is determined here on Earth in terms of electrical interaction as between particles. This authors insight into the latter problem, his efforts in the past being unheeded, was the subject of the previous paper No. 3 in this series. Here in this paper we shall address once again the former problem, that of proton creation, the authors findings on this theme, now dating back some 30 years. This having also been ignored by the scientific community notwithstanding its vital importance is now restated in a more advanced form in the hope that, in accounting for matter creation, it will serve to provide answers sought by unguided research and so serve to spare unwarranted waste of money on futile and ill-founded experimental effort. The Basic Question Concerning the proton, which, being the heavy nucleus of the hydrogen atom, accounts for 99.95% of its mass, the basic question we face is Why is it stable, whereas other particles are short-lived and decay after only a transient existence? The secondary question is: Why does it have a mass that is slightly greater than 1836 times that of its hydrogen atom partner, the electron? Here I note that the electron, though assumed by physicists to be stable and have no decay lifetime, does contrive to tunnel through obstructing electric potential barriers as if it suffers demise on one side of such a barrier and is reincarnated on the other side 10-13 or so seconds latter. It seems so logical then to accept that protons and electrons are special in the sense that they may, indeed, have a finite lifetime, but there are forces at work which require the energy shed by their decay to recreate them virtually immediately in the same energy form and close to where they decay. This is merely saying that surplus energy that exists in the space environment of our quantum underworld contrives to create matter by appearing as protons and electrons. Physicists, by quantum theory, can picture action in that quantum underworld, much as it is disguised by their mathematical equations, but they still lack the insight to see how energy unable to be absorbed by that underworld has to take material form by creating those electrons and protons. The reason, of course, is that they have been brainwashed into believing the theory advocated by Albert Einstein which makes probing that underworld based on aether theory a taboo subject. So, unless they change their belief, they are not
destined to understand how the proton is actually created and, in particular, why it has a mass some 1836 times that of the electron. They should however realise that there is intermediate ground to be explored that is truly in the realm of quantum theory, namely what determines the actual value of Plancks constant h and what is known as the fine-structure constant which relates h with the speed of light and the charge of the electron. Yes, here we see the importance of the electron, that partner to the proton. Surely the message is: Fathom what it is that determines the value of fine-structure constant and you will be on track in the quest to understand how matter is created. Yet, physicists, in spite of knowing how to spend vast sums of money to fund construction of their high energy particle colliders and space probes, do not know how to go about even looking for the answer to the mystery of the fine-structure constant. The ghost of Einstein stands in their way! The Bottom Line in Particle Physics As you can see I intend to put my case rather firmly and I admit that, as I write this, I am motivated by a rejection, having offered to tell the physics community how protons are created by presenting a poster on the occasion of the Physics 2005' conference to be held in April 2005 under the auspices of the Institute of Physics in U.K. of which I am a member. One must, you see, be seen to conform with the current beliefs of those who act as scrutineers for such occasions. New ideas that may cast doubt on certain theoretical notions that are currently in fashion cannot be entertained. That conference aims to celebrate Einsteins centenary and so concerns cosmology and quantum physics. It is an appropriate occasion to hear new views on matter creation and, in particular, what I refer to as the bottom line in particle physics. This is a reference to the role played by the three particles that feature alongside one another below the quarks in the standard particle grid used by particle physicists. These particles are the electron, the muon and the taon, the fundamental leptons that play a major role in quantum electrodynamics. In the previous paper [1], the subject of which was also offered as a poster session presentation at the above conference but duly rejected, I have shown how G, the constant of gravitation is determined in terms of the role played by the taon. This leaves us to answer the question: What role, if any, is served by the muon? As to the electron, we see it everywhere, so much so that it is appropriate to take it as a reference by which to relate the properties of other particles, but there is still the question of how the electron itself is created. Can that be answered? Well, here I admit that I have no clear answer but I will at the end of this paper float an idea that others may find interest in exploring. Here, my object is to account for the creation of the proton and, indeed, you will see that my answer is clear and precise in deriving a theoretical value for the proton/electron mass ratio that conforms with experiment. The virtual muon population that pervades all space is the agency that performs this creative act. Before proceeding, and in order to gain the readers attention, I will again, as I did in my 1986 paper [2], repeat a quotation from an authoritative scientific source dated 1985. I note with some pride, pride I share with a colleague in advancing this theory, that when the leading experts, R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., F. L. Moore, D. L. Farnham and P. B. Schwinberg, involved in making such measurements reported in 1985 their findings in Int. J. Mass Spectrometry and Ion Processes, 66, p. 327 they stated:
The value that they [Aspden and Eagles] calculate is remarkably close to our experimentally measured value (i.e. within two standard deviations) This is even more curious when one notes that they published this result several years before direct precision measurements of this ratio had begun. They had measured the proton-electron mass ratio to within a precision of 41 parts in a billion and this measurement was reported some 10 years after we had presented the theoretical value derived from aether theory. You see, it was 30 years ago in 1975 that this major step in understanding how matter is created was put on scientific record, but I still face the task of gaining its acceptance. The passage of time has, however, clarified some of the factors involved and so much of this paper is new and original, particularly the focus I shall be placing on the links between protons, taons and dimuons, the dimuon being a charged particle having double the mass of the virtual muon, and the virtual muon being the form the muon takes in its virgin state as part of the quantum electrodynamic underworld of space. A Pre-Einstein Principle The physics governing proton creation is that founded in electron theory dating back to the pre-Einstein years, before 1905. In particular I shall be using a classic formula once used in many student textbooks and one I see in a 1904 book by reference to J. J. Thomson, the scientist who discovered the electron. I have presented the relevant quotation from that book in Chapter 2 of a work I have put on record in January 2005 [3]. It would be best for reader to read that chapter before delving into what follows. The point I there make is that E = Mc2 owes nothing to Einstein for its derivation. Indeed, as I there explain, the simple truth is that this fundamental formula arises from the fact that a charged particle reacts to an accelerating electric field so as to conserve its intrinsic energy and has nothing whatsoever to do with mathematical gymnastics performed in so-called four-space. The principle I refer to in this section concerns the form of the electric charge we symbolize as e, whether this be the charge of the electron, the proton or any other fundamental particle. J. J. Thomsons formula for the energy of this charge is: (1) E = 2e2/3a where a is the radius of a sphere in which the charge is confined and in which the charge is so distributed that a uniform pressure prevails within that sphere and is balanced by the external pressure asserted at its surface by its self-field. One can easily verify that three quarters of this energy sits in the field outside the radius a whereas one sixth lies within the charge sphere. As we now proceed you will see that there is liberal use of this equation and that it applies to separate charge components of a charge pair, comprising opposite polarity charges of magnitude e in surface contact. Thus the sum of two such terms as in (1) offset by a term e2 divided by the sum of their radii would represent the energy of the combination.
A System of Notation We will refer to the proton as P, the virtual muon as , the dimuon as Q, the taon as and the electron as e. The dimuon is a charge confined with a radius of half that of the virtual muon and so the energy of the dimuon is twice that of the muon. Why do I introduce the dimuon? My answer simply is that this is the quantum of energy that my theory tells me exists in each cubic cell unit of the quantum underworld of space. As I noted in my previous paper [1], where I derived G, such cubic cell units have a cube side distance d which is equal to 108 times the electron radius a. We are, you see, going to show how protons are created from energy shed by the quantum underworld, the aether, and the units of energy Q or the units of the energy of a virtual muon are the source of the energy needed to create the proton. As to notation, if I write: (A:B) this represents the energy of two charged particles A and B in surface contact and if I write: (A:B)* this represents the energy applicable if B happens to be the necessary charge form corresponding to the combination having shed energy to adopt an overall minimum energy state subject to the first charge A being of constant form. Thanks to that Thomson formula above it is a simple task to take the sum of the energies of the two particles as offset by their electrostatic interaction energy and by differentiation with respect to a variable radius of the second charge evaluate the minimum energy and that radius and thereby the value of B. One finds that B is equal to (%(3/2) - 1) times A or 0.22474A whereas the energy shed has the value (%(3/2) - 1)2 times A or 0.0505102A and so we are ready to delve into the secrets of proton creation. The Proton Creation Process We begin by supposing that somehow the proton as a single charge form P has been created. Why then is it so stable as to be the primary component of all matter? Can it somehow be associated with another particle form that has led to a minimum energy situation? If so then what is that particle form? It would, from the above analysis, have an energy that is 0.22474 times P which happens to be the combined energy of two virtual muons or the dimuon Q. Surely that is not a coincidence. Our proton must somehow be able to exist, even if only transiently, in the form: (P:Q)* but if so it has shed energy that has itself a particle form, whether as a single particle or particle combination, that has a net charge e. The latter energy is, in fact, the quantity of the expression: (Q:)* So, our empirical enquiry, given that P has been created, tells us that it might exist in an overall stable net energy state given by: (P:Q)* + WP even though it may be switching form, oscillating as it were, between its single form P and a three-particle state. This is consistent with the experimental observation that the proton exhibits a three-quark composition.
Now, though this accounts the stability of the proton or next task is to explain how it is actually created and, a most important consideration, why it is a unique form of stable matter. That link with the dimuon energy quantum may seem a sufficient answer and, indeed, that was the status of my research back in 1975 when the theory of the proton/electron mass ratio was first recorded [4]. However, some 11 years on from there, in 1986, I advanced the theory when I saw how shedding that energy was the clue to proton creation from a virtual muon source [5]. I asked what would happen if n virtual muons were to transfer their energy and a charge e to the particle combination (Q:)* and cause to be separated whilst Q merged with the muon inflow to create the combination (P:Q)*. I realised that n would have to be odd, meaning inflow of one more positively charged virtual muon than the inflow of negatively charged virtual muons. Also, to be sure, one might expect a mismatch of energy and so some further energy shedding than occurs in forming (Q:)*. To my genuine surprise however, and intense satisfaction, it became evident from the mathematics involved that n not only had to be odd but that it could only have a unique value to keep energy in balance with no loss by radiation. To find n, note that: n + (1 - 0.0505102)Q = Q/(0.22474487) (2) and that Q is 2. One can see that n has to equal 7. The result is that the proton must have a mass that is 8.898979486 times the mass of the virtual muon, the mass energy of the latter being half that of a cubic cell of the quantum underworld of space, found by pure theory to be equal to the mass energy of 206.3329 electrons. Therefore the proton/electron mass ratio obtained by this theoretical pursuit is slightly above 1836.152 as recorded in that 1975 paper [4]. In the light of this I cannot see how anyone can doubt the role played by the virtual muon in creating the proton and so creating matter generally. If one seeks to question the derivation of that factor 206.3329 then that requires reference to my book Physics Unified [6] published in 1980. It is fully of record on my website www.aspden.org and on page 112 you will see an equation (160) which is the result of a full derivation of that figure above. The equation actually is: Eo = 412.665816 mec2 where Eo is the energy Q or 2 of the above analysis. Particle Creation and the Electron I said above that I would float an idea concerning the electron whilst on this subject of matter creation. I have, in my research so far, taken the electrons existence for granted and I have, for some 15 years now, been more concerned with energy issues of our real world than the underlying physics theory that preoccupied me as a private interest from 1955 to 1980. So in coming back to the subject of matter creation, I can point to a clue pertaining the electron and positron forms of matter. First note that, in deriving that Eo energy quantum above, the vital step was that of determining the mass and energy of a fundamental particle that pervades all space and accounts for the Heisenberg jitter motion of quantum theory. The energy density of that particle is identical to the energy density of Eo divided by the volume of the cubic cells of the quantum underworld, each of side distance 108 times the charge radius of the electron. The volume of the charge occupied by that fundamental particle was deemed to be an odd
multiple of the volume of the electron. This step was need to refine the calculation of the fine-structure constant determined by my theory, as discussed in reference [7]. The electron came into the act in that context and also in regard to its quantum angular momentum of h/2 as used in formulating the theory of that quantum underworld of space. Now, in regard to the creation of matter in the form of atoms of higher order than hydrogen, my theory of early record did contemplate the proton becoming associated with a meson in a two particle charge combination of the kind noted above with the energy thereby shed being absorbed in the main by creating what I referred to as electron-positron chains. These comprised a line of electrons interposed between positrons in adjacent charge surface contact and I noted that about 166 or so electrons and positrons in a chain might form a discrete link between two adjacent particle sites in the quantum underworld, as one can see by halving that 108 factor. As early as 1974, in reference [8], I recorded my ideas on the subject of heavier atoms and their structure but at that stage I had settled on the belief that the meson linked to the proton component in the atomic nucleus had to be that charge form Q introduced above. Furthermore, since we are here considering atoms of atomic number greater than unity, we confront the neutron as a component in the atomic nucleus. Here I declare quite categorically that the neutron as such has no presence in an atomic nucleus. When created as a free particle form it exists as a combination of electrons and/or positrons with a proton or antiproton and survives for several minutes before decaying. The so-called neutron of the atomic nucleus is an antiproton form that happens to have replaced a charge occupying a lattice site in the space medium. The thought I now float concerns the form that energy might take when shed by the union of the P and Q particle forms and a pointer to the electron-positron pairing. I have stressed in the previous paper [1], No. 3 in this series, that the taon has a role as a graviton in accounting for gravitation and that gravitons provide dynamic balance for an equal mass of matter sharing the quantum jitter motion. Note therefore the approximate energy equality between: e + (P:Q) + (P:Q) and: + (e:e) + (e:e) In terms of electron mass (P:Q) has an energy of [1 - (%(3/2) - 1)2]P or, with P as a little over 1836.152, some 1743.4 electron mass units and so the combined energy of the three components is 3487.8. The (e:e) electron-positron components may be shown to have an energy of 1.25 electron units, this being 2 minus their interaction energy. So if we deduct 2.5 from 3487.8 to get 3485.3 we might expect the taon to have a mass energy equivalent to 3485.3 electron units. The reader may verify by reference to the previous paper [1] that the value of the taon mass in electron units which gave us the precise value of G as measured was 3485 electron units. The suggestion therefore is that the proton creation process has features which indicate electron-positron pair creation forming components that can combine to create links between components in the atomic nucleus, especially as the (P:Q) forms sit at one end of such links. The energy component of the three-state proton form has enough energy to create such links with a little energy to spare. The energy quantum involved has presumably not been detected as a meson owing to the transient quark nature of existence of the form.
A question which then should be raised is that of why I take two (P:Q) combinations as the basis of taon creation. Why not six or seven? The answer has to be that Nature plays a statistical game of trial and error and will create numerous particle forms, as will the high energy particle colliders at CERN and elsewhere. However, the particles that will take control will be those having a higher creation rate at specific energy values and which have energy determined by two factors. We see that in the case of the proton because its energy was determined first without that factor n of 7 being assumed but then we found that only the factor 7 could give the right energy input. So where is that other factor for the taon? Well it is presented on page 156 of reference [9], as published in 1986. There, also taking the energy of the proton as the base reference, I indicated how a series of hyperons developed by processes involving charge-pair annihilation and consolidation of charge with conservation of charge energy and charge volume and all based on the proton, dimuon and taon forms. Indeed, the clear message from that analysis of six hyperons, all of which were found to have theoretical energy values in conformity with observation, was that the energy of the taon was greater than that of the proton by the factor 3 raised to the power 7/12. The latter has the value 1.898107 and, the proton/electron mass ratio being 1836.152, this gives the taon/electron mass ratio as 3485.2 Conclusion One can but conclude that the quest to understand how matter is created is best pursued by such analysis rather that trying to create freak forms of matter using high energy particle colliders. I do stress the need to rethink adherence to Einstein philosophy given what I have said in my four chapters in my recent work Physics without Einstein: A Centenary Review [3]. Until the scientific world recovers its good sense and takes another look at the mysteries of our cosmos with the aether in mind and Einstein ignored we really have no hope of inspiring future science students and gaining a better understanding of the phenomena which dominate, indeed constitute, our very existence. References [1] H. Aspden, Aspden Research Papers, 3 www.aspden.org (2005). [2] R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., F. L. Moore, D. L. Farnham & P. B. Schwinberg, J. Mass Spectrometry and Ion Processes, 66, 327 (1985). [3] H. Aspden, Physics without Einstein: A Centenary Review, www.aspden.org (2005). [4] H. Aspden & D. M. Eagles, Il Nuovo Cimento, 30A, 235 (1975). [5] H. Aspden, Hadronic Journal, 9, 129 (1986). [6] H. Aspden, Physics without Einstein, Sabberton Publications, www.aspden.org (1969). [7] H. Aspden & D. M. Eagles, Physics Letters, 41A, 423 (1972). [8] H. Aspden, The Chain Structure of the Atomic Nucleus, Sabberton Publications, (paper reference 1974a, www.aspden.org ). [9] H. Aspden, Hadronic Journal, 9, 153 (1986). 21 February, 2005
THE FOO FIGHTER MYSTERY

H. Aspden, 2004 Introduction On May 18th 2004 THE TIMES newspaper published in U.K. included in its Weather section an intriguing commentary entitled Weather Eye by Paul Simons. It began by noting: The Mexican Air Force disclosed last week that one of its planes had seen a swarm of bright lights hovering and darting around it. The lights remain a mystery, but UFO enthusiasts claimed that they were extraterrestrial. Paul Simons then explained how this reminded him of strange lights seen towards the end of the Second World War, when many pilots reported seeing balls of light chasing their aircraft during flights in Europe and over the Pacific. He then noted that the lights, which were also reported by German pilots, were nicknamed foo fighters and looked like small balls of fire, usually orange, sometimes translucent. He ended with the words: The foo fighters are a mystery to this day. There is still no technology in the world that can perform their spectacular feats, and if the lights were a natural electrical phenomenon, such as ball lightning, it is difficult to explain why they were seen in all weathers. When I read this I recalled that in 1983 a paper of mine entitled The Thunderball an Electrostatic Phenomenon was published here in U.K. by the Institute of Physics. It appears at pp. 179-184 in their Conference Series No. 66 record of a conference held in Oxford. Until reading that account a few days ago I had never before heard of that foo fighter nickname or understood that the phenomenon was so prevalent. I was aware of an account by Professor R. C. Jennison, himself having been a fighter pilot in the Second World War, who told me that in more recent years as a passenger on a commercial flight homeward bound for England he had an encounter with a thunderball within an aircraft. He said that there were very few passengers in the cabin and he was sitting well back and in an aisle seat. To his surprise a young stewardess looking distressed suddenly came rushing aft towards him. She threw herself over him to get into a window seat and then he saw the reason for her concern. A glowing spherical object was floating along the aisle moving towards the rear of the plane. He did not move and it floated past him and vanished through a closed door at the rear. Professor Jennisons speciality, being electronics and the physics of electromagnetic wave propagation, led him then to say that he wished he had had the foresight to look away from that glowing object to see if he could sense its presence visually, a possibility he thought, if it was emitting radiation other than that of its optical glow.
The Mystery Explained The point I made in my paper concerning the thunderball is that the phenomenon is the result of setting up an electric field directed radially to or from a central axis. Lightning is not the essential trigger that creates the quasi-stable state of spin which consolidates into spherical form and glows until the energy stored in its field spin is dissipated. My paper delves into the quantitative aspects of the physics involved and shows how the theory predicts the energy density levels which have been established from the available observational data. The spheres of field spin created can be portrayed as spheres of uniform electric charge density of one polarity with a compensating electric charge of opposite polarity sitting at the boundary surface of sphere. This accounts for the energy content, it being that of the field of the displaced charge. The theory is then supported by an associated energy state arising from its spin as the sphere rotates about an axis through its centre and such theory involves a coupling with the quantum jitter of the underlying field medium. This is governed by a synchronization factor effective between the spin quanta within the charge sphere and those of the quantum underworld of enveloping space. Such theory is a matter of record elsewhere, not only in the above referenced conference paper but in books and in many published papers. See this authors web site www.aspden.org. However, a point that is rather obvious from what has just been described, is the fact that such a sphere, electrically-neutral overall, but rotating about its axis, will produce a magnetic field directed along that axis. So, you see, we are considering here a phenomenon of energy contained by a spherical form which, as mere electric field displacement, can float in space but yet, owing to its magnetization, be subject to the influence of magnetic fields. Note that mere electric displacement is something we can achieve within the vacuum, as by storing energy in a capacitor formed by two plate electrodes spaced apart in vacuo. As to whether a thunderball may have a magnetic field, just take note that history records that thunderballs floating in the vicinity of gun barrels have been seen to be attracted to them, presumably because the iron gun barrel has itself acquired some magnetism, but otherwise because, as we well know, magnets that come into close proximity with iron are pulled in by the induced field. Why, you may ask, is the thunderball the product of a lightning discharge? Well, we know that lightning arises from atmospheric electricity, clouds acquiring electric charge and then their sudden discharge. This produces ionization of air along the discharge track, meaning that the air molecules shed electrons. The electric current of the lightning discharge is therefore carried by those electrons and, as is well-known in electrical engineering theory, a sudden very high current discharge produces a pinch effect. The electrons are pulled together, being drawn radially towards the axis of the discharge. This, therefore, establishes a radial electric field between the inner electron population and the outer positive ion population. This sets up the field spin state mentioned above, which persists after the lightning discharge has subsided, and what results can be a consolidation into spherical form bearing in mind the magnetic attraction as between the field spins created along the length of the discharge path. Now, concerning the question of the foo fighters and why, if they are the same phenomenon as the thunderball, they appear without the presence of a thunderstorm, just consider a fighter aircraft as it changes altitude at very high speed in its manoeuvres in an atmosphere we know is charged with electricity. The Earth has a vertical electric field, as
if it is negatively charged, that is measured in hundreds of volts per metre. It is not enough for us to harness for electric power generating purposes but it is enough, subject to fluctuations, changing sunlight and cloud movement, to set the stage for a thunderstorm or, should a fighter plane make a sudden change of altitude cause its metal skin to acquire an electric charge of one or other polarity. Then, taking account of the fact that the aircraft fuselage is somewhat cylindrical in shape, one can see that here we have a longitudinal axis with an external electric field directed radially from that axis. This is a recipe for setting up field spin in the underlying vacuum medium, the medium through which the plane is travelling at high speed. This means that a trail of field spin is created behind the aircraft and there is then the possibility of that magnetic field attraction consolidating that field-spin into spherical forms which glow in shedding the energy acquired. Such spheres might then be held captive by the magnetic field set up by the field spin that envelopes the fuselage and so be seen as foo fighters. Such, at least, is my explanation of the foo fighter mystery that puzzles Paul Simons. A Concluding Note As to the thunderball that was witnessed by Professor Jennison inside an aircraft, that could have been produced by a lightning discharge well ahead of the aircraft and flown into so as to enter the body of the fuselage. Just as thunderballs can pass through solid objects, they being aethereal-like objects characterized by energy and a state of field spin, so they could well find their way into a passenger compartment. A more important note on which to conclude is the need for concern as to the attitude of the physics community, given that such a mystery has been left unanswered. There are indeed many mysteries that need to be addressed by todays physicists, mysteries that pertain to the reality of Nature here and now on body Earth. They should take precedence over highly expensive experimental pursuits that supposedly delve into the mysteries such as Is there life on Mars?, How long ago was the Big Bang, assuming there was a Big Bang? and What happens if two protons are caused to collide at an ultrahigh level of energy? At least, there is enormous scope for exploration of alternative ideas concerning basic physics, rather than merely building block by block on an existing framework without a care as to whether or not it might collapse owing to having relied on the wrong assumptions. The aether is pushed aside by Einsteins theory, but yet whatever there is in space devoid of matter can somehow store energy, electric and magnetic field energy. Physicists think that electromagnetic wave energy is conveyed by photons moving like bullets at the speed of light but still use wave theory to explain optical interference phenomena and wave theory demands an aether. When they did believe in the aether in the 19th century, physicists did not know how to escape from their dilemma, that of the aether seeming to be a solid for some reasons but yet a fluid for other reasons. You would think they would re-evaluate their position, once the properties we associate with fluid crystals became better known. Another example is their belief that the Sun owes its energy radiation to a nuclear fusion reaction occurring at its centre where they believe the temperature exceeds 100,000,000 degrees Celsius. Yet any student of physics who has been introduced to Bohrs theory of the hydrogen atom can work out that when hydrogen atoms come as close as they need to to account for the mass
density of the Sun, the electrons of adjacent atoms collide. This produces ionization, meaning that some protons become free, which in turns means that enough protons will be pulled by gravity to set up a positive charge in the body of the Sun of just such an amount as to cancel further compression under gravity. There can then be no inner temperature that can promote nuclear fusion. Ionized atomic hydrogen at about 6,000 degrees Celsius will prevail throughout the body of the Sun. The key factor governing what has just been said is our knowledge that, by the law of gravity, the mutual rate of gravitational acceleration of free protons is 1836 times greater than that which applies between free electrons. In spite of the mixture of positive and negative charges in the Suns ionized plasma, the higher mass of the proton by a factor of 1836 compared with electron mass results in an equilibrium state in which statistically there are more protons within the body and core of the Sun than there are electrons. The electron deficit is made up by an excess of electrons in the Suns surface regions. So, if we rule out nuclear fusion, how does the Sun get its energy input to sustain its radiation? Well, surely, that same physics student might reason that the electrons that are recaptured by the protons will adopt the identical quantized state that they had before their original separation. This is because they are governed by interplay with the quantum underworld, meaning the aether, and that requires inflow of energy from that underworld. So the Sun is kept alive by the aether which physicists say does not exist and, daring to answer the problem of another mystery, that of where energy goes when it is radiated into outer space, I suggest that such energy is eventually absorbed back into that unrecognized aether. In short, my message is that we exist in a state of low temperature energy equilibrium as between us and the aether but the Sun, owing gravity attributable to its massive form, has energy equilibrium with the aether at a level set by ionization of its hydrogen atoms and that is at 6000 degrees Celsius. My further message is that, given that the aether can be induced to shed energy, there is the ever-present challenge of our contriving to tap energy from the aether. Ask yourself what it is that sustains the properties of a permanent magnet. Physicists will tell you that ferromagnetism depends upon the quantized orbital motion and spin states of electrons which happen in some substances to work collectively in an energy condition that favours the magnetized state. Then ask, if it were possible to draw energy from a permanent magnet, whether that magnet might recover that energy from the quantum underworld, the aether. I certainly would be inclined to answer that question in the affirmative, meaning there could well be scope for tapping energy from the aether by a motor using permanent magnets in some way. Such a topic featured in a recent issue of the magazine NEXUS (June-July, 2004) and I saw it contained on pp. 41-44 an account of Kohei Minatos Amazing Magnetic Motor, which proves what has just been suggested. There is indeed much the physicists have yet to learn and my message is that when facing a mystery in the field of physics one should be realistic enough to keep the aether in mind.
THE PHYSICS
OF CREATION
BY
HAROLD ASPDEN
Doctor of Philosophy of Trinity College in the University of Cambridge
SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS
P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England
THE PHYSICS OF CREATION
CONTENTS
Page
Introduction Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Natures Coded Messages Gravitation and the Continuum The Ubiquitous Muon The Creation of the Proton The Law of Gravity The Quantum Underworld Aether Structure Creation: Stars and Planets General Discussion The Epilogue
(i) 1 14 30 46 57 79 96 114 179 221
Appendix I The Exclusion Zone of Interaction Energy 227 2 230 Appendix II Inertia and E = Mc Appendix III The Electrons Anomalous Magnetic Moment 234 Appendix IV Hydrogen as a Star 243 Appendix V The Angular Momentum of the Solar System 245 Appendix VI The Hypothesis of Fechner and Einstein 249 Appendix VII Einstein and 100 years of Wisdom 260 Index 270
Introduction
Whatever your religious beliefs concerning the role of God in the Creation of this our universe, there can but be satisfaction in deciphering the messages coded in what we see around us, and which surely reveal some of the secrets of Creation. The language involved is itself universal, being that of mathematics, the logical foundation of physics, and so, for those who understand algebraic equations and integral calculus, let me now guide you along a path of exploration as we confront those coded messages.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
CHAPTER 1
Natures Coded Messages

Introduction The processes by which Nature creates the fundamental particles which combine to form atomic matter and so our whole universe determine certain numerical factors which are precisely the same whenever and wherever measured. These are known as the fundamental dimensionless constants. They are merely numbers but yet those numbers are encoded expressions which tell us that Mother Nature has, for some special reason, determined a definite relationship between certain physical quantities. There are three such numbers that, collectively, can reveal to us the secrets of Creation, if only we can discover their physical formulation. One is the numerical factor which relates the mass of the proton to that of the electron, an important ratio, given that the partnership of these two fundamental particles constitutes the hydrogen atom. This is the primary atomic element from which all matter evolves. The numerical factor here is 1836.152. Another, equally important numerical factor, is that having the measured value of 137.0359. This relates the speed of light c in vacuo with the electric charge e of the electron and Plancks constant h. Plancks constant is the factor by which the frequency of an electromagnetic wave is determined as a function of the energy quanta involved. That number 137.0359 is Natures message which says:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
Decipher me and you will understand what governs the phenomena of quantum physics as evidenced by matter at the sub-atomic level. Thirdly, there is the numerical quantity that relates the constant of gravitation G and the charge to mass ratio, e/me, of the electron. Unlike the first two numbers, this does not appear in the tables of physical constants. It is not one that is measured directly, but has to be inferred from separate measurements of G as the force of attraction between two bodies of known mass, and e/me as by measurements using a cathode ray tube. One simply cannot hope to fathom the mysteries of Creation without an understanding of the physical processes that govern the value of G. The measurement data applicable to G and e/me depend upon the units physicists have chosen to use. Concerning units, it is intended in this work, to use the system of units that prevailed during the period in history when our knowledge of physics at the fundamental level expanded by the discovery of the electron. This system, the cgs system, regards the force between two unit electric charges separated in vacuo at unit distance as being itself unity, whereas the practical system of units as used in modern physics complicates the force formulation by ascribing properties to the vacuum medium itself, properties which need expression in their own units. To use the practical system of units for the purpose of this work would over-complicate the mathematical equations and add unnecessary complexity to the project at hand, that of understanding the creative forces at work in our universe. So, to summarize, the task ahead is to examine the factors which govern the physical actions that determine the three numerical quantities introduced above. Our object is simply to unravel, so far as we can, the secrets of Creation and, at the very least, decipher the three numbers introduced above, by which is meant the discovery of the mathematical formulae which they signify as relations between the physical quantities involved.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
Historical Foundations An appropriate starting point is provided by Newtons Law of Gravitation as seen in the context of Coulombs Law concerning the force acting between two electric charges. Although Isaac Newton established that gravitation was governed by an inverse-square-ofdistance law of force which implied the constant of gravitation G, it was not until a century later in 1797/8 that Henry Cavendish, using a delicate torsion balance for measuring the attraction of two small bodies, could quantify its value. Joseph Priestley in 1767 proposed that the electric force acting between two charged objects was also subject to an inverse-squareof-distance law. Having been advised by his friend Benjamin Franklin that when a small charged body is placed anywhere inside a hollow charged conducting sphere, no electric force is exerted on that body, Priestley recalled that Newton had shown mathematically that the gravitational force attributable to the mass of a hollow spherical shell is zero everywhere inside that shell. This is only true if the gravitational force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the two interacting bodies. Therefore, Priestley reasoned that the electric interaction force must itself be of the inverse-square-of-distance form. In 1750 an Englishman Michell had devised an instrument in which the known torsion of a thread balances an unknown force acting at the ends of a bar magnet and had used this to show that an inverse square law acts between magnetic poles. Coulomb reinvented the torsion balance and with it, in 1785, verified the law for both magnetic pole interaction and electric charge interaction. So we see that, by the end of the 18th century, physicists were able to formulate the magnitude of the force acting between bodies as a function of their mass, their electric charge and, indeed, their magnetic pole strength, but, still two centuries later, there remains the need to decipher the messages implied by those measured quantities to understand how Nature determines their values.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
In this pursuit we should find inspiration in the account above by which Priestley deduced that the electric force had to be of the inverse square form. The mathematics involved is of the kind we shall be using in this work as we explore the same force laws to probe the mysteries of Creation and this will include an account of the small but very significant modifications affecting the law of gravitation to cater for the planetary perihelion anomaly. This is a question of how energy travels between interacting bodies when their separation distance is changing. Just as Newton was able to prove mathematically that there is no gravitational force acting on a body within a spherical shell of uniform mass density per unit area of the spherical surface, so we shall prove, on the same assumption, that the interaction component of the field energy of two electric charges separated by a distance R sums to zero within a sphere of radius R centred on either charge [See Appendix I]. It is analysis of this kind that can point to the connecting links between electric, magnetic and gravitational laws of force and provide the elements of a unified theory by which to comprehend how Nature regulates the values of those dimensionless constants already mentioned. As to the historical picture, take note that the electron did not present itself as something whose electric charge and mass could be measured until another hundred years or so had passed. J. J. Thomson in 1897 made progress in his cathode ray tube measurements by which the charge to mass ratio of the electron was measured and by 1911 Millikan, by his falling-drop technique of measurement had discovered how we can measure electron charge and so separate it from the mass of the electron. Early in the 20th century, therefore, and especially after the introduction of wave mechanical theory with the advent of the photon, physicists had all that was needed to decipher Natures messages, the subject of this work. Yet, the task has, it seems, been left to this author, whose interest was aroused when engaged on
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
Ph.D. research in 1950-3 on the subject of anomalous energy losses found in electrical steels when reacting to oscillating magnetization. The reaction phenomena associated with magnetization of electrical conductors has an analogy with the reaction which must of necessity exist when a magnetic field acts across space devoid of matter. It was the study of that reaction that opened the door leading to the pathways we are to explore in this work. So how shall we proceed? Well, it seems appropriate to present at the outset a glimpse of what lies on the far horizon, the answers to our deciphering exercise. Hopefully, this will allow the reader to anticipate some on the onward steps as the theory develops and so share some of the excitement which this task arouses. There is, however, one preliminary historical feature that must be presented first. This concerns the Thomson electron. The Thomson Electron There has to be a starting point from which one can build a picture of the electrical structure of the space medium and matter which sits in that medium. The electron is the embodiment of the unit of electric charge in physical theory. It is the appropriate foundation for our exploration of the electrical properties of the medium that pervades all space, it being well established that the vacuum medium has properties by which it can store electrical energy. The reader well versed in modern physics will now wonder how one can possibly justify the need to refer to this space medium in terms which seek to revive what amounts to the old-fashioned notion of the aether. After all, every physicist today is indoctrinated in the belief that space is a four-dimensional medium referred to as space-time and subject to the relativistic principles which Albert Einstein introduced between 1905 and 1916. E=Mc2 is taken as a sufficient testimonial in proof of Einsteins theory and no one can
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
argue with the experimental evidence which gave birth to the atomic bomb. Indeed, quoting from p. 287 of Science since 1500' by H. T. Pledge, a 1939 Ministry of Education publication then available from the U.K. Stationery Office: With Einsteins work, the old substantial aether vanished from higher physics. In spite of the internal difficulties which had dogged it, it was long mourned by the older school of physicists, who found the reasoning of Einstein perilous - and hard to follow. Well, it is this authors submission that it is due time for the younger physicists of today to visit the graveyard where the aether was put to rest and consider its reincarnation. That visit takes us back to the year 1904, one year before Einstein launched his theory. In that year 1904 a book entitled The Recent Development of Physical Science was published in its second edition. Its author was W. C. D. Whetham, a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge and so a close associate of J. J. Thomson, the discoverer of the electron, who had entered Trinity College in 1876 at the age of 20 and who remained there for another sixty-four years, becoming Master of Trinity College from 1919 to his death in 1940. In now quoting a section of text from that 1904 book, one can see that it gives basis for one to wonder why our modern generation is so impressed by Einsteins E=Mc2 contribution. This is a quotation from pages 283-284 of Whethams book, which include the table below: The property of mass, the most fundamental property of matter for dynamical science, is explained by the electron theory as an effect of electricity in motion. Forasmuch as a moving charge carries its lines of electric force with it, it possesses something analogous
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
to inertia in virtue of its motion. The quantitative value of this effect has been calculated by Thomson, Heaviside and Searle. Definite experimental evidence has been given by Kaufmann, who finds that the ratio e/m of the charge to mass of the corpuscles ejected by radium diminishes as their velocity increases. The charge is almost certainly constant, and thus the mass must increase with velocity. Theory shows that, for a slowly moving corpuscle, the electric inertia outside a small sphere of radius a, surrounding the electrified particle, does not depend upon the velocity, and is measured by 2e2/3a where e is the electric charge on the particle. But when the velocity of light is approached, the electric mass grows very rapidly; and, on the assumption that the whole of the mass is electrical, Thomson has calculated the ratio of the mass of the corpuscle moving with different speeds to the mass of a slowly moving corpuscle, and compared with the results of Kaufmanns experiments. In this remarkable manner has it been possible to obtain experimental confirmation of the theory that mass is an electrical phenomenon.
velocity in cm/s 2.36 x 1010 2.48 x 1010 2.59 x 1010 2.72 x 1010 2.85 x 1010 calculated mass ratio 1.65 1.83 2.04 2.43 3.09 observed mass ratio 1.5 1.66 2.0 2.42 3.1
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
That is a commentary on the state of knowledge of the electron in the year 1904 but that knowledge seems not to have been heeded by future generations of physicists. Today, if you refer to the tables of physical constants, you will find that the electron radius is not formulated according to the above formula, but rather as something that is 50% greater, a notional parameter that has no physical meaning as justified by theory that explains why the radius expressed in relation to mass, electric charge and the speed of light should have that particular value. However, that energy quantity 2e2/3a is the true measure of the electric energy of an electron of radius a and students of physics should see it as important and know how to derive this formula themselves. Just assume that the charge e is confined within a sphere of radius a. Take note that the speed of light c is also the ratio of electrostatic to electromagnetic units in the cgs system. Then assume the charge is moving in a straight line at velocity v so that it defines a current circuit element of strength ev/c and formulate the strength of the magnetic field produced by that circuit element at points distant from the charge. From that work out the magnetic field energy density at such a point and then integrate that energy over all space external to that charge sphere. You will obtain the formula (ev/c)2/3a. Now equate that to kinetic energy mv2/2 and the result will be that mc2 is 2e2/3a. This was, no doubt, the manner in which this result was obtained in that 1904 report, but there is another quite simple derivation that has more merit. Take note that the electric energy of a sphere of charge e and radius a, having all of its charge at the surface of that sphere, as if it were of conductive material, is e2/2a, but if we do not make that assumption and simply declare that the charge e is actually distributed within that sphere of radius a so as to have uniform electric energy density or pressure inside that sphere that equals the energy density just outside the boundary radius a, then it is easily proved that the component of electric energy inside
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
the sphere is e2/6a. Add that to the energy outside the radius a and one obtains 2e2/3a. This is surely the energy of the electron that accounts for its inertial property. It is the formula referred to in this work by reference to the Thomson electron. It is equal to the mass of the electron as multiplied by the square of the speed of light, as you have just seen, and yet physicists see E=Mc2 as something we owe to Albert Einsteins theory of relativity that came along after 1904. As to the so-called relativistic mass increase that one also attributes to Einsteins philosophy, was this not explained in that 1904 text in deriving the data for that table presented above? The gain in energy with speed adds inertial mass and, if whoever computed that data did not use the formula E=Mc2, it becomes an interesting exercise to discover how, given the measured electron speeds, the increase of mass factor could have been calculated. The known speed of light in 1904 was much the same as it is today, very nearly 3x1010 cm/s, and using the formula for mass increase that one derives from electron theory, the same as that later obtained by Einsteins methods, one sees, using this speed of light value, that an observed mass increase by the factor 3.1 corresponds to an electron speed of 2.84x1010 cm/s. The difference between this and 2.85x1010 cm/s as listed in the above table is only marginal and probably attributable to approximations in the calculation. In any event, the point made here is that the Thomson electron formula can be relied upon in our onward theoretical investigation. It is, however, noted that the formal derivation of E=Mc2 as an expression relating the electrical energy E of a charge with its inertial mass M is possible, as this author has shown. See discussion in Appendix II. One has merely to accept that the charge, when subjected to acceleration by an electric field, will move in just such a way as to conserve its intrinsic electric field energy from being radiated.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
10
Based on the physics of 1904, with its aether, we can now confront those messages that pertain to Creation and we do so by using the Thomson electron formula in a quite fascinating way, as will emerge in chapter 4 when we show how the proton is created. Concerning a Theorem and the Aether 19th century physicists went adrift by assuming that the aether had certain properties, notably that of providing a universal and absolute frame of reference for the constant speed of light in vacuo. They should, instead, have studied the aether with an open mind, allowing its properties to be revealed by their experiments. First and foremost is the fact that the aether can and does store energy, electrical energy, and so it must have an electrical composition. 19th century physicists were obsessed by its properties as a medium in which electromagnetic waves propagated. They were baffled because it seemed, in one sense, to exhibit the properties of a solid medium and, in another sense, the properties of a fluid. Considered as an electrical system having structure as if it comprises electric particles formed into a kind of crystal pattern, the problem was one of stability, as was pointed out by Samuel Earnshaw, a Cambridge scientist, by presenting his famous mathematical theorem. In 1839 he read a paper before the Cambridge Philosophical Society, which was later published in their Transactions at pp. 97-114 of volume 7 of 1842. That paper was entitled: On the Nature of the Molecular Forces which regulate the Constitution of the Luminiferous Ether. Quoting from that paper one reads: It is therefore certain that the medium in which luminiferous waves are transmitted to our eyes is not constituted of such particles (acted upon by purely inverse-square forces). The coincidence of numerical results, derived from a medium of such particles, with experiment, only shows that numerical results are no
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
11
certain test of a theory, when limited to a few cases only. So, at the very outset of the project undertaken in this work, one has it on the authority of an eminent scientist, speaking some 164 years ago, that an aether constituted by electric particles conforming with the inverse-square-of-distance force law is an impossibility on mathematical grounds, whatever our number deciphering exercise might prove. Earnshaws Theorem was a basis for rejection of early attempts by this author to secure publication in the mainstream science publications and, indeed, this was how the author first came to know that there was such a theorem. Why then are we proceeding with our quest? Well, there was something about this authors perception of the aether that made that theorem helpful rather than obstructive. Earnshaw had overstated his case. If the medium contains electric charges of like polarity governed by the inverse-square law then they can arrange themselves in a stable configuration, provided they are immersed in a uniform continuum of charge of opposite polarity. Conversely, one might say, if the evidence supports an aether having a structured form composed of electric charges governed by the inverse-square law, then, with certainty, that aether must incorporate a background continuum of electric charge which envelops those charges. So, you see, dating from 1839, physicists seeking to understand the aether were wandering in the dark as they confronted problems of this kind and confronted an aether that had to exhibit the properties of both a fluid and a solid. The fluid crystal of modern physics with its state dependent upon electric field excitation had not been discovered and, almost as soon as the electron had been discovered and its charge and mass measured, Einstein came onto the scene and gone was all hope of salvaging the aether from the wreckage.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
12
This author, however, having committed so much effort into the project of understanding the aether, aether of a form that overcame Earnshaws theorem, could but soldier on without support from the physics community. By 1966 the author had published two works based on aether theory, both entitled The Theory of Gravitation, the first, dating from 1960, being only 48 pages in length and the second, dating from 1966, being an enlarged 170 page second edition. Coincidentally, in that year 1966, as the author discovered later, a book by an author named W.T. Scott appeared with the title: The Physics of Electricity and Magnetism, published by Wiley, and this included a commentary on Earnshaws theorem. It is relevant to mention it because Scott had also seen where the theorem fails. A passage in his book reads: In a region of continuous charge distribution, a maximum or minimum could exist, but a continuous distribution is an idealization. We have to consider each electron or proton as an isolated charge, so that pure electrostatic equilibrium is impossible. Earnshaws theorem sought to prove stability by showing how a differential equation could have a maximum or minimum but the analysis denied that possibility for the interaction of discrete electrical charges immersed in a true void. Scott had seen what this author had seen, namely that the presence of a uniformly charged background could provide that stability. However, Scott says that involves an idealization. One may answer that by saying that the aether could well be an idealization, meaning a physical medium of such ideal and simplified form that it has rather special properties not shared by matter. One may also say, given the evidence to be presented in this work, that the aether has to have that uniform background continuum of charge as a kind of sea in which the other
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
13
charged particle forms are immersed and in which a stable array of such charges can exist. This brings us to the stage where we can begin to introduce the formulae which emerge from the deciphering of what is implied by those numerical constants and so we move on to chapter 2 and begin by exploring the factors that determine the force of gravity.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
14
CHAPTER 2
Gravitation and the Continuum

Introduction In chapter 1 our consideration of Earnshaws theorem established that all space must be permeated by a uniform continuum of electric charge. Since space overall is electrically neutral that continuum must contain numerous electrical charges having a charge polarity opposite to that of the continuum. Those charges can, notwithstanding Earnshaws theorem, form into a stable array, a simple cubic structure, which gives the aether certain characteristic properties. One such property arises when there is an intruding presence of something that takes up space in that continuum. That something, if itself electrically neutral overall, may be assumed to be, in effect, the occupant of a hole in that continuum. Consider then two such holes, spaced apart, each of volume V within an electrical continuum of charge density . Given that the continuum charge, being everywhere of the same charge polarity, will repel itself owing to its electrostatic action, this means that those two holes will experience a force of mutual attraction. It is tempting, therefore, to suggest that this may account for the force of gravitation should whatever it is that occupies those holes have the appropriate association with matter. Note that the charges of the structured array, which will be referred to as lattice charges, will not interfere with this force of attraction because they merely attract the charge of the continuum,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
15
which, being of uniform charge density, takes precedence of position in keeping those holes away from these aether lattice charges. By way of illustration two such holes in a background charge continuum are depicted in Fig. 2.1. The arrows indicate a mutual force of attraction and one can imagine that as the holes come together, at the relatively slow speeds we associate with matter moving owing to gravitational attraction, the continuum charge will flow around the holes without there being any significant concentration of the charge density . Fig. 2.2 depicts the presence of the lattice charges. The relative sizes of these compared with the gravitating holes are far from being represented by this figure. In fact, those aether lattice charges each have a volume that is quite enormous compared with the occupants of those holes, but even so, in displacing continuum charge they do not themselves contribute to the overall gravitational attraction between regions of space. The reason for this, as we shall see, is that the lattice charges are moving relative to the charge continuum at a very high speed, so fast in fact that, in being thereby forced by sudden pressure to flow around such a charge, the continuum charge is compacted in the regions denoted X in Fig. 2.3 to increase in those regions enough to ensure that the net continuum charge in the vicinity of the hole the lattice charge occupies compensates the effect of that hole and so does not contribute to the gravitational action. Gravitation is simply a question of the speed of whatever it is that takes up space within the charge continuum, a difficult concept perhaps, but one offering a convincing insight once we see how it leads us to the theoretical derivation of the value of G, the constant of gravitation. More will be said about this later, but meanwhile suffice it to say that we have introduced the theme of gravity as a property dependent upon the aether and our task now is to develop the formulation by which G is determined.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
16
Fig. 2.1
Fig. 2.2
Fig. 2.3
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
17
Introducing the Graviton Suppose that those holes of volume V are each associated with a mass M so that the mutual force of attraction between two such holes is (V)2 at unit distance. The force law will be of inversesquareof-distance form and so it can be said that this force is a gravitational force GM2. If we know the value of and M has some standard value, which we can also evaluate in terms of the mass of the electron, then we can formulate that basic numerical factor involving G. Now, the problem with gravitational mass is that it is not something that comes in specific units. The smallest amount of energy can exhibit the mass property. To cater for this under normal conditions Nature has adapted by creating two types of what we will here refer to as gravitons. These are unit charges e of either polarity that occupy those holes but they have different mass values. Although it may appear to be mere assumption to say that Nature creates charged particles as needed and given the necessary energy, this is a fact evident from the phenomena of quantumelectrodynamics, where pairs of oppositely-charged electrons are produced by energy activity in the vacuum medium. These electron pairs, or rather electron-positron partnerships have a short lifetime, because, after their creation as charges spaced apart from one another, those charges come together by mutual attraction and are annihilated. They vanish to leave the energy quantum from which they were first created. Somehow the aether in its ongoing and well organized activity then contrives to recreate the electron and positron in a spaced relationship and so the cycle of charge pair creation and annihilation is repeated. The electron and positron are members of the lepton family. They are leptons and, indeed, those gravitons just mentioned are also leptons.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
18
We need to know their mass values and the amount of space which their charges occupy if we are to derive a formula for the constant of gravitation G. We also need to know the value of the continuum charge density . The latter quantity will be the unit of charge e as divided by the volume d3 of a cube of side dimension d, where d is the lattice spacing of the cubic array of those aether lattice particles that permeate the aether continuum. Later in this work it will be shown that d is 108a, where a is the radius of the Thomson electron. Therefore we have the following value for : = e/(108a)3 ........................... (2.1) Note that this equation applies without adjustment to cater for the volume of the lattice charges or particles of matter that might be present and sharing the motion of those lattice charges. The reason is that the compaction of in flowing around these intruding objects exactly balances the continuum charge displaced by their presence. Concerning the charge volume to mass ratio of the graviton, this is complicated by the fact that there are two basic types of graviton, each type having a different role. By their creation and existence the gravitons create holes in the charge continuum which their charges fill. The ratio of the volume of those holes to the graviton mass is the primary factor determining G. Now, considering a group of three gravitons, if two have the same mass and so the same charge volume it is possible for them to exchange energy by very slight volume fluctuations where one expands in radius slightly as the other contracts slightly. Keep in mind that formula for the Thomson electron. As charge radius expands, so the energy and mass decreases and vice versa. The existence or non-existence of that group of three gravitons is a quantum transition for which gravitating mass changes in steps of whole units. Yet we need to cater for the smallest element of gravitating mass-energy. The third graviton in the group is deemed therefore to have the property that, if it sheds energy, its gravitational action, as represented by its increase in
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
19
volume, will increase in just the right amount to match that quantity of mass-energy. Now, a little exercise in mathematics will reveal that, if the graviton mass changes slightly, so the graviton charge volume will change in inverse proportion by an amount that is precisely three times the basic volume to mass ratio of that graviton. Let the mass of one graviton form, the one of larger charge volume, be denoted as times that of the electron and the mass of the other graviton form be denoted as g times that of the electron, there being one g-graviton present for every two gravitons. We will justify this ratio presently. What this then means is that, in terms of the charge volume to mass ratio of the electron, the graviton charge volume to mass ratio will be given by: (2/3 + 1/g3)/(2 + g) ....................... (2.2) Then, owing to that third graviton of a group of three, the g-graviton, having that threefold differential property in respect of the charge volume to mass ratio, we know that this ratio must equal: 3(1/g3)/g .................................... (2.3) From which one can write: 3(/g)4 + (/g)3 = 1 ......................... (2.4) and so find that: g = (1.452627) ......................... (2.5) We can now progress in formulating the value of G as: G1/2 = (4)(1/108)3(1/g)4e/me ............... (2.6) which provides the numerical factor concerning gravity that we set out to find. However, we have yet to justify that 108 factor and we confront also the task of deriving the value of g from pure theory. Also there is that question of the two to one ratio of the - and ggraviton population, not to mention the many unanswered questions that can be raised as to how all this relates to the mass of many forms of matter that exist in our universe. We can but proceed in stages, but, by way of reassurance, the reader is invited to take note that the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
20
known varieties of charged leptons in physics are limited to but a few. There is the electron family, the heavy electron family otherwise known as the mu-mesons or muons, and then the even heavier lepton form, the tau lepton. It would seem that the latter is the graviton. As to the g-graviton form this seems rather elusive in the spectrum of particle physics, but we shall point to some evidence later as we refer to the Japanese H quantum in chapter 9 [See section entitled: Numbers Game]. Meanwhile, from the above formulations (2.5) and (2.6), the reader may check the value that must have to satisfy the relationship between G as 6.67259(85)x10-8 dyne.cm2/gm2 and e/me as 0.527281x 1018 cm2 esu/gm. The answer you will find is that is 3485, meaning that the tau-lepton should have a mass energy of 1.781 GeV, some 3485 times 0.511 MeV, the mass-energy of the electron. On this basis g is 5062.3, which corresponds to a massenergy of 2.587 GeV. Now, of course, these values for and g are empirical, having been derived from measured data on the assumption that the theoretical formulation is valid. However, it is our intention to show in chapter 4 that both and g can be derived theoretically and found to have values quite close, indeed very close, to those just presented and this will then mean that we have deciphered Natures message implicit in the value of the constant of gravitation G. The 2:1 Graviton Ratio The two to one ratio of the -graviton to g-graviton population can be justified in the following way. Imagine the -graviton as having the primary existence as a kind of parent from which the ggravitons are born. The isolated -graviton is suddenly confronted with an influx of energy which it has to absorb. It has a unit charge e which can be positive or negative but we will take the case of it being positive. It has a certain charge volume. It can absorb energy by contracting in radius but we need to accept that space in the aether
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
21
charge continuum is at a premium and, in contracting, some space becomes available for occupation by other charge. However, it takes time for the aether to adjust to changes associated with energy deployment. The scenario envisaged therefore is one where the sudden influx of an appropriate quantum of energy absorbed by the graviton will contract it approximately to the g graviton form, whereupon, to take up the volume of continuum vacated, two similar g-graviton forms will be created, one of charge +e and the other of charge -e. This is a process of lepton charge pair creation which must be followed soon thereafter by the onward quantum transitions that occur with a time delay as the movement of continuum charge imports the added space commensurate with the net amount of energy that is absorbed. Since, for the case of the initial -graviton having a positive charge, the transition state has two positively charged pseudo ggravitons and one negatively charged pseudo g-graviton, those quantum transitions, given that added space, will mean a decay back to the -graviton form with charge pair annihilation, except for the one case where the two positively charged g-gravitons decay before the third graviton in the group is affected. The residual three graviton group will comprise two positively charged -gravitons plus one negatively charged g-graviton. This is a combination which resists spontaneous decay by charge pair annihilation and so there is a physical basis for saying that the graviton system that pervades space will have two graviton forms, which exist in this two to one ratio. As to the reference to the pseudo g-graviton form, this arises because, in dividing into three gravitons, the primary graviton will allot one third of its charge volume to each newly created pseudograviton with the result that the latter have a charge radius smaller by a factor of 1.44225 as compared with the -graviton. This means that during the rapid transition in adjusting to the energy fluctuations under consideration, the transient g-graviton form will be about 0.7%
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
22
smaller in mass and so energy as compared with the ultimate ggraviton form. The completion of the transient phase therefore involves the residual g-graviton absorbing that extra energy. It will, of course, be understood that it is the displaced volume of the continuum of charge density that matters in determining G, there being overall as many positively charged gravitons as negatively charged gravitons of either the or g form and graviton charge pairs being close enough together to preclude their actual charge from having any gravitational effect. The Onward Quest The task ahead involves us in an extensive analysis of the aether as that charge continuum permeated by those aether lattice particles. There is relative motion between these charge forms and that motion gives us the insight we need into the physical activity giving foundation for quantum mechanics and leads us to the derivation of equation (2.1) above and so that factor 108. Then there is the challenge of discovering how matter is created from the activity of the aether medium, and we will find that the creation of the proton and of those -gravitons, along with the ggravitons, go hand-in-hand. In this pursuit we find an answer to one of the great mysteries of physics. Physicists have long been puzzled as to why the muon, the mu-meson, the lepton particle form intermediate the electron and the taon, the tau particle, exists at all. It seems to serve no purpose whatsoever. Unlike the electron it is not seen as present in matter but yet it appears transiently in high energy particle physics. It forms the subject of our next chapter but, as our story unfolds, you will see that the energy of a pair of muons is actually present in each unit cell of volume d3 of the aether. The resulting energy density is that pertaining to those aether lattice particles, meaning their charge volume as divided by their electric energy according to the Thomson charge formula.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
23
We shall find, by the analysis from which that 108 factor is derived, that the aether lattice particle, which we name the quon, is of much larger charge volume than the electron, by a factor N, which will be shown to have the integer value 1843. This leads us to the equation: Eo = (3/4)(108)3(1/N)4/3 mec2 ............... (2.7) as the energy contained within each unit cell of the aether. With N as 1843, the factor in this equation has the numerical value 412.6658. Note that the muon that materializes in experiments of high energy particle physics has a mass somewhat greater than 206 times that of the electron. The numerical quantity just calculated represents the energy in electron terms of two virtual muons, meaning the lepton pair of muons that populate the aether. The proton/electron mass ratio, P/me will, as we shall see, be that given by a quantity: P/me = {9 - 2[(3/2) - 1]2 }Eo/2mec2 ....................... (2.8) which has the value 8.8989795 as multiplied by half of the above factor 412.6658, and so is 1836.152, which compares well with the measured value of 1836.152701(37). This rather incredible degree of precision for the measured value of the proton/electron mass ratio is a daunting challenge for anyone who ventures in search of a theoretical explanation of this quantity. Having indicated that this theory, in its basic structure, succeeds to within a few parts in 10 million, it seems best now to await acceptance of the foundations on which the theory is constructed, namely the aether of the form introduced in this work, and leave onward progress for future generations of physicist. One has to assume that the purpose of precision measurements of physical constants is to establish just how constant such quantities are, just in case they vary from place to place and with the passage of time. Also, whereas the constants themselves may not vary, history indicates that variation does occur in the assumed values, especially as new techniques of measurement are developed and more
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
24
measurements are reported. However, it would seem that the proton/electron mass ratio as now measured is likely to survive as an adequate indication of its ultimate value. Having introduced the -graviton and its alternative role as the tau-particle, the taon, it is appropriate here to note that the theory also gives a formula similar to (2.8) that accounts for its mass in terms of the rest mass of the electron. It is: = 2(P/me)(1 - [(3/2) - 1]2).................. (2.9) which is 3487. This corresponds to a mass-energy 1.782 GeV. This is a little higher than the empirical value 3485 derived above from the G formula (2.6) and this raises the fascinating issue of what factors are at work in determining the quasi-stable energy state of the taon, a topic to be mentioned in the discussion chapter 9. Finally, as part of this preliminary glimpse of the power of this theory in revealing how Nature determines the fundamental dimensionless constants of physics, it is noted that the quantity referred to by physicists as the fine-structure constant has also been deciphered as being that of the formulation: hc/2e2 = 108(8/N)1/6 ................... (2.10) where N, as before, has that value 1843. This expression is that of the inverse of the fine-structure constant which physical tables list has having a measured value of 137.0359895(61). In contrast our theoretical value as it applies in the true vacuum environment remote from matter is, as may be verified from (2.10), 137.0359153. In this case there are reasons why some slight upward modification of this quantity can occur for measurements made in laboratories that are moving through enveloping space at the speeds we associate with the cosmic motion of the solar system. At this stage the author yields to temptation by pointing out that Einsteins acclaim owes a great deal to the support he received from the Cambridge scientist Sir Arthur Eddington in the early years when his General Theory of Relativity was under scrutiny.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
25
Eddington is well known also for his attempts to decipher Natures numerical factors, those dimensionless physical constants. However, at the time (1930) the fine structure constant had not been measured to a degree of precision which allowed one to be sure that that 137 figure was other than an integer. Eddington, who was impressed by Einsteins four-dimensional notions of the space medium, evolved a theory by which 137 was seen as being: (162 - 16)/2 + 16 + 1 which theory, in the words of B.W. Petley of the U.K. National Physical Laboratory (p. 161 in his book The Fundamental Physical Constants and the Frontier of Measurement, Adam Hilger Ltd. (1985), declared as coming: from considerations of the number of independent elements in a symmetrical matrix in 16-dimensional space where 16 equals 4 times 4 (4 being the number of dimensions in Minkowskis world). However, Petley then added the comment: The theory lost respectability partly because Eddington at first predicted the number as 136. It is noted that on that same page 161 of Petleys book there appears a table listing theoretical expressions that have been, as the author puts it, derived for the fine structure constant. The last entry in this table, in date sequence, before the experimental review value, is the one dated 1972, being the formulation of this authors theory giving that value 137.035915, the reference being to the paper entitled: Aether Theory and the Fine Structure Constant in Physics Letters 41A at p. 423. This paper was jointly authored, by this author, Dr. H. Aspden, who was with IBM at their Hursley Laboratory in England, and Dr. D. M. Eagles of the National Standards Laboratory, Sydney, Australia, who had contributed to the development of the theory by involving Dr. C. H. Burton who used
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
26
the computer power of that laboratory to verify the authors analysis of the electrical structure of the aether and thereby cooperating in the determination of the 1843 value of that factor N mentioned above. However, reverting to the Eddington theme by reference to his book New Pathways in Science (1935, Cambridge University Press) one surely must agree with a comment he made on p. 234 in introducing his theory: I think that the opinion now widely prevails that the constants (A), (B), (C), (D) are not arbitrary but will ultimately be found to have a theoretical explanation. Here (A), (B), (C) and (D) were, respectively, the proton/electron mass ratio, the fine-structure constant, the ratio of the electrical force between an electron and proton to the gravitational force between them, and a rather curious quantity the ratio of the natural radius of curvature of space-time to the wave-length of a mean Schrodinger wave. Eddington, being Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University, saw this latter quantity as important, its value, as he states, depending upon the observed recession of the spiral nebulae and being about 1.2x1039. Readers will therefore find it of interest, as we proceed, to see that this authors theory can rise to the challenge posed by this fourth constant but we shall derive instead a formulation including the value of the Hubble constant as that is a more familiar quantity. See chapter 8. It is somewhat hilarious to see that Eddington, in explaining his theory for the fine structure constant on p. 237 of that book, says the following: It is a feature of quantum theory that the particles are so much alike that we can never tell which is which; and we shall later see that this indistinguishability is actually the source of the energy that we are studying, so that we must not ignore it here. We have then to make one of 16 possible presents to one particle and one of 16 possibly
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
27
similar presents to the other; but the particles are communists, not believing in private ownership, and it makes no difference which present has gone to which particle. There are 16 ways in which the commune can receive two like presents and 120 in which it can receive two unlike presents, making 136 in all. That is a curious way of saying that for each of 16 components to have two unlike or two like quanta, given that 16 of each variety are available, is, mathematically 16x15 divided by 2 plus 16. However, Eddington was puzzled by the 136, when he really needed a figure of 137. He ends his account on p. 237 by saying: Is it unreasonable to suggest that the fact that (each of those quanta) is one of a gang of 136 may have something to do with it? Apparently the majority of physicists think that it is. But for my own part the clue seems to me good enough to follow up. Clearly, Eddington is on the defensive here, but he struggles even further in seeking to derive a figure of 137. He concludes with the words: But, you may say, the fraction is really 1/137, not 1/136. I think if we can account for 136/137 of the quantum, the remaining 1/137 will not be long in turning up. There is a saying: One spoonful for each person and one for the pot. As to another of the basic constants, Eddington, by an argument based on wave functions, formulated a quadratic equation of the form: 10m2 - 136mmo + mo2 = 0 ............. (2.11) relating two mass quantities and, taking mo as a standard unit, argued that, since the equation had two solutions for the value of m, these
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
28
were, respectively, the electron mass and the proton mass. From this he derived the proton/electron mass ratio as having the value 1847.6, which, albeit in 1935, he declared agrees very well with the observational determination of the mass-ratio. Eddington deemed there to be such a mass unit mo furnished by the universe as a comparison object. It would have a mass which the above equation shows as being 135.926 times the electron mass. Readers should note here that this authors theory in no way supports the notion that a mass unit having this particular value exists and that we shall be using the symbol mo extensively later in this work to signify a different mass quantity, that of the aether lattice charges depicted in Fig. 2.2. As to Eddingtons formulations, it was this kind of physics that caused the physics community to develop a great distaste for any attempts to account for physical phenomena that were guided solely by prior knowledge of the measured numerical factors involved. Where numbers seemed to dominate the argument this outlawed the theory and caused physicists to find more appeal in factors such as symmetry in mathematical formulations purporting to describe physical phenomena. Yet those numbers, as they evolved from high precision measurement, do convey Natures message, whereas the notional pictures of symmetry in an imaginary mathematical picture of space are merely the product of wishful thinking. This author hopes, however, that with the passage of time since Eddingtons days and with the failure of existing techniques in physics to bridge the gaps which link gravitation with quantum theory and particle physics, physicists of this 21st century era will take note of what this author is offering in this work. In our next chapter, we will come to the introduction of our overall theme, an account of the physics governing the creation of our universe, and this brings on stage the principal player, the virtual muon that was mentioned above as the primary energy form in our aether. In a sense, one could say that Eddington led the way in
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
29
trying to decipher those numbers and he was headed in the right direction in postulating something in the universe having a standard mass intermediate the proton mass and the electron mass. However, it was too fanciful an argument to attribute those masses to the two solutions of a quadratic equation. The logical approach was to heed what J. J. Thomson had already presented as the mass-energy defined by the electron as a charge confined within a spherical volume of space and apply the general formula to other charges, including our unit mass form, the virtual muon, and combine these in an energy equation which seeks a minimum value.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
30
CHAPTER 3
The Ubiquitous Muon

Introduction The mu-meson, or muon, is the ghost particle that inhabits all space. It is ubiquitous, which, according to dictionary definition, means it is omnipresent; being everywhere or in an indefinite number of places at the same time. Yet it has no recognized role in the structure of matter. When it does appear, as in cosmic radiation or as a decay product of the pi-meson, the pion, it has a fleeting existence, but it has been found to have properties of the kind we associate with electrons. Indeed, as mentioned earlier, it is sometimes referred to as the heavy electron and it can, though only transiently, drive an electron out of its orbit around the nucleus of an atom and itself move around that nucleus, though in an orbit of much smaller radius. So why do I refer to it as the the ghost particle that inhabits all space? Well, although it is there, everywhere in space, we cannot sense any resistance to our motion that we can attribute to such a presence. Why is that? I can but suggest that it is because that is characteristic of its ghostly behaviour. You might, of course, be tempted to suggest much the same by assuming that I am merely imagining ghosts that do not exist at all, but do, please, stay with me as I show you how muons cooperate in the creation of the proton, the primary particle constituent of all matter. Muons exist in pairs of electrical charges that can simply dissolve by annihilating one another and shedding energy which can
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
31
meld into a uniformly dense background which allows those charges to reappear once an intruder has moved on. Indeed, we should not expect what is hidden from us in the quantum underworld of space to exhibit the same properties that are revealed to us by the atoms and molecules of our material world. If we meet resistance to our motion and press forward then we exert force and energy is dissipated as heat, but that heat energy is merely energy we have transferred to the obstructing object and that object is normally an atom, meaning a unit of matter and not a member of the lepton family that exists in the aether in a state of equilibrium consistent with uniform energy. If the medium that fills all space is already in a state of uniform equilibrium with pairs of muons conserving their energy in spite of material bodies moving amongst them and has already shed any surplus energy to create matter (protons and electrons), it will surely contrive to stay that way. At best, therefore, with the exception of a phenomenon to be referred to as vacuum spin or aether spin as we proceed, we can expect that ghost world of the aether to cooperate in making it possible for matter in motion to suffer events in which that matter transforms itself into some other form of matter. In this respect, since electrons and positrons exist as matter and not as a constituent of the aether, we can look to the participation of the electron-positron lepton family when contemplating energy transfer processes that involve photons and deployment of kinetic energy as in electrodynamic actions. It would be foolish, indeed, to reject the picture of space as populated by the ubiquitous muon, solely on the ground that it offers no resistance to our passage through it. So, you may say, If it is there and we cannot feel its presence, then why should we concern ourselves with its existence? Also, why use the word muon, given that is already the name of a particle that has materialised and has been seen as part of the particle spectrum in physics? The answer to this first question is that we can feel its presence indirectly, but not in the way one might expect. We do sense those
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
32
muons by the existence of their reaction to our presence as a function of our mass, because they regroup in a stronger ghostly form (the tauparticle, the -graviton of chapter 2) in which they assume a role that we sense as the phenomenon of gravitation. In other words, they react to ensure that we mortals, for example, stay put on body Earth and do not drift off into outer space. The answer to the second question is, to be frank with you, simply that I did not want to invent a new name for what I found was a pristine, newly born, version of an electrically charged energy quantum it is naked state, before it added just a little weight by consuming, as it were, an electron-positron pair, which then gave it a momentary presence as matter on the stage where we also perform. I have tried referring to it as the virtual muon to distinguish it from the real muon, but, in the end, I have chosen to call it the muon and, before leaving this chapter, I will enlighten you on the details of what I have just introduced. Reverting to the first question and that link with gravitation, it is this gravitational connection that is the reason why we should not ignore the ubiquitous muon. The story of Creation is based on the muon as the building block from which the edifice of our universe has been constructed and the muon is also the agent giving birth to the action accounting for the force of gravity, without which the stars and planets could not have formed. So please accept as our starting point that space is primarily a densely populated ocean of muons in which we, as intruding matter, have very little relevance. As we, with awe and due reverence, worship God, the Creator, those physicists amongst us might find a measure of satisfaction that can strengthen ones faith concerning the Creation of the universe by studying what now follows from this introductory insight into the creative workings of Nature. A snapshot overview of what lies ahead in later chapters is evident from Fig. 3.1.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
33
Fig. 3.1 In view of the audacity of this attempt to explain Creation, it seems not inappropriate to use the following words to summarize, just briefly and only by this intervention, what is illustrated, in a biblical style of wording. The justification for this is that we now have 21st century knowledge and the terminology of physics at our disposal but the sterile tone of modern scientific writings cannot convey the message of Creation with the same meaning as that of biblical times. And in the beginning there was Energy and that Energy packaged itself into units of electrical charge, in pairs of opposite polarity, that bear the name of Muons and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
34
which form a uniformly dense electrically-neutral plenum that fills all space. As this plenum evolved, the Muons gave birth to a system of Quons immersed in a uniform Continuum of electrical charge of opposite polarity to the charge of the Quons and there evolved from the chaos a state of order amongst those Quons as they acquired a rhythmic motion which was duly balanced dynamically by an accompaniment of Gravitons, specially created for that purpose. Then, with the passage of time, as some residual Energy needed accommodation, matter appeared in the form of Protons and Electrons which joined the Quons in the rhythm of their dance and which also had a Graviton counterpart. And those Gravitons, by their presence in the Continuum amongst those electrically charged Muons, gave rise to a force that acted over vast domains of space and between all matter in each such domain, thereby drawing that matter together to form a star or pair of stars in each of those domains. And so it was that the universe was created and those Protons and Electrons combined to form atoms some of which developed into the more complex forms from which Mankind and other life forms duly evolved. With this introduction the reader now has a choice. That muon form we see in experiments on particle physics is found to have a mass-energy by which a pair of muons would have a combined energy of 211 MeV. The reader can move on immediately to Chapter 4, to be introduced to the creation of the proton from those muons and, hopefully duly impressed by what has been discovered. Natures coded message there resolved is the one encoded in the number 1836.152, the proton/electron mass ratio.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
35
However, if the reader is reluctant to be led along a path where numbers may seem to be more important than the underlying physics, then such a reader may prefer to plough through the remainder of this chapter, where we will delve into some of the intricacies that distinguish the muon in its primeval, bare or virtual, form from its real form in its transient presence as matter. Numbers will still play a major part in this pursuit, simply because the measure of muon lifetime in seconds is a mere number, as is its mass ratio relative to the electron, but at least you will see that number derived from a rigorous theoretical exercise in physics. The reader needs to keep in mind that so much of what one reads in advanced theoretical physics is dominated by complex notions and even more complex equations which really have no clear meaning and, if given numerical form, seldom conform in precision with what is actually measured. It is very different from the realm of the engineer where one can design machines and structures that, in operation, match up well with theoretical prediction. I will give one example of this that pertains to the muon at the outset as we now proceed, but do realise that, in addressing this muon issue in detail, I am departing along a kind of side-track from the line of argument that I would otherwise follow, given a reader interested to learn something new by following a new theoretical route without being handicapped, in a sense, by prior indoctrination, as, for example, on the subject of time-dilation. You see, the muon and its lifetime variation as a function of speed is deemed to be a test verifying Einsteins Theory of Relativity and certain aspects of that theory are not in keeping with the process of Creation that I have introduced above. I hope these words of introduction will justify the diversion now offered by the remainder of this chapter. The Muon Lifetime The muon, as reported in Review of Modern Physics, (v. 48, 2, Part II, April, 1976), has an observed mean lifetime of:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
36
2.197134 +/- 0.000077 microsconds and it is an interesting task in physics to discover what it is that determines this particular lifetime period. Physicists have seen a way in which to progress in this quest by using the techniques of what is termed Electroweak Theory. Under a chapter heading Feynman Rules for Electroweak Theory on p. 236, Bailin and Love in their book Introduction to Gauge Field Theory (Adam Hilger Ltd, 1986) derive a theoretical value for the muon lifetime, namely: 2.90 +/- 2.61 microseconds Of this result they say: Thus, while our result is consistent with the data, the large errors on this theoretical value of muon lifetime mean that this is hardly a rigorous test of the theory. So if one is really interested in delving into the theoretical foundations which govern much of particle physics and particularly physics pertaining to leptons, the realm of quantum electrodynamics, one presumably should not be concerned with the kind of aether advocated in this work. However, do note that the theoretical derivation of numerical quantities that arise in basic physics is seen as a test of the theory involved. So let us put our alternative theory to the test by trying to derive the lifetime of the muon. First of all, we ask, What is a muon, meaning the one that appears in the matter frame of high energy particle physics? It will, according to the theory already presented, comply with the formulation used by J. J. Thomson for the electron, though having its charge radius reduced by a factor equal to the muon/electron mass ratio. Yet, given that electrons and positrons are prevalent in the quantum electrodynamic arena, one can wonder if a simple positive muon charge might attract two electrons and form a three-charge entity having the character we recognize as a negative muon.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
37
With this in mind, the author has surmised that such muon entities might well comprise a core charge that, of itself, has a mass that is an odd integer multiple of the electron mass, that multiple being 207. The reason is that those two electrons, in repelling one another, take up positions in near-contact with the muon charge but at diametrically opposite locations and, by adding two units of electron mass as offset by the negative mass-energy of their electrostatic interaction, the net result is that the muon entity would have a mass of approximately 206.75 electron mass units. The measured muon/electron mass ratio is 206.76835(11) (Physical Review D, 25, 652; 1982) but onward analysis which involved a resonant wave interaction governing the actual spacing of the core muon body and the satellite electrons (or positrons) led to the authors theory giving the mass ratio as: 207 + 2 - 9[207/(208+2/9)]/4 which is 206.7683078. The full theory for this is of published record in the Italian Institute of Physics publication Lettere al Nuovo Cimento (38, 342; 1983). So, this result being precisely in accord with the measured value, you see why the author is confident that this model of the muon is the proper basis from which to seek to explain the lifetime and so test the theory further. Indeed, what is now to be described supercedes the theory for that lifetime that features at p. 146 of the authors book Physics Unified, published in 1980. Concerning muon lifetime, physicists well know that Einsteins theory requires the lifetime of a particle to increase with speed according to a relativistic formula, just as the same theory requires the energy of a particle to increase according to the same formula. Already in this work, in discussing electron energy theory as advocated by J. J. Thomson, we have seen why the mass of a particle moving at high speed is increased in accordance with what is observed, as in the Kaufmanns experiments of the 19th century. There is no particular merit in Einsteins derivation of the mass-increase formula. Concerning muon lifetime, however, the lifetime
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
38
enhancement with speed is best explained once one has an acceptable theory for the muon lifetime with the muon virtually at rest. Otherwise, it makes no sense at all to theorize about the lifetime changing with speed when it would seem that all one needs to do is to argue that lifetime is proportional to mass-energy and, as Einstein does, then argue that time itself is perceived to change in its rhythm as a function of speed. We will confine our concerns here with deriving that muon lifetime for the rest condition, but if readers wish to see how this same aether theory does give account of muon lifetime dilation with speed then the appropriate reference is this authors paper entitled: Meson Lifetime Dilation as a Test of Special Relativity, (Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 206; 1983). Einsteins theory is not involved in this exercise, but one can point to a section of that paper where one may read: A primary publication on this subject is that of Bailey and Picasso (Progress in Nuclear Physics, 12, 62; 1970) who measured muon lifetime at very high speed for which the theoretical relativistic value was 26.69 microseconds compared with a rest lifetime of 2.198 microseconds. Thus ... (this authors theory) .... tells us that the observed lifetime at this value (of energy at the high speed compared with rest-mass energy) should be 0.56% low compared with the relativistic value. This is quite small, but it is also significant because Bailey and Picasso reported measurements to an experimental accuracy of 0.2% and did in fact find that the observed value was lower than the relativistic value by 1.2%. Though they regard this as adequate agreement the difference was sufficiently concerning for them to speculate at some length about the possible reasons for the difference. Only further research can verify the speculation, but it can be said that the question remains
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
39
open and the indications are that the relativistic expectation is up to 1% above the measured value of the muon lifetime at these energy levels. Concerning the muon and this authors theory, one further point of interest before we come to the derivation of that lifetime property is that the very same model which the author used for deriving the mass of the muon gave a full account of the muon g-factor, again without involving Einsteins theory or, indeed, the standard arguments based on Feynman diagrams. The principles involved are much the same as those this author has applied in deriving the anomalous magnetic moment (g-factor) of the electron, the latter being presented in this work as Appendix III. The periodical reference is this authors paper: The Muon gfactor by Cavity Resonance Theory, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 271; 1984. The theoretical value for the muon g-factor was found to be 2(1.001165918), a result in quite remarkable agreement with the then measured value of 2(1.0011659230), given the simplicity of the theory used. One can see, therefore, in this digression from the main topic of this work, that concerning the physics of Creation, we need not lose sight of the reality of what is observed concerning the muon in our laboratory experiments. This point is made particularly because, in introducing the ubiquitous muon of the aether medium as something different but active in the quantum underworld of space, it may seem that we are invoking arbitrary assumptions, whereas the analysis, once we reach the realm of quantum theory, will be seen to lead us to a mass-energy for that ubiquitous muon which is indeed very close to that of the real muon which reveals itself in our experiments. Now we come to the question of the muon lifetime. The aether we are considering in this work has a unit cell volume that is (108)3 times the cube of the radius of the electron charge and it will emerge as we proceed that the aether has a rhythmic cycle at the Compton
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
40
electron frequency, the photon frequency corresponding to the electron mass-energy quantum. In every such cycle there is a quantum-electrodynamic event associated with the energy quantum of a pair of virtual muons but such events occur at random positions in space. The proposition now advanced is that if those two electron charges associated with the core muon form sustain a hit simultaneously in the same rhythmic period, then the muon will be conditioned for decay. By hit it is meant that the virtual muon of opposite charge polarity is created within the space occupied by the electron charge. By conditioned for decay is meant the transient creation of a system which statistically has the prospect of decaying in the manner now explained. Given one unit of muon energy plus two similar units owing to the impact of the two virtual muons, there are three units of muon energy. Given also the fact, as we shall see later in this work, that the space occupied by material charge forms is conserved in particle reactions, the muon, when subjected to such a hit is converted to a higher energy level, pending decay or reversion to the normal state. Some muons so affected are transiently elevated to an energy level that is less than three times their normal rest-mass energy, whereas others are elevated to an energy level that is greater than three times their normal rest-mass energy. The latter are the ones that experience decay. The energy deployment determines the ratio of the two states as being 17:8, meaning that the chance of decay for each hit is 8 in 25. This immediately leads us to the formula for muon lifetime as being: (25/8)(3/4)2(108)6(8.093)10-21 s which is: 2.199 microseconds a value that is within one part per thousand of the experimental value.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
41
If a muon core charge +e is suddenly forced to shed its two electron (or positron) associates and is driven to an energy level some three times greater then one could contemplate the space occupied by its basic charge form being shared equally by three charges, +e, -e and +e. Each such new charge form will have a charge radius that decreases by a factor equal to the cube root of 3. Conversely, each such charge will have a mass-energy enhanced by the same factor 1.44225, according to the Thomson formula already introduced. Now, depending upon how these three charges arrange themselves in a group, the overall mass-energy can be greater or less than that of three basic muons.
Fig. 3.2 One possible configuration of the three charges is depicted in Fig. 3.2 and such a charge group has an electric energy that, in the basic muon units, is 3 as offset by the sum of three components of electrostatic interaction energy. This leads to the following quantity: 3 - 0.75 - 0.75 + 0.375 = 1.875 and, upon multiplication by 1.44225, this becomes 2.7042. We could then expect that, since muons are involved and are subject to pair creation and pair annihilation, the number of such configurations that might be created as a group would require an energy threshold that is an appropriate integer multiple of the basic
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
42
muon energy quantum. If now one multiplies 2.7042 by successive integers until one comes to a value that is itself well within one part in 1,000 of being an integer value, then it is found that the necessary multiple is 17. As such a group forms by deploying a total of three muon units of energy at each step there will be a surplus of energy of 0.2958 units, some of which is likely to be deployed in helping to create a more energetic version of that three-charge system, as shown in Fig. 3.3.
Fig. 3.3 Here one of the charges is separated from the other two and the energy at separation to a distance far in excess of the charge radius may then be as high as: 3 - 0.75 = 2.25 times 1.44225, which is 3.2451. It seems then possible that, as each of the Fig. 3.2 charge combinations forms by shedding that energy of 0.2958 units, there is the possibility that the two such quanta of energy shed by the nearby activity of creating two similar charge combinations will converge on the primary combination and act to separate the charges and so form the Fig. 3.3 charge system. This is because 2(0.2958) exceeds (0.2958 + 0.2451), meaning that 0.0507 units of energy disperse at this second stage of action to leave three charge combinations, two of the Fig. 3.2
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
43
form and one of the Fig. 3.3 form. Therefore, in progressing to the threshold stage at which 17 of the Fig. 3.2 combinations have been created one has by then also created 8 of the Fig. 3.3 form. This is very satisfactory because 8 times 3.2451 is 25.96, which is itself within one part in 650 of being an integer. As to the muon decay process, the Fig. 3.2 charge combination will revert to the basic muon state because two adjacent charges will annihilate one another and, being close to the remaining charge, their charge volume will be conserved for use by that residual charge as it sheds surplus energy. However, for the Fig. 3.3 charge system, the decay by charge pair annihilation occurs at a distance from the residual charge and that charge, in shedding energy, cannot capture the space vacated by the charge pair and so revert to its basic muon form. It stands in isolation and lacks the stability assured by the close presence of other charges having the same properties. The latter is important because a group of three or more like charges conforming with the J. J. Thomson formula for energy in terms of charge volume can preserve equilibrium by exchanging energy and still conserve their overall energy and charge volume. Hence, owing to that isolation, the Fig. 3.3 charge combinations must decay at the end of the rhythmic quantum cycle. For this reason there is the statistical probability that in every group of 25 muons that happen to be excited to the potentiallyunstable condition, there are 8 that will decay and 17 that survive decay, thereby substantiating the above formula for the muon lifetime. Now, the author will be the first to concede that the above account is somewhat complicated in the derivation of that 8 to 17 ratio and there may be a better alternative yet to be discovered, but it does give what seems to be the right answer. Accordingly, it is included here for the record and also to make the case that, in comparing this aether theory with Einsteins theory or what is referred to as Electroweak theory, there is really no contest, given that Einsteins theory does not even offer any estimate of the muon lifetime that one
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
44
can define in numerical terms, whereas the other standard theory gives, as stated above, a figure well off target and is anyway subject to an uncertainty having a standard deviation amounting to 90% of the estimated value. Concerning other particle lifetimes we shall not, elsewhere in this work, be seeking to derive further theoretical values as evidence supporting this theory. Our primary concern in this work is the problem of Creation on the universal scale. However, by way of reference, readers interested in particle lifetime theory may find it of interest to look up the following papers by this author. A Theory of Pion Lifetime, Lettere Nuovo Cimento, 33, 237 (1982). A Theory of Neutron Lifetime, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 31, 383 (1981). The Finite Lifetime of the Electron, Speculations in Science and Technology, 7, 3 (1984). The latter paper discusses the reason why the electron has a finite lifetime evident from its electron tunnelling properties. It must have a lifetime if the above theory for muon lifetime is correct, because it is the dual hit of two electrons (or positrons) as a target that gives basis for muon decay. That electron lifetime, based of course on a single hit, is of the order of 0.75x10-13 seconds and may be derived from what has been presented above by using the formula: (3/4)(108)3(8.093)10-21 s One of the most fascinating questions one can then consider is whether the proton has a finite lifetime. As for the electron, standard physics offers no suggestion that these two most fundamental of all particles of matter may be subject to eventual decay. However, may not the reason for this be that decay sheds energy which our aether has to take under its wing and look after pending finding a new home for that energy in the system of matter? It is simply a question of equilibrium as between the energy the aether can store to meet its own structural needs and surplus energy it may possess transiently pending
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
45
shedding it to create matter. Given then that the basic forms of matter in the local space domain of our experience consist in negative electric charges assuming the form of the electron and positive electric charges forming as protons, need we be surprised if we were to find that both an electron and a proton may have finite lifetimes but, upon decay, they are recreated almost at the point where they suffered their demise? As to the proton, though we shall see in the next chapter how it is created, we will later in this work discuss an aspect of this process that explores the broader picture of proton creation even in outer space, or rather the aethers attempts at proton creation that fail owing to lack of surplus energy. That ongoing scenario of an aether subject to quantum fluctuations involving those ubiquitous muons in trying to create protons is one from which we can derive the theoretical value of the Hubble constant as a feature of a non-expanding universe necessarily set in that aether. Such is the scale and scope of the subject of this book concerning Creation.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
46
CHAPTER 4
The Creation of the Proton

Introduction In this chapter we will address the problem of proton creation. The proton is the most fundamental particle in the composition of matter. Our task here is to explain how it is created and how similar creation processes attempt to create other particles that we only glimpse by their transient existence. The proton is indeed very special as there is something unique about the conditions under which it is created, something which assures its stable existence. However, contrary to general belief, even a proton must have a finite lifetime, but in view of its creation propensity its decay is followed by its immediate re-creation and so it appears to be immune from decay. It is the same for the electron, but we can infer a measure of its lifetime from its ability to tunnel across potential barriers. The starting point in this account is the activity of the virtual muon system that populates all space. The muon is a lepton form intermediate the taon and the electron. It decays to form the electron but it can also, in its game play with other muons, build the particle forms that include both the taon and the proton and, once created, those protons are survivors for the reason now to be explained. The Proton Creation Formula Earlier in this work there has been extensive use of the formula ascribed to J. J. Thomson for the mass-energy of a charge e
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
47
confined within a sphere of a radius we here denote by the symbol x. The energy E is simply: E = 2e2/3x ....................................... (4.1) If we now imagine that two such charges of opposite charge polarity but different radii x and y exist in surface contact, we see that their centres are separated by a distance (x+y). This means that the combination has an energy amounting to that of the two components as offset by the Coulomb interaction energy e2/(x+y). Suppose now, given such a combination, that one charge, that of radius x is not susceptible to x changing in value but that the other charge can adapt by adjusting the radius y to suit some optimum energy condition. This is an electrostatic system and we are familiar with the energy of such systems seeking to minimize. Therefore, now let y change until the total energy of the combination is a minimum. This will mean that: - 2e2/3x2 + e2/(x+y)2 = 0 ............................. (4.2) and so we find that y is equal to x times the square root of 3/2 minus 1 or 0.2247x. The energy of the charge combination in this minimal energy state is then found to be even less than that of the stable charge of radius x by the small factor of 0.2247 squared or 0.0505, meaning that the overall combination has an energy slightly less than 95% of that stable charge. The two-charge unit just described is electrically neutral and, with the dominant component having a mass-energy A and the dependant component having a mass-energy B, we now adopt the following expression to symbolize its energy: (A:B)MIN that energy being 0.9495A. Now suppose that a proton of energy P and charge +e has been created from the turmoil of excess energy in the aether that is seeking a state of equilibrium by deploying that energy into a
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
48
standard particle form. Remember that in discussing the graviton in chapter 2 it was evident that the volume of the charge continuum displaced by the existence of the graviton bore a crucial relationship with the energy of that graviton. If that volume expands slightly, signifying a loss of some of that energy, there had to be other gravitons that absorbed that energy by contracting in equal measure. Such a scenario implies greater particle stability where all those particles have identical form. In the aether the taon is one such particle form and in matter the proton is such a particle form. Then there is that ubiquitous virtual particle form, the muon of chapter 3, and its double, the dimuon now introduced, the mystery particles of the vacuum medium. Once created the proton will be stable by virtue of its association with so many other protons of identical form, but the proton, along with other particles, can engage in a violent encounter if one of those muons or dimuons gets too close. The result is that an amount of energy z will be shed in a form nucleated by a charge +e but the muon or dimuon will escape unscathed to leave a neutral entity: (P:k)MIN where k is 1 or 2 and signifies the energy of the muon. The existence of the dimuon is explained by considering the combination of two muons, one of charge +e and one of charge -e, with the energy being retained without loss in a neutral combination represented by: (2:) To understand this simply put y equal to 2x in the system described at the beginning of this section to signify that one charge has twice the radius and half the mass-energy of the other and you will see that the Coulomb interaction energy exactly cancels the energy of the second charge. The dimuon is a latent component in the neutral system transiently formed by muon pair combination.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
49
It seems possible therefore that k could be 2 and, keeping this in mind, we now write the equation: (P:k)MIN + z = P ................................ (4.3) Given that the proton is somehow created and is a survivor, this equation is presumably one that is reversible in the sense that it says something about the creation of a positively charged particle z when P does get embroiled in a decay incident but it is equally a statement that has bearing upon how P is created. Somehow that particle of energy z has an independent origin and, if we can discover what that origin is, then we will discover the secret of proton creation. Well, one can now utter the word Eureka, because the answer is so obvious. In that (A:B) expression put A as 2 as if we are considering that transiently neutral combination of a muon charge pair, but suppose the muon component B sheds energy to become z as that combination adopts its minimum energy state. One then has a neutral particle form of energy: (2:z)MIN This then becomes the target for attack by an odd number n of muons which drive out the z component and combine as a charge of energy P within the new neutral entity. The formulation of this is: n + (2:z)MIN = (P:k)MIN + z ..................... (4.4) We know the value of z from this latter step. It is 0.2247(2) and we also know from the earlier equation (4.3) that z is 0.0505(P), all of which merely tells us that: P = 8.899() ...................................... (4.5) which was evident anyway once k was seen to be 2 but the theory has relied on the assumption that P rather than the dimuon is the dominant partner in the neutral combination yielding this result. That assumption has to be justified and it is here that the factor n comes into the picture. It sits in that two-stage equation (4.4) indicating that the major energy input needed for proton creation is a muon source but, absent verification, we have no assurance that its
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
50
integer value n will give the now-expected answer, nor whether it will prove to be an odd integer. Also there is so much scope in particle physics for energy discrepancies owing to Nature not complying with ones ideal theoretical portrayal that one would surely expect to find that some adjustment in regard to charge spacing or whatever will become necessary to satisfy the odd integer n requirement. Now take note that the value of: (2:z)MIN is simply 0.9495 times 2 or 1.899() which tells us that precisely 7 muons have to be added to create the proton. It just so happens that the mathematics of all this works with such perfection in requiring n to be an odd integer that can only have the value 7 given the dimuon foundation. It is an almost miraculous feature of the underworld activity of the aether medium that it has this truly amazing unique energy resonance property which causes a particle to form which locks its energy level at a unique value so precisely related to that of the prevalent lepton of the aether, the virtual muon. In saying this I can but emphasize the fact that we have here the secret of the feature of Creation by which one, and only one, high mass-energy particle form has a dominating presence in matter. It is the proton family, by which I include the antiproton. The electron is equally prevalent but its existence is linked to the unique value of the universal rhythm of time, owing to its relatively low rest-massenergy being that given by the frequency of the aether as multiplied by Plancks constant h, as will be discussed in chapters 6 and 7. Although physicists may argue that the neutron can claim also to be very prevalent in matter, I deny that claim, because the neutron has only been detected as a short-lived particle form, which decays into a proton and an electron. Its imagined existence in atomic nuclei is based solely on theory which pretends there is no aether and tries to balance the books accounting for mass and charge. An atomic
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
51
nucleus having n units of charge and N units of mass is deemed to comprise n protons and N-n neutrons, but given the role played by the aether, with atomic nuclei having charges which meld into the aether particle lattice by adopting its structural form, one can imagine that atomic nucleus having n protons and N-n antiprotons, but with those antiprotons each having displaced a quon from its seat in the aether lattice. So, by understanding how protons are created in terms of aether activity, we are opening the way forward for a better understanding of the structure and composition of atomic nuclei. However, that is digressing from our main theme and we must get back on track. Once we have derived from first principles the precise energy quantum of the aethers virtual muon we shall know the precise mass-energy of the proton. Our progress so far assures us that it is 8.899 times that of the virtual muon or, as may be shown by the very simple mathematics involved, to be far more precise as 8.898979486 times that quantity. Note that, the equivalent algebraic formulation for this quantity is: 9 - 2[(3/2) - 1]2 which is the expression used in equation (2.8) in chapter 2. The Mass-Energy of the Taon In the effort to understand the myriad of particles that have revealed themselves in high energy experiments by particle physicists, one has sought to build patterns of their relationship and classification. This seems not to be aimed at understanding how these particles are created but rather more directed at spotting gaps in the pattern and looking for evidence that might fill those gaps. All that is a rather futile exercise, bearing in mind that those particles are all so short lived that one wonders whether they are Natures creation or man-made resonance effects arising from the high energies used in their manufacture.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
52
Nevertheless, there has to be a natural process by which those gravitons discussed in chapter 2 are created and, given the argument that the activity of the muons in the aether creates the proton, it is logical that we should try to build on that theme in considering graviton creation. I would expect that, since the creation of protons can mean that matter is being added to the E frame of the aether and this implies the need for gravitons to be created to provide dynamic balance by settling in the G-frame, the creation of protons and gravitons could well occur as if from the same manufacturing process. One needs to imagine that the aether is ever trying to deploy its energy to create protons but failing to keep them alive if the energy surplus to its equilibrium requirements is insufficient. Also, and with equal vigour, it will surely seek to create gravitons as well, given the necessary energy and vacancy in the graviton frame that provides dynamic balance for the quantum jitter of matter, such as those protons that are created amongst the quons in their reference frame. So proton creation and graviton creation go hand in hand. Note, however, that what you will see emerge from this exercise is the creation of the more prevalent graviton, the taon form already discussed in chapter 2, where it was shown how the taon and the more massive g-graviton form were related. The latter, as we have seen, has a mass that is 1.452627 times that of the taon. If taons are created with protons, why not just consider the possibility that they can emerge from the very same process as that represented for proton creation in equations (4.4) and (4.5)? All we need to do is to imagine that two proton creation events occur side by side, meaning a proton and an antiproton, so that, in energy terms, the overall equation is: 2(P:k)MIN + 2z = 2P .......................... (4.6) Then suppose that, before the emerging proton-antiproton pair 2P are created, only to decay by mutual annihilation, the two z particles,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
53
being of opposite charge e, as otherwise they would not come together, merely combine first and so decay to dissipate their energy. That would leave the energy of those two neutral combinations of charge which might find a way of combining with a similar neutral energy entity to then divide as two particles of opposite polarity charge e. If the product were a pair of taons then, by the following equation: 4(P:k)MIN = + + - ........................... (4.7) The mass of each of those taons would be 2(0.9495)P or 1.899(P). Now, since the proton P has the mass-energy 938.3 MeV, this means that the taon has the mass-energy value close to 1.782 GeV. This corresponds with the algebraic formulation of equation (2.9) in chapter 2. So here we have the taon that assumes the role of a graviton emerging from the very same process that accounts for proton creation. This mass-energy quantum is that found from measurements of the taons that appear transiently in the matter state. Moreover, there is something we can even add in connection with this process that is a kind of additional check of our analysis. It is the fact that: (P:k)MIN = 891 MeV ........................... (4.8) and that there is a meson in the experimental particle spectrum that is denoted K*(892) to signify that its measured mass-energy is approximately 892 MeV and this meson is the only one intermediate the proton mass-energy of 938.3 MeV and the mass-energy 783 MeV of the (783) meson. This, therefore, endorses both the above derivation of proton mass and this more direct route of accounting for the taon creation process. Now, at this stage, it is interesting to explore this subject of taon creation just a little further and ask ourselves what happens if Nature tries to create more massive particles by bombarding the taon with pairs of muons. Well, once the energy involved is high enough
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
54
then it would seem that the onward decay could bring those heavier gravitons into their transient existence. However, other particle forms having a much shorter lifetime will surely be created as well and it is of interest to consider this, as we now see. Hyperon Creation Taons are leptons. They decay by mutual annihilation and such decay can be triggered by muons. Consider then their combination with a pair of muons of opposite charge. Might the taon be converted into a charged particle of higher mass-energy? If it were and this new particle, lacking the company of an abundance of similar particle forms, found it was unstable, then how might it stage that decay? Well, since space in the continuum cannot be created by a spontaneous demand, it seems likely that it would share its own charge volume with that of two of its brethren of opposite charge e, so that, by decay of an opposite charge pair, the single charge could take up residence in a space having three times the volume as the original charge form. This would mean that the particle so formed would have a charge radius larger by the cube root of 3 than the original particle and so smaller in mass-energy in inverse proportion. What this means is that, if N muon pairs merge their energy with the taon to create a single particle of charge e and energy plus 2N, then three such particles could come together and shed much of their pooled energy in a high energy environment to leave a new residual particle having a mass given by: 0.693( + 2N) Note that 0.693 is the inverse of the cube root of 3. With as 1.782 GeV and 2 as 211 MeV this suggests that, depending upon N, a series of particle by-products might be generated in high energy particle experiments, their mass-energies being:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
55
1.235 GeV for N = 0 : (1235) 1.381 GeV for N = 1 : *(1385) 1.527 GeV for N = 2 : *(1530) 1.674 GeV for N = 3 : -(1675) These mass-energy values can be seen to correspond to hyperons that feature in the high energy particle spectrum, as indicated by their standard symbols. The data listings from which these are quoted evidently rounds-off energy values to multiples of 5 MeV, no doubt owing to the approximate nature of the measurements. It is submitted that on this basis we can be quite confident about the physics underlying the particle creation processes here discussed. The taon is clearly a major player on the aether scene and it is very reassuring to find that its creation stems from activity which also produces the proton. It is not intended here in this discussion of the physics of creation that we should try to delve into the creation of the many other particles that are found in high energy experiments. All I seek is to give account of the creation of the primary matter particles and the particles hidden but ever at work in its governing agency, the aether. The task, as we have already seen, has taken us into the realm of unified field theory and there is much more to discuss concerning cosmic issues. This has to be after we have really delved deeper into the mathematics of the aether to show how its structure and form give basis for wave mechanical phenomena and determine the finestructure constant. The latter is a key factor in any pursuit to understand the foundation for the creation of our universe. Also much has to be said to reinforce the case for the aether already presented, given the strength of conviction of theoretical physicists on the relativistic front, the group hostile to aether theory with its three-space dimensions, and those of the quantumelectrodynamic front, the group hostile to attempts at deriving the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
56
dimensionless constants of physics by methods they see as unorthodox. This effort, which may seem a little tedious, will include the theoretical derivation of the virtual muon mass, thereby allowing full theoretical evaluation of the proton-electron mass ratio, but, for those who have skipped over the latter part of the previous chapter, one can see by referring back that we have not ignored the slightly different mass of the muon in evidence in the matter frame. Happily, once through the detail of the next three chapters, we shall arrive at the more exciting prospect of seeing how stars are created and the spin-off from that pursuit which brings us down to Earth as we explore the scope for using the knowledge so gained to tap into the energy resource of the aether itself.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
57
CHAPTER 5
The Law of Gravity

Introduction Here in this chapter we will revert to a consideration of the phenomenon of gravitation as it is seen from the perspective of orthodox physicists. They do not have insight into the processes by which Mother Nature develops the force of gravity and have no way of regulating its action, which means that there is little they can do, apart from measuring the laboratory value of G and observing gravitys action in the astronomical arena. Having, as this work shows, spent many years developing and publishing accounts of the theory which forms the subject of this work, this author can but be a little depressed upon reading something concerning gravity and published in the British press during the days when this chapter is written. The TIMES newspaper dated January 9, 2003 highlighted a feature as News under the heading: Einstein vindicated at Newtons expense. It would seem that at the annual meeting of the American Astronomical Association the results will be announced which show that Einstein was right. The speed of gravity has been measured at 1.06 times the speed of light, with a margin of error of plus or minus 0.21 and since the speed of light is the only possibility for the speed of gravity that falls within that range, so gravity complies with Einsteins prediction. Newton suffers defeat! His theory has failed because Newton deemed the force of gravity to be an instantaneous action-at-a-distance.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
58
On such a basis those involved in this research justify the following statement as quoted at the end of this newspaper article. We also hope that over the next decade Russia, Japan and the United States will succeed in extending the largest radio telescope arrays beyond the diameter of Earth by putting radio telescopes in orbit, and that this will confirm and greatly increase the accuracy of our result. One can but wonder why it is that scientists believe they can justify vast expenditure on future research enabling them to look deeper and deeper into outer space in search of inspiration by which to find solutions to the problems they confront here and now on body Earth. Accordingly, in this chapter the author will indulge in a critical survey of the state-of-the-art pertaining to gravity and ask the reader to weigh the case for and against the opinions expressed. The issue is not whether Einstein was right and Newton was wrong. The issue is simply that of understanding how fast gravitational action does assert itself and here, in this chapter, one can open the debate by reference to an assertion often made concerning quantum theory that electrostatic action is an instantaneous action-at-distance. Having, in chapter 2, introduced the notion that gravitation might well be rooted in electrostatic action, readers will then see why, in the light of the above newspaper article, this debate is needed. I will in this chapter discuss the theme generally but nevertheless show how the evidence of record deemed to support Einsteins gravitational theory is better explained by analysis based on the role played by the aether. The debate which follows is merely an introduction. Quotations The TIMES article was authored by Mark Henderson, Science Correspondent. It included as aside remarks the following statements:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
59
General theory of relativity: Einsteins most famous work, which accounts for the nature of the cosmos, was proved in 1919 by the British astronomer Sir Arthur Eddington, who showed that light from distant stars was bent by the Sun during a solar eclipse. Quantum theory: Einsteins other great work remains the best model that physicists have for understanding the forces that govern the interior of atoms, matters building blocks. But it does not incorporate gravity, and scientists are still seeking a grand theory of everything that unites relativity and quantum mechanics, knitting together every aspect of physics. So, there you are, Einsteins theory is proved and to move forward to achieve the ultimate target of all physicists one must seek a way of uniting relativity and quantum mechanics. Well, the aether theory on offer in this work does unite quantum mechanics with gravity but ignores Einsteins doctrinaire distortions of a four-dimensional space medium that physicists refer to as spacetime. Those scientists who follow the Einstein track can never, ever, reach their Holy Grail, that grand theory, without getting off that track and setting off on ground first trod by Sir Arthur Eddington and confronting with an open mind the task of deciphering the significance of Natures physical constants. The TIMES article tells us that the speed of gravity being equal to the speed of light has: never been anything more than an assumption and has always been impossible to test. .............. The experiment to measure gravitys speed was conceived by Ed Fomalont, of the National Radio astronomy Observatory in Charlottesville, Virginia, and Sergei Kopeikin,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
60
Professor of Theoretical Physics of the University of Missouri-Columbia. That experiment involved the use of radio telescopes to measure the effect of planet Jupiter in traversing across the path of the radio waves we receive from a very bright quasar named JO842-1835 and, owing to Jupiters gravitational field, thereby deflecting the path of those signals so that the quasars position appeared displaced. The Debate The reference to the speed of gravity is itself something that needs definition. If one considers the speed of light, at least one can interrupt the light beam at a distance from the point of measurement and so relate time and distance as needed to make the measurement. Gravity as a force exists given the existence of a source body and we really have no way of turning that force on and off. All we can do is to move the body itself and then the question arises as to whether the gravitational field shares that motion as if rigid (instantaneous action) or adjusts to the motion with a time delay. Keep in mind that there is a world of difference in physics as between the notional retardation of the action of a force such as gravity and the delay involved in gravitational potential energy redeploying in the field system which envelops the mass involved. The reader, in yielding to theoretical notions, has to decide whether to think in terms of force or in terms of energy, whereas Mother Nature does not think but simply acts by a process of adjusting the distribution of the energy in the system to optimise action leading to a minimum energy potential state. If the motion of a planet around the sun were truly a circular motion with the planets orbit having a constant radius, then the mutual gravitational energy potential between sun and planet would surely be constant as no energy is being transferred to cater for changes of kinetic energy by the two interacting bodies. If, however,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
61
there were to be a cyclical change of that radius, as applies for elliptical orbital motion of the planet, then there would be energy transfer to and from the planet drawing on, or replenishing, that gravitational potential resource. Now, in the context of this situation, what is meant by speed of gravity? Gravity does not move, so are we referring to the speed of energy that is traversing between planet and the gravitational field system? Then one must ask where that potential energy is seated as it can hardly be that it sits at the Suns centre and to apply the proposition that the energy we associate with gravity travels at the speed of light we need to know where it sets out from in its journey in order to reach the planet and resettle as it adds to the kinetic energy of that planet. As to the basic orbital component of circular motion, the radius is determined by a balance of centrifugal force and the force of gravity. The balance is an unchanging quantity and if gravity has a speed is this something that was only a factor when the solar system was first created or is it somehow something that affects the planets motion on an ongoing basis? The history of this subject tells us that, if we assume the circular component of orbital motion is not affected by the speed of gravity but the radial component of motion is so affected, then the radial period of the oscillations will be slightly retarded in relation to the orbital period. This explains why the orbit is subject to a slow progressive advance of its perihelion, something observed and particularly noticeable in the case of planet Mercury. Indeed, to get the theory to fit what is observed, namely the 43 seconds of arc anomalous advance of perihelion per century, the speed of that radial gravitational retardation effect has to be deemed to involve the speed of light. Gerber in 1898 (Zeitschrift f. Math. u, Phys., 43, 93), in explaining this 43 second of arc advance per century, assumed the gravitational action to have that speed of light limitation. Readers who regard Einstein as the genius who discovered why the planet Mercury has such an anomalous motion should take note
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
62
that Gerbers paper was published 18 years before that of Einstein. Gerbers formula for the anomaly was exactly that which later appeared in Einsteins paper. Gerbers paper was entitled: The Space and Time Propagation of Gravitation and, though not published until after Gerbers decease, a second paper repeating and expanding on Gerbers analysis appeared in January 1917 in Gerbers name in the same German scientific periodical: Ann. d. Phys. in which Einsteins 1916 paper had appeared. It was obvious that there was concern that Gerbers contribution had been ignored and there was then onward debate as Seelinger drew attention to a mathematical flaw in Gerbers analysis. Oppenheim responded, stressing that the issue of finite speed was still open, but Seelinger reasserted his position to ensure that his arguments were not eroded by Oppenheims views. (See: Ann. d. Phys., 52, 415; 1917: 53, 31 & 163; 1917 and 54, 38; 1917). That debate revealed the difficulties of picturing how gravitational action asserts a retarded effect, given that one can hardly expect the flow of energy to be along a pencil thin line drawn between Sun and planet and given that point above that one is not even sure where the energy that is fed to the planet is seated before it sets off on that journey. However, one can be certain that somehow the speed of light is a governing factor and that what was needed was the proper interpretation of that observed 43 arc-second value to gain insight into the physical action. Since physics involves matching assumptions with observations to verify those assumptions we then have a kind of chicken and egg argument. If the measurement is made before the assumption is recorded then that is not regarded as proving the theory, but if the assumption is made and duly found to be consistent with later measurement that is said to prove the theory. Such is the illogical arena in which the contests between theoreticians are staged. One must, it seems, predict what is later verified by experiment in order to be applauded by acceptance of ones theory. To explain by theory what is already known is not a respectable pursuit.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
63
In the case of the anomalous perihelion motion of Mercury the measurement antedated the theory, but in the case of gravitational bending of light Einsteins theory predated the measurement by the eclipse expedition in which Eddington was involved. Thus one may wonder how one can ever explain why gravitation deflects a ray of light, except by Einsteins argument, given Eddingtons assertion that this latter phenomenon is proof of Einsteins theory. Well, light-energy quanta, photons, supposedly travel at the speed of light and energy E has mass E/c2, in accordance with classical electron theory, so those light-quanta, in moving past an astronomical body, are subject to the pull of gravity. Since, as light from a distant star, they do not travel around that body in a circular orbit, their distance from the body is changing constantly and so energy transfer should be occurring. Now here there is a real problem. How can those photons change their energy, energy surely gained by them as they approach the deflecting body and lost later on receding from it? Does the light frequency change during passage? Do they travel faster in their close transit past that body? If so then their deflection would be away from the body rather that towards it. Alternatively, maybe we should be thinking in terms of electromagnetic wave theory, rather than photon theory. Maybe we should be wondering how the gravitational action of that body affects the refractive index of the aether and thereby the speed of light through that aether which becomes a function of that refractive index. That TIMES article, in telling us about the speed of gravity does not provide any answers. I believe that photons, the product of quantum theory, do not in fact travel at the speed of light. Photons are events at localities in the aether where energy shed by matter is absorbed into the aether or energy shed by aether is absorbed by matter. A photon is deemed to travel between two such localities but in reality all that travels is an electromagnetic signal which is a mere ripple of energy already present in the aether, a ripple characterised by
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
64
direction and frequency. Such hypothesis is not tested by the quasar radio wave deflection observations. However, if you think of photons as energy quanta travelling at the speed of light as part of a ray in close transit past the Sun, then, since energy has mass, but yet photons seem to have no mass, you confront a conflicting situation, one made all the worse by the fact that, owing to the gravity, a mass quantum, as just indicated, should go faster in its transit past the Sun and that means that, as a part of a ray of light, that ray will surely be deflected away from the Sun rather than towards it, contrary to what is found by observation. Do be assured, therefore, that a ray of light cannot be the flow of a train of photons and so seek instead to understand how gravity affects the refractive index of the medium that pervades all space. To base ones arguments on vague terminology, the expression speed of gravity, is only a way of raising more unanswerable questions rather than explaining unanswered questions! The Way Forward To reach a position on common ground with that of physicists familiar with Einsteins theory I will proceed by making an assumption and I will show how this leads directly to the formulation of Einsteins law of gravitation. This should be seen as verification of that assumption. Then I will show by separate aether-based theory that the formulation governing light ray deflection arises from the effect of gravity upon the refractive index of the aether. The inference is that, whereas Einsteins theory explains the perihelion anomaly and light ray deflection by the same modification of the Newtons law of gravitation, the physics of gravitation requires two separate theoretical foundations for these two phenomena, because there is no analogy between planetary mass and the electromagnetic wave. I note, however, that before leaving this chapter I will discuss the fascinating topic of whether gravity is an electrodynamic
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
65
phenomenon, as assumed so far by those who seek a unified field theory, or an electrostatic phenomenon as implied earlier in this work. The assumption is that the gravitational potential energy GMm/R that arises between two bodies of rest-mass M and m, respectively, having their mass centres spaced at a distance R is enhanced by the factor: (v/c)2 ............................................... (5.1) if there is relative motion at velocity v between the two bodies, c being the speed of light. For Sun and planet v will, in the main, comprise a component of motion tangential to the orbit of the planet as supplemented by a radial lesser component of motion in that orbit. Such motion is, by standard physical principles rooted in Newtonian mechanics, subject to conservation of angular momentum and v being very small in relation to c. One can therefore, by close approximation, write h as vR, assuming the mass m to be constant. However, though I know that this latter assumption is made in developing Einsteins General Theory as applied to gravitation, I appeal to the relativistically-minded reader familiar with Einsteins Special Theory and say that one could designate m as given by: m = mo [1 - (v/c)2]- .................................. (5.2) I then argue that retardation of the force of gravity GMm/R2 at the speed c will be equivalent to its value having to be enhanced by a factor sufficient to account for the work done by m in moving a distance fT2/2 against such a force, f being the acceleration v2/R and T being R/c, the time taken to traverse distance R at speed c. That factor then becomes: [1 + (v/c)2/2] ......................................... (5.3) Taken collectively, the effect of (5.2) and (5.3) is, to a close approximation, equivalent to requiring the gravitational potential to increase by the factor (5.1) as a result of that planetary motion at velocity v, which then means that our assumption has been derived
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
66
by analysis based on standard physical logic founded on classical electron theory that recognizes increase of mass with speed . As an aside remark I now stress here that, in quoting the relativistic mass increase formula, I am in no way accepting Einsteins doctrines. My reason is that that formula, as already noted in chapter 1, in no way requires use of Einsteins theory, as I well know from textbook data of my student years. Now, provided our expression for the gravitational potential is based on the rest-mass mo of the planet, we derive Einsteins law of gravitation on the presumption that h, meaning vR, is constant by writing it as: (GMmo /R)[1 + (v/c)2] .............................. (5.4) Replacing v by h/R, differentiate with respect to R to obtain, after reintroducing v by eliminating h as vR, the result that the gravitational force acting on the planet is: (GMmo /R2)[1 + 3(v/c)2] .......................... (5.5) Note here that gravitational potential is a negative quantity, which explains why we avoided introducing a minus sign in deriving this force. Note also that energy is shed by the gravitational potential as R increases, which is consistent with the force being one of mutual attraction. I now point out the fact that, by writing u as 1/R, and introducing polar coordinates based on an angle , the force can be equated to the dynamic pull of the planet in orbit to lead to an equation for that orbital motion: d2u/d2 + u = (GM)[1/h2 + 3(u/c)2] .................... (5.6) The corresponding Newtonian equation for planetary motion does not include that quantity 3(u/c)2. Equation (5.6) is the law of gravitation derived from the General Theory of Relativity. That additional term which distinguishes it from Newtons law corresponds to the progressive advance of the perihelion of the elliptical orbit of the planet.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
67
It takes about 20 textbook pages of mathematical analysis that is beyond the comprehension of most students to progress to the above equation through the jungle of relativistic dogma. Here I refer to a book entitled Modern Physics by H. A. Wilson that I purchased in 1946 when I was a university student. This is also the student textbook just mentioned above by reference to electron theory. Starting from the doctrine of equivalence, one encounters geodesics and world lines as one enters the realm of curvilinear co-ordinates. Then one comes to the curved Minkowski world and encounters tensors, where one is introduced to a covariant form of tensor called the fundamental tensor, of which there are three. Next come the Christoffel symbols, one of which has particular importance, the three-index symbol. After that the next hurdle is covariant differentiation which, once mastered, brings one to a second covariant derivative, developed in two forms, the difference of which has a special name: the Riemann tensor. This brings us in sight of Einsteins Law of Gravitation, but only after we have digressed to calculate the values of a whole series of three index symbols that apply to space surrounding a single heavy particle. To conclude the exercise we then have to introduce and formulate the path of an infinitesimal particle to represent the planet that is to move in orbit around that heavy mass and finally, Lo and Behold, we arrive, after another page and a half, at that equation (5.6) above. I cannot now resist the temptation of quoting a few words from the front page of a Newsletter that I have just received from the U.K. Institute of Physics South Central Branch (January, 2003). The Chairman, Howard Watson, tells us about his preparations to give a public talk on the subject of Physics Nobel Prize Winners and his perception that Einstein is usually about the only Nobel Laureate whose name is recognised by the so-called man-in-the-street. He goes on to say:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
68
The deliberations of the committees in Stockholm are not released for 50 years after the awards. They show, for example, that Einstein was vetoed many times before he finally received the award in 1921. One committee member resolved: Einstein must never receive a Nobel Prize even if the entire world demands it. Part of the problem was that the physicists there could not get their head around the new relativity physics, regarding it as something almost evil and reflecting the undesirable changes that were taking place in the world generally at the time. So, with the slogan in mind: Einstein is right; Newton is wrong, but with that 20 pages of relativity physics still there to mystify the student, are we to accept that the paths of planets are determined and starlight is deflected thanks to Einsteins relativistic doctrines or are we to come to terms with the simple fact that a little commonsense physics that the student can understand will suffice for our onward perception of the universe and its Creation? That equation (5.6) does hold valid, but surely it must be derived in a different way, as by starting from that formulation of (5.4) and understanding its physical basis. The Bending of Light by the Sun Given Newtons law of gravitation as a starting point, equation (5.6) without that term 3(u/c)2, the solution for u is: u = (GM/h2)(1 + e cos) ........................... (5.7) where e, being less than 1, signifies the eccentricity of an ellipse. Since the additional term added by the Einstein formulation is very small it may then be shown, by a process of successive approximation based on the approximate solution of equation (5.7), that the result corresponds to a slow rotation of the major axis of the ellipse. We shall not work through that analysis here but one will find
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
69
that the result, as applied to planet Mercury, gives the answer that the major axis of its orbit turns at the rate of 43 seconds of arc every 100 years. Note that we are not involved in four-dimensional space once equation (5.6) is formulated. The answer applies to motion in space of three dimensions. It is, indeed, a trick of relativity to take one into a notional space of four dimensions to justify the distortion of Newtons equation before converting the result back into the threedimensional world of reality. It is surely so much better to stay in the world of reality and, by understanding the physics which accounts for the gravitational potential expression of (5.4), progress without reliance on the General Theory of Relativity. Now, so far as the effect of gravitational potential on a ray of light is concerned, Einsteins theory proceeds from the law of gravitation (5.6) and regards h as infinite, which is quite an assumption, one which I prefer to avoid. However, for the record, this leaves us with the equation: d2u/d2 + u = (GM)[3(u/c)2] ........................ (5.8) compared with the corresponding expression based on Newtons law of gravity: d2u/d2 + u = 0 .................................... (5.9) The latter has a solution: u = (1/p)cos ................................... (5.10) which is the equation of a straight line, p being the perpendicular from the origin. This solution represents a first approximation that we can now substitute in (5.8) to obtain the equation: d2u/d2 + u = (3GM/p2c2)[1 + cos2]/2 ........... (5.11) a solution of which is: u = (1/p)cos + (3GM/p2c2)[1 - (1/3) cos2]/2 ......... (5.12) where the angle is measured from the point where u is a maximum, the point of closest transit.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
70
The value of u has to be zero at a far distance and so, putting u as 0 in equation (5.12), with as /2+ or as -/2-, being small, we obtain: 0 = (1/p)(-) + (3GM/p2c2)[1 + 1/3]/2 ................ (5.13) which gives: = (2GM /pc2) ................................. (5.14) This parameter is the amount of deviation of a ray of light in transit from a far distance to the point of closest approach to the mass M. Therefore, since a similar further deviation occurs as the light ray continues on its way, the total deviation is 4GM/pc2. With the mass of the Sun as 2x1033 gm, G as 6.67x10-8 dynecm2 per gm squared, p as 7x1010 cm, the Suns radius, and c as 3x1010 cm per second, the total deflection is therefore indicated by the theory as being 8.47 micro-radians or 1.75 seconds of arc. Since this is consistent with the observation of the deflection of light from stars that grazes past the Sun during a total eclipse of the sun, it has been taken as verification of Einsteins theory. The reader will, however, have noticed that the mass mo has somehow dropped out of the equation, but, though its value does not affect the numerical result just obtained, its presence is essential to the formulation of the theory. Clearly, Einsteins theory requires light, as a stream of photons, to be a ballistic phenomenon or, alternatively, requires energy that gravitates to be transported by the electromagnetic light wave. But here I stress that one must keep in mind that the ray of light cannot be deflected in the manner observed unless its components closer to the Sun travel more slowly than its components further removed from the Sun so we have to believe that the speed of light in vacuo need not be constant, given the presence of a nearby body. Furthermore, I again make the point that the energy or mass quanta that are conveyed by the light ray must somehow be slowed down, retarded, as they approach that body, whereas gravitation is supposed to attract and so accelerate such quanta
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
71
because the gravitational potential is shedding energy and augmenting their kinetic energy. This poses a dilemma, but relativists are not daunted by this, because it is assumed that such problems can be answered by looking into the fabric of four-dimensional space and, accepting that a constant speed in four-space means a variable speed in three-space, so that the resulting formulations override the normal physics encountered in the three-dimensional world of reality. We reach then a position where the formula for derived above is seemingly valid but its derivation is questionable, whereas the law of gravitation according to equation (5.6) holds valid, because it does account for the anomalous advance of planet Mercurys perihelion. To add further confusion one can refer to authoritative works aimed at helping the student to better understand Einsteins theory. Here I will quote two contrasting statements, one by Einstein himself in his final and fifteenth edition of his book Relativity (Crown Publishers Inc, New York), where, in his Appendix III concerning experimental confirmation of his theory, he arrives at the 1.7/ arcsecond value for light deflection by the Sun at a distance of solar radii from its centre: It may be added that, according to the theory, half of this deflection is produced by the Newtonian field of attraction of the sun and the other half by the geometrical modification (curvature) of space caused by the Sun. The other statement is quoted from a book by V. Fock (1964) entitled: The Theory of Space Time and Gravitation, (2nd. Ed., Pergamon Press, London), where, on p. 222, one reads: The fictitious medium of refractive index n is optically more dense in the vicinity of the Sun than it is far away from it. Therefore, light waves will bend around the sun.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
72
This is said in relation to a formula for refractive index: n = 1 + 2GM/Rc2 ................................ (5.15) where M is the mass of the Sun, and R here is distance from the centre of the Sun. So, you see, Fock does not agree with Einstein on this aspect of Einsteins own theory. Einstein thinks that the deflection of light by the Sun is half due to the pull of gravity acting on mass-energy of the light itself and half due to refraction by the space medium, whereas Fock finds that all of the deflection arises from that refraction. Also, the space medium has become fictitious rather than curved. I ask the reader what he or she, as a student, would learn from such enlightenment and note that the caption on the front cover of that book by Einstein (printed in 1961) reads: A CLEAR EXPLANATION OF THE FAMOUS THEORY THAT BROUGHT ABOUT THE ATOMIC AGE. With Only a High School Education The Reader Can Understand Albert Einsteins Explanation of His Epoch-Making Theory. I submit, therefore, that since equation (5.15) gives the appropriate measure of the light deflection observed by starlight grazing past the Sun, we should seek to derive it without thinking it represents the action of gravity on mass moving at the speed of light, but rather as the action of gravity on the aether itself. The aether should not be regarded as a fictitious medium but rather as a real medium, the properties of which are rather subtle and somewhat elusive until we probe to discover the answers we seek. Introducing the E and G Frames of the Aether The aether itself must be the seat of something in motion, something having a mass density and an energy density and so a characteristic that provides the relationship between energy and mass, which accounts for its light-speed determining property.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
73
The aether must have a rhythmic motion, a frequency, by which it acts as a kind of clock which determines what we call time. With this cursory introduction I will now present a formula for its kinetic energy density that appears on p. 82 of my book Physics without Einstein, published in 1969: (2)(c/2)2/2 ..................................... (5.16) This formula represents the kinetic energy density of the aether, on the assumption that it has two systems, each of mass-density , moving at speed c/2, but having a relative velocity c. Because that motion is an orbital motion that is strictly harmonious, having a fixed frequency, does not depend upon speed and so is not subject to relativistic mass increase owing to the way in which energy is deployed in such a system. It is therefore correct to use the Newtonian expression for kinetic energy even though the speeds involved are c/2. The reader may have already guessed that one of those systems is provided by the gravitons introduced in chapter 2, whereas the other system is that of mass for which those gravitons provide gravitational interaction. So, even with no matter present, the aether intrinsically does have a state regulated by gravitation. Now, since cannot exhibit the inertia of translational motion owing to the preservation of equilibrium within the aether, its selfgravitational interactions are merged with the electrostatic interactions of its electric charge properties and so the gravitational feature only reveals itself when matter is present. Suppose that a material object of mass M exists and interacts gravitationally with the mass-density . Then at a distance R from M, one can expect the gravitational potential energy density to be GM/R, which we denote as . This will deplete the kinetic energy density of the aether, because gravitational potential is a negative quantity and its increase in magnitude sheds energy. So we expect the expression in (5.16) to be reduced, but with remaining constant. Therefore c must itself be reduced in proportion to . One then finds that: = c(c)/2 .................................... (5.17)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
74
This means that the aether itself has a refractive index n, a quantity we formulate as: n = c/(c - c) ................................... (5.18) which can be written as: n = 1 + 2/c2 ................................... (5.19) or: n = 1 + 2GM/Rc2 ............................ (5.20) which is the above formula (5.15) said by Fock to be a result derived from Einsteins General Theory of Relativity. However, we have derived it from aether theory. So, you see, the slowing down of light in its close passage past the Sun and its deviation as a result of the Suns mass and also, for radio waves, that deflection by the planet Jupiter in the recent observations reported at the start of this chapter, are aether-based phenomena. It is the energy deployment that governs what is observed and, just to show that the aether interpretation can add further insight into this energy deployment process, we can go one step further by asking and answering the question: If energy is shed by that mass M acting on at a point distant R from the centre of that mass M, where does that energy go? All you have done is to tell us that the kinetic energy density of the aether has been depleted, but surely energy cannot just vanish. Well, the answer is that it does not vanish. It merely transfers into another kind of motion and is still held at that point. It has been shed by its ordered motion state in those rhythmic orbital cycles and has become kinetic energy associated with what we can regard as thermal vibrations, as if the aether lattice system that provides the mass density has a temperature T. Owing to the fixed rhythm of time the motion involved has only two degrees of freedom, one radial to that orbital motion and one lateral to the plane of that motion. Thus we may well ask if the space here in cosmic regions close to Earth exhibits a temperature.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
75
If so, what would that temperature tell us about ? The message would be that consists of units of mass mo for which kT is equal to GMmo /R, where the gravitational potential here is that of the combined effect of the sun and body Earth, k being Boltzmanns constant. Before we embark on the detailed analysis of the aether we already know therefore that the 2.7 K cosmic background temperature of local space can indicate the mass value of that lattice particle, the quon, depicted earlier in Fig. 3.1. Furthermore, once we have derived that mass value independently by theoretical analysis, then we can deduce the very important fact that gravitation has a limited range of action, because distant stars do not contribute much to the gravitational potential matching that mass value. An astute reader will have noticed that in deriving equation (5.3) I assumed that the energy transit time T was R/c, which is tantamount to saying that the gravitational action travels the distance between the two interacting masses at the speed of light. Here there is an interesting analogy evident from analysis of the deployment of electrostatic interaction energy in the case of two interacting charges. It may be proved (H. Aspden, The Spatial Energy Distribution for the Coulomb Interaction, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 25, 456; 1979) that if the distance between those charges is R, there is no net interaction energy within a sphere of space centred on either charge and of radius equal to R [See Appendix I]. It may also be shown that the interaction field energy in a spherical shell of radius greater than R does not change as R changes. This means that the field energy associated with that interaction, if it has to be deployed by transfer to or from the kinetic energy of either charge, must traverse exactly that distance R. In other words, if this analogy applies equally to the gravitational interaction, as seems to be the case, then the designation of that transit time T as R/c is fully justified if the energy involved travels at the speed of light. I further point out that, because we are considering an aether that has an underlying energy density, energy can be deployed at what may seem to be the speed of light but without actually moving
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
76
at the speed of light, just as a tidal wave can travel across the ocean without the water it conveys actually moving at the speed of that wave. As to the so-called E and G frames mentioned in the heading of this section, the G frame is that defined by the graviton system, whereas the E frame is that defined by the system of aether lattice particles. The onward discussion and analysis pertaining to these aether frames in the next chapter takes us into the world of quantum physics and so we now enter the more serious phase of this quest to probe the secrets of Creation. A final word on the subject of gravitation is, however, needed before concluding this chapter. Gravity: An Electrostatic or Electrodynamic Phenomenon? When we come to discuss the Neumann potential in chapter 9 it will be seen why the answer to this question favours electrostatic action. As just shown, since electrostatic action and gravitational action, both involving direct inverse-square of distance forces, this puts the emphasis on electrostatic action as the seat of gravitation. One finds from analysis based on the electrodynamic interaction that the distribution of interaction energy in the field does not conform with that we relied on above to derive the factor (5.3). One then confronts the need for special assumptions in seeking to accommodate to the retardation time factors involved. Also, as we shall see in deriving the Neumann potential from Coulombs Law in chapter 9, I can no longer hold to a position I took in my earlier accounts of the theory of gravitation. This was that the gravitons, in moving with the G-frame at a speed c relative to that of the E-frame, were, in effect, interacting current elements (V/c) moving mutually parallel at the same speed c relative to the electromagnetic frame of reference. To apply the Neumann potential to their mutual interaction can then be argued as giving an attractive force of (V)2 at unit distance, which admittedly implied this was a gravitational action, but this argument is now thwarted by the proof in chapter 9 that the basis of the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
77
Neumann potential is the relative velocity of the interacting charges and this is zero. This means that to sustain the argument that gravitation is an electrodynamic phenomenon, one loses the theoretical foundation for the Neumann potential or one has to wander into unacceptable territory by saying that the gravitons, in their motion with the G-frame, exist themselves as leptons by ongoing charge pair creation and annihilation at an enormously fast rate, far greater than that of the rhythmic G-frame motion at the Compton electron. These factors militate against gravity being an electromagnetic phenomenon and favour the electrostatic interpretation. Fortunately the quantitative aspects of the theory affecting the determination of G remain the same as that of the authors earlier theory. Here, then, is the lesson that in developing theoretical accounts of physical phenomena one must persist in probing deeper to understand more and more and must be ready to change direction if Mother Nature guides one along a different path. I therefore now hold firm to the position I took in chapter 2; gravitation is an electrostatic phenomenon or rather a negative electrostatic phenomenon in the sense that holes in the G-frame continuum charge of density mutually attract according to the inverse-square law. Those holes are filled by pairs of oppositely charged gravitons, the motion of which provides the dynamic balance for matter sharing the motion of the E-frame. [End of Chapter Footnote] Concerning that TIMES article mentioned in the opening section of this chapter, it is noted that, in the News and Analysis section of the February, 2003 issue of Physics World, (page 7), the members monthly journal of the Institute of Physics in U.K., under the title: Have we measured the speed of gravity?, it was reported that the claim by Kopeikin and Formalont had been challenged. Clifford Will of Washington University is said to have calculated that any effects of the speed of gravity cancel out in the experiment
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
78
performed. However, this merely leaves the issue open. All I say is that the speed of gravity, meaning energy in transit owing to change of relative position of Sun and planet does travel at speed c, but, as to the effect Jupiter has on the deflection of the signals we receive from a quasar, this concerns energy deployment as between Jupiter and the aether through which those signals travel and, whatever the answer, I cannot see how Einsteins theory could thereby be proved.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
79
CHAPTER 6
The Quantum Underworld

Introduction The underworld of space, that invisible medium which pervades what we call the vacuum, but which we are here bold enough to refer to by its proper name, the aether, is the seat of quantum activity, the physical forum in which energy is packaged into quanta which have interplay with matter at the atomic level. The best known energy quantum in physics is that denoted ho, where h is Plancks constant of action and o is the Compton electron frequency. Tables of physical data usually list the measured value of the Compton electron wavelength as 2.42631058(22)x10-10 cm, along with the speed of light 2.99792458x1010 cm/sec, from which one calculates that o is 1.2356x1020 per second. That energy quantum ho is equal to the rest-mass energy mec2 of the electron and so the aether is the stage on which the electron and its partner the positron are created, perform and then may die by mutual annihilation. The aether is a world seething with energy, but energy that is, in the main, held in a state of equilibrium, with a very small proportion of it involved in fluctuations as it searches for a stable home in the vastness of space. Now, much of this chapter will merely repeat what I have disclosed in chapters 6 and 7 of my book Physics Unified published in 1980, where I began by explaining that in 1932 Dirac delivered his Nobel prize lecture under the title: The Theory of Electrons and Positrons in which he said:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
80
It is found that an electron which seems to us to be moving slowly, must actually have a very high frequency oscillatory motion of small amplitude superimposed on the regular motion which appears to us. As a result of this oscillatory motion, the velocity of the electron at any time equals the velocity of light. This is a prediction which cannot be directly verified by experiment, since the frequency is so high and the amplitude so small. I then noted in that work, on p.87, that: Similar proposals had been made earlier by both Einstein and Schroedinger. Einstein imagined the electron as belonging to a Galilean reference frame oscillating at a frequency determined from the electron rest mass energy and the Planck relationship, and being everywhere synchronous. Now, for my part, I cannot accept that electrons can share such a concerted rhythmic motion unless there is something that makes it energetically desirable for them to keep in step, as it were. That something has to be electrical in character but electrically neutral overall and it must be omnipresent, all-pervading and uniform through space. It is, of course, the presence in the aether of that lattice system of charges referred to in chapter 3 as quons and our task now is to explore the form of that aether and discuss the part it plays in governing wave mechanical processes. Our Aether Remembering what was said about Earnshaws theorem in chapter 1, our aether must comprise a uniform continuum of electric charge density which is populated by a uniform cubic-structured array of aether lattice particles of unitary charge, here denoted q, and of charge polarity opposite to that of the continuum.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
81
We can set up an electric field in a vacuum, so how might the presence of such a field of uniform strength V affect the aether? It will displace those charges q through a distance D relative to the continuum charge . Each charge will move through that distance D as from a point on one side of a planar slice of the continuum to a point on the other side of this planar slice. Since the relative spacing between those charges q will be unchanged by this collective displacement there will be no change in the Coulomb force on any particle due to the action of its neighbours. They move in register with one another locally and remote actions balance anyway owing to the large scale distortions of the lattice structure governed by the charge producing V and boundary conditions. By Gauss theorem a planar slice of charge density and thickness D has a total normal electric field density of 4D of which half is directed one way and the other half the opposite way. Hence 4D is the change in field density experienced by a lattice particle in going from O to P owing to the action of the field V. The restoring force on q is therefore: 4qD ........................................... (6.1) This is equal to Vq. The energy stored by this displacement per charge q is: (4q)D2/2 ...................................... (6.2) because the restoring force rate is linear with displacement. The energy density represented by (6.2) is then found by multiplying by /q since the space medium is electrically neutral and there are just as many particles of charge q in unit volume as are needed to balance . Thus the energy density is given by: 42D2/2 ........................................ (6.3) But, since Vq equals (6.1), we know that D is V/4. Putting this in (6.2) gives the energy density: V2/8 ............................................ (6.4)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
82
This is the formula for energy stored by the electric field of intensity V. Its derivation in this way means that the aether as the medium subjected to the action of a system of charge is able to deploy energy from the field of that charge and store that energy by the displacement of those charges q, the quons which form the structured lattice system set in that background continuum of charge density . Here then is the basis for the displacement currents we associate with Maxwells theory. As to the magnetic field properties of the aether, which Maxwell attributes as the accompaniment of the field energy of propagating electromagnetic waves, one should really think instead in terms of the kinetic energy associated with oscillations of the quon lattice system represented by those waves. Now consider the aether with no externally applied electric field presence and ask yourself whether our basic aether devoid of matter has an energy density. Consider first the energy we associate with electrostatic interaction between and the lattice charges q and also that between the q charges themselves and that of the self-interaction of the continuum charge . Without engaging in this analytical exercise, which is deferred for the moment, it can be reasoned that each q charge sits in its own cubic cell of charge density and that it will be attracted electrostatically towards the centre of that cell. Each such cell together with its q charge forms an electrically neutral unit and so there should be very little electrostatic energy owing to mutual interaction between such cells. What this means is that the net electrostatic energy density of the aether would be negative if such a condition prevailed. Since it does not seem feasible for the space medium itself to have a state of negative energy density, especially as that state is one where each of those charges q sits rigidly at the centre of each space cell, meaning no motion and no time rhythm, we must, if we are to make any sense of involving the aether in this account of physics, accept that Mother Nature will not allow a negative interaction energy condition to prevail. The fact that we can tolerate negative energy
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
83
conditions, as exemplified by the force of gravity and electrodynamic potential where matter is involved, does not affect this argument because these actions are set in what must be a slightly positive energy density background of the aether itself. The positive energy density condition must prevail overall. A crucial example of this emerges from our later derivation of that factor N as the odd integer 1843 as we come to formulate the theoretical value of the fine structure constant. What all this means is that those aether lattice charges q are all displaced in unison from the centres of those cubic cells of continuum charge, displaced just enough to assure a positive, rather than a negative overall interaction energy density state. The restoring force involved in this can be set in balance with the centrifugal forces of the q charges, given that they each have mass mo. This gives us the link between frequency, the timing of their orbital motion around those centres and the radius r of those orbits. We are then well on the way to establishing the role the aether plays in quantum theory. The aether has become a charge system sustaining the cyclical motion of the system of the aether charges q in circular orbits with the continuum charge and its associated graviton population moving in dynamic balance also in circular orbits. Since the mass density of both the graviton system and the aether lattice charge system is the same, for space devoid of matter, we know that both systems describe circular orbits of the same radius, the radius being designated by the symbol r. In my book Physics Unified at page 91, and also in what follows below, I prove this equality of mass density on the basis that the combined kinetic energy of these two systems in their orbital motion is a maximum, consistent with electrostatic interaction energy being a minimum. The displacement distance between the q lattice system, which we define as the E-frame, and the system of the continuum charge ,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
84
which we define as the G-frame, is 2r and, from the restoring force expression (6.1), this allows us to write: 4q(2r) = mo2r ................................ (6.5) by equating that force to the centrifugal force. Here is the angular velocity 2o. So we have two frames moving as if they are diametrically opposed to each other in circular orbit of radius r and, by accepting that matter, if present, such as an electron, shares the motion of the Eframe, we can see that all matter has an intrinsic state of jitter at that frequency o. In his 1929 book The Nature of the Physical World, Eddington wrote on p. 220: A particle may have position or it may have velocity but it cannot in any exact sense have both. This was his way of saying that, when probing in the physical underworld to locate an electron, say, we cannot pinpoint its exact position because it has a high frequency jitter, but here Eddington was referring to the Heisenberg Principle of Uncertainty of quantum mechanics. The experimental support for quantum theory indicated that, for the electron, the product of uncertainty of momentum and uncertainty of position is h/2, h being Plancks constant. So an electron moving in those circular orbits with the E-frame will have an uncertainty of position by as much as 2r and an uncertainty of momentum of 2mer, the product of which should be h/2. This gives us insight into how the aether determines Plancks constant. If we now ask how the aether determines a characteristic speed c it is fairly evident that a likely candidate is the relative velocity between the E-frame and the G-frame, meaning the quantity (2r) and so we derive the relationship: r = h/4mec ....................................... (6.6)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
85
This is an important step which gives physical foundation for Diracs surmise concerning the oscillatory jitter motion of the electron, but we now have the quantum underworld of the aether in our sights and the stage is set for detailed analysis of its electrical form. The Aether: Solid or Fluid? Historically at the time when the aether was accepted without question, physicists nevertheless pondered on whether it had a kind of solid form or fluid form. Although we cannot sense any resistance to motion through the aether, its property in determining the speed of light was seen in the context of an analogy with the way in which the speed of light through glass or water is a function of the physical structure of those media. There was a property of the electromagnetic wave that required a feature characteristic of propagation through a crystalline solid and yet our freedom of motion through the aether implied it could only be a fluid, a fluid of extremely low mass density. Now, instead of trying to force the aether into the mould which we see applies to our material world, we should piece together the clues and accept the aether for what it is. It is a sea of energy with nowhere to go because that energy fills all space, almost all of it having found equilibrium and settled in a state of order, but, thankfully, as mankind would not otherwise exist, there being the ripples and fluctuations occasioned by creation and decay of certain electrical charge components of that aether which keep the aether alive with activity. It is logical in physical terms for the aether to develop its own crystalline form because that is an optimum energy condition and, as already indicated, it must avoid a negative energy density state and so sustain a state of motion confined to that Heisenberg jitter activity. It must therefore exhibit in some measure the properties we associate with a solid. This does not preclude motion of material objects
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
86
present in the aether because those objects may nucleate their own crystalline aether territory, meaning that the aether picture before us is one of a solid moving through a solid. Is that really possible? The answer is surely Yes because we are not here suggesting that energy can move through energy. The energy density of the aether devoid of matter is uniform and we can have two regions of a liquid medium of uniform mass density incorporating a crystal formation, with those crystal formations having relative motion. A laboratory analogy, were we to build it, would be a liquid crystal substance in which the liquid is crystallized by two extraneous electric fields (signifying the presence of matter) moving towards one another. It is not the liquid which moves but rather the factors which determine whether or not it is optimum in energy terms for it to adopt the crystal form. At the collision boundaries the energy would redeploy into other form but its density would remain constant. There is nothing to be gained by speculating as to the details of such a process. All we need concern ourselves with is the evidence that emerges from the theory. Undoubtedly, at collision boundaries the ubiquitous muons have a way of absorbing energy resulting from mutual annihilation of a corresponding amount of continuum charge and the quons involved in the collision, whereas the ubiquitous muons at the separation boundaries can create new quons and add continuum charge as needed. That assumes that the continuum charge shares any translational motion of the quon lattice. If that assumption does not hold and the continuum charge is truly at rest in an absolute frame of reference, then the muons themselves have to share in the charge balance at those boundaries. The only consideration of relevance here is the fact that energy density of the aether medium remains uniform, whereas the aether lattice inertia is balanced by the inertia of the muons that provide a balance by migrating slowly in the opposite direction. We will come back to this latter topic of aether lattice particle motion in chapter 9 in the context of the Michelson-Morley
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
87
experiment and merely mention here that a reader interested in the formulating the speed of light in terms of aether lattice structure could refer to pp. 102-104 of the authors book Physics without Einstein, published in 1969. Electron theory as applied to solids gives a formulation of the refractive index of a substance in terms of its atomic structure, the number of atoms per unit volume and the natural oscillation frequencies involved. A version of the formula is: (c/v)2 = 1 + .................................... (6.7) where is an expression involving parameters specific to that substance. Here v is the speed of light through the solid, which is of course smaller than c. However, if we ignore the presence of that solid material substance by writing as zero, then that unity term in equation (6.7) can be said to be the corresponding formulation of aether parameters. There is no escape from the fact that the aether must have structure, which is why our insight into the exception to Earnshaws theorem, as discussed in chapter 1, meaning the need for that uniform background charge continuum is so important. Plancks Law Whereas, in deriving (6.4), we were concerned with the effects of the field V set up by an intruding presence of charge disturbing the aether, we now need to consider the dynamics and energy properties of the undisturbed aether. The charges q move in synchronism circular orbits of radius r governed by a balance of centrifugal force and the restoring force attributable to their displacement relative to the continuum charge of density . This gives: 4qx = mo2r ................................. (6.8) from (6.1). Here x is the separation distance between the continuum and the q charge, mo is the mass of the quon and is the angular frequency of the aethers rhythmic activity. Thus the expression (x-r) is the orbital radius of the cyclic motion of the graviton and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
88
continuum system. The continuum and the gravitons are best regarded as an integral system statistically smeared into a uniform whole as far as interaction with the q system is concerned. Since the gravitons are deemed to be relatively massive, they need only have a sparse population compared with the lattice particles, the quons. Let mg denote the mass of the continuum-graviton system per lattice particle. Then: mo2r = mg 2(x-r) ............................. (6.9) The kinetic energy density of these E and G frame constituents of the aether is proportional to: mor2 + mg (x-r)2 .............................. (6.10) because the aether frequency is constant. We may then expect the electrical potential energy of such a system to have minimized, so determining x, and the rest mass energy to have been deployed between mo and mg to maximize (6.10), inasmuch as kinetic energy is drawn from a source of potential energy and, with energy conservation, minimization of the latter means maximization of the former. Write M as mo+ mg to obtain from (6.9): x - r = (mo/M)x and r = (mg/M)x ..................... (6.11) Put these in (6.10) to obtain: mo(1 - mo/M)x2 .................................. (6.12) Since M and x are constant, we may now differentiate this energy expression with respect to mo to find its maximum value by equating the differential to zero. This gives: 1 - 2mo/M = 0 ................................. (6.13) from which we deduce that mo and mg are equal and, from (6.11) that x equals 2r. The E frame and the G frame describe orbits of equal radius r. As their relative velocity is c, they move at speed c/2 in orbit. As the aether frequency is, by assumption, deemed to be the Compton electron frequency at which quantum theory tells us that electrons and positrons are created, namely mec2/h, the value of is given by:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
89
= 2mec2/h ................................. (6.14) The radius r is then known, because r is c/2. Thus, again, as for equation (6.6) we find that: r = h/4mec ..................................... (6.15) What has been said above about the electron in the context of Heisenbergs Principle of Uncertainty does imply that the electron has an intrinsic motion when at rest in the E frame. Its own angular momentum is mecr/2 but there is a connected angular momentum due to the dynamic balance afforded by the G frame. Thus the total angular momentum intrinsic to the electron and due to the underlying jitter motion of the aether is mecr, which, from (6.15), if h/4. This is the well known quantity associated with so-called electron spin. Curiously, this is not the quantum of angular momentum that is paramount in governing the orbital motion of an electron in an atom, Bohrs quantum unit, which is double the spin quantum. To understand this we need to address the problem of the photon, as it is this, rather than the electron, which is the regulator of action between aether and matter. The photon is not an elemental form of matter intruding into the aether. It is a feature of the aether itself which arises from a disturbance, albeit by the intrusion of an electrical charge, typically that of the electron, and we need next to examine the theory of the photon. Photon Theory Apart from deciphering Natures coded messages and providing what surely is a comprehensive unified field theory, we will in this work come to see how a electric field can induce what I refer to as a state of aether spin. If there is to be a spin-off of practical, technological importance, from this theoretical study, I feel sure it will be the cyclical induction of aether spin aimed at inducing the inflow of aether energy which we can utilize in our efforts to secure a sustainable pollution-free environment while meeting our escalating energy needs.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
90
Aether spin exists, both on a grand scale, within our stars and planets, and on a microscopic scale as the photon. The universal rhythmic motion of the aether at the angular frequency defines a fixed direction in space. A direction anisotropy in the properties of space is not in evidence so far, though one wonders if researchers have really been looking for such a phenomenon. When we come to study the large-scale rotation of the aether medium, as with body Earth, it will then be seen that the Earths magnetic field indicates that the axes appropriate to are approximately normal to the plane in which the planets move around the Sun. It is probable from this that the circular motion of the E frame and G frame of the aether, though has the same magnitude throughout all space, may be directed in different, possibly opposite, directions in the environment of different and widely spaced stellar bodies. There may be space domains measured in dimensions of many light years and within which is unidirectional . Yet its direction may vary from one domain to the next. I did, in my earlier pursuit of this theory, think that this, being linked to an electrodynamic action, might account for the force of gravity not being effective across the boundaries separating adjacent space domains, thereby limiting the range of gravity to action between matter in a common space domain. As we proceed, however, it will be seen when we come to discuss space domains and evaluate their size along with the creation of stars, that the essential difference between two adjacent space domains is the fact that in one the proton has a positive charge and the electron a negative charge, with the continuum charge positive and the quon charge negative, whereas these charge polarities are all reversed in the other space domain. In a sense, we can say that we have here the picture of space and antispace together with matter and antimatter. This would also mean that gravity, as an electrostatic force phenomenon, could not be deemed to act across space domain boundaries.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
91
Possibly, for interaction between matter in adjacent domains, there could be a repulsive gravitational interaction, the long range effect of which, as scaled over many space domains would mean that gravitational potential within a particular domain arises, in effect, solely from the presence of matter located within that domain. This proposition is supported by the explanation of the cosmic background temperature already introduced. A further point of very special relevance concerns a theme we shall discuss in chapter 9 by reference to the Neumann potential. There are strong reasons which confine what we regard as electrodynamic forces to action as between leptonic currents in the sense that electric current flow in the circuits we use to produce magnetic fields or to detect such fields involves electrons active in a quantum-electrodynamic pair creation and decay process. Such electrons may be those active in atoms, where their apparent orbital motion about an atomic nucleus is really a quantum relocation as a newly created electron-positron pair in the path ahead of an electron involves the positron in annihilating that electron to leave the newlycreated electron in a forward position. In any event, the point at issue is that the aether itself devoid of the presence of matter is not subject to electrodynamic activity. In spite of Clerk Maxwells interpretation of electromagnetic waves as comprising components of electric field energy and magnetic field energy, one can just as easily argue that the electric field energy which is seated in oscillating charge displacement has an associated kinetic energy and that accounts for what Maxwell regarded as magnetic field energy. Accordingly, our onward analysis will address the aether and its properties as if magnetic properties do not exist and so confine the energy analysis to its electric field and kinetic energies. Concerning Earths magnetic field, this is a clue to the most important feature of the aether, which is that a state of spin, as of a large spherical bulk of the aether, will induce electric charge displacement radial from the axis of spin. So if Earth sits in a coextensive aether that spins, there will be an electric charge density
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
92
belonging to the aether that is neutralized by a compensating displacement of electron charge in body Earth. We cannot sense the presence of that charge by its electric action but we can sense it by the geomagnetic field it produces. In determining the geomagnetic moment much then depends upon the angle subtended by the Earths spin axis in relation to the aether spin axis and the vector direction of that underlying quantum jitter motion at angular frequency . We will come back to this topic in chapter 8 but keep in mind that aether spin implies electric charge induction and vice versa and also the point that the vector direction of is of no significance to the analysis in this and the next chapter. The aether behaves as an isotropic medium in its quantum mechanical interactions with the atom. A n electromagnetic wave is a propagated disturbance of the aether particle lattice formed by those charges q, the quons. The lattice can be disturbed if a discrete non-spherical unit of it rotates and so sets up radial pulsations. This will rotate if an intruding electric charge is present along with a quantum of energy activity that is being shed or absorbed by that charge. The aether spin thus suggested will be the smallest possible symmetrical cubic unit of aether that has the ability to disturb surrounding aether lattice and that has to be a unit of 3x3x3 lattice particles. Referring to this cubic unit as a photon, seen as an event when such a group of 24 quons spins about a central axis defined by 3 quons, our task now is to relate this spin to the frequency of the propagating disturbance which it causes. We will defer the detailed explanation of why it spins until chapter 8 but note here that a radial electric field acting from its centre or near-centre will so displace the superimposed E-frame orbits of the quons as to cause them to lose synchronism with unless their centres of those orbits are slightly displaced and they move transversely in a rotational sense about the charge inducing that radial field. It is a simple exercise in mathematics to show that the moment of inertia of such a 3x3x3 unit is independent of the axis about which
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
93
it spins [see page 94 of my book Physics Unified] and one can see that the pulsating disturbance of surrounding lattice will be at four times the frequency of that state of spin. The point of interest then arises if one wonders about the effects of a high spin speed which is such that the frequency of the pulsating disturbance is at or close to the frequency /2. In a sense one can imagine that the latter is a more likely circumstance, given the quantum rhythmic motion of the aether lattice at that high frequency. Then one might consider a circumstance where a slight modification in the photon spin frequency can set up electromagnetic wave propagation at the difference frequency . In the context of electrons in atomic orbit I have explored this notion on the assumption that a pair of such photon units, one seated with the nucleus, spin in opposite sense but cooperate in propagating electromagnetic wave radiation. That, however, goes beyond the scope of this work on Creation and I can but give reference to this theme as pp. 70-73 of my book Physics without Einstein. We will proceed by terming a photon unit spinning at /4 as a standard photon unit. Now when an energy quantum E is added to the dynamic state of the aether it will, as with any linear oscillator, be shared equally between the potential energy and the kinetic energy. With the constant angular frequency , this means that E/2 is added to the kinetic energy. That is: E/2 = H/2 ................................... (6.16) where H is the corresponding quantum of angular momentum. Thus even though the energy E may become dispersed throughout the aether medium it introduces a related angular momentum given by: H = E/ ..................................... (6.17) We believe that angular momentum is conserved, which means that this event cannot occur without there being a reaction, and so our photon must be characterized by such a relationship linking an energy quantum and angular momentum. The space medium, whether one refers to it as the vacuum or the aether, is known to react critically to certain energy quanta related to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
94
the mass of the electron or positron at rest. It somehow permits the creation of electrons and positrons at these exact energy levels, as if there is some kind of resonance at the characteristic frequency of the space medium. It seems essential to connect this phenomenon with the standard photon unit, especially so in view of the clear connection evident from equation (6.14). The standard photon unit must be associated with this energy quantum mec2. Thus, from (6.17), H is mec2/, which, from (6.14), is: H = h/2 ...................................... (6.18) Denoting I as the moment of inertia of the standard photon unit, H is given by: H = I(/4) ................................... (6.19) which, from (6.18), gives: I = 2h/ ................................... (6.20) Taking now a photon unit rotating at a much lower angular speed , this is related to the frequency radiated by: 4 = 2 ...................................... (6.21) and since the angular momentum H of this photon unit is I, which (6.20) plus (6.21) show to be: I = h/ ................................... (6.22) we find, from (6.17) that: E = h ....................................... (6.23) which is Plancks radiation law. At the outset of this work we set our sights on decoding three basic messages from Mother Nature. One of these was that hidden by the numerical quantity referred to as the fine-structure constant, this being 2e2/hc, the reciprocal of which is 137.0359. It is self-evident that we cannot decipher the meaning of this quantity without first understanding the physical basis for the existence of the photon and so that has been our task in this chapter. The problem ahead is to exploit this insight into the 3x3x3 quon structure of the photon and its relationship with by moving on to the real numbers that factor into the relationships between the various
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
95
components of the aether, the continuum charge density, the muons, the quons and their charges and masses, as well as that angular frequency and c, the relative speed of the G and E frames. The electron is not present in the basic make-up of the aether but its properties provide a basis of reference in our material world. Our analysis in the next chapter has to be rigorous, as we seek to decipher the primary numerical quantities, the proton-electron mass ratio and the fine-structure constant to part per million degree of accuracy.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
96
CHAPTER 7
Aether Structure
Introduction In this chapter we delve into the theoretical foundations of the aether itself, guided by our knowledge (a) that it comprises a uniform continuum of charge density permeated by charges q arrayed in a simple cubic structure owing to their mutual repulsion subject to the constraint that the electrostatic interaction energy density cannot be negative and (b) that the continuum and q charge systems, the G and E frames, respectively, are displaced 2r one from the other owing to their relative motion at speed c in circular orbits of radius r given by: r = h/4mec ...................................... (7.1) The task ahead is mathematical in that we have to compute the lattice dimension d in terms of r, where d is the side of a cube of space housing each charge q. The photon will emerge as the largest symmetrical unit of that lattice structure which can spin about an axis of that structure without crashing into adjacent structure. It is also the smallest cubic unit of that lattice that has a lattice charge q at its centre. That spin involves energy and sets up pulsations which disturb surrounding lattice structure at a frequency characteristic of the energy quantum involved. Thus, in terms of the ratio of r/d, we will arrive at a formula for Plancks constant in terms of two physical quantities pertaining to the aether, the charge q and the speed c. That dimensionless formula is known as the fine structure constant. In the process we will have established the mass-energy of the lattice charge q, that of the quon, as well as the energy density of the aether, which will thereby indicate the mass-energy of the pair of virtual muons that exists for each cubic aether cell of side dimension
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
97
d. Additionally, our analysis, by bringing the electron into the picture, will derive the odd integer value N that was introduced in chapter 2 as having the value 1843. Such is the scope of this chapter. It is the essential foundation on which the whole of this authors theory is founded. The analysis to be presented was developed in the latter part of the 1950s and was first published privately in printed form in 1960 in the authors 48 page booklet entitled: The Theory of Gravitation, when the author, owing to a change in employment upon being appointed to a Senior Manager position with IBM, was obliged to arrest his private research pursuit to concentrate upon his career in the patent profession. This explains why the advancement of the theory became so protracted in development over time and lacked the endorsement which a career in academia can offer. It is a curious coincidence that Einsteins theory was conceived during his early years as a Patent Examiner in Zurich, given perhaps the stimulus of dealing with the field of invention on a daily basis, and no doubt Einstein was lucky in finding the favour of Max Planck, who supported publication of his papers. However, in moving ahead now to publish this account of my theory, which is probably my final contribution on the subject, it is for future generations to judge the merits of my work relative to that of Einstein. Hopefully, what I have to say will have some impact, but as to this chapter 7, for my part it is more a reminiscence on past work dating back some 50 years, from when I concluded my years of Ph.D. research and entered the patent profession. Do keep in mind, however, that I have presented something of vital importance in earlier chapters, something wholly new, by changing my account of gravitation from the interpretation of gravity as an electrodynamic force consistent with the expectations of those in search of a unified field theory to the recognition that gravity is, in a sense, an inverted electrostatic force. The theoretical derivation of G, the constant of gravity, in terms of gravitons is unchanged, but I will explain more fully in chapter 9 the reason why I was obliged to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
98
alter course. The contest against Einsteins theory is nevertheless as strong as ever and I hold my ground firmly in now reproducing here in this chapter 7 an edited and slightly extended version of pages 103115 of my 1980 book: Physics Unified. The Mass of the Quon We first consider the aether particles, the quons, that form the E frame lattice system. As with the gravitons and electrons, the Thomson formula is used to relate energy E, mass and charge radius of the quon, its charge q being the same magnitude as that of the electron: E = 2q2/3b ....................................... (7.2) where b denotes quon charge radius. Quons have the lowest energy quantum of all charged particles, owing to their radius b being larger. The least energy state is justified by the fact that the lattice structure of the undisturbed aether must be the ultimate in stability, a feature which demands also that the quons must be in a state of equilibrium in their interaction with the rest of the aether system. This is assured if the energy E, as a property of a charge sphere of volume 4b3/3, implies an energy density which is common to the aether as a whole and so shared by the surrounding medium. Thus, with d as the lattice dimension, the cube side length or spacing of the cubic array of quons, we can say that the total energy per unit cell of volume d3 is: Eo = (1/2)q2d3/b4 ................................. (7.3) This is the energy density of the aether, on average, attributable to the notional rest-mass energy, and is deemed to be that of a pair of virtual muons as if there is one such pair in each cubic cell of aether. Such muons are active by creation and decay by mutual annihilation followed by recreation as on ever-ongoing process. This needs a little clarification concerning the interplay between the muons and the quons and so is subject to later commentary near the end of this chapter.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
99
The effective mass of the quon is not found by using the formula E = Mc2, because, when the quon moves in that uniformly dense background sea of energy, it behaves as if its mass is halved. This is akin to a known property of the motion of a spherical body through a liquid. We know from the study of hydrodynamics that, if that body has a mass density equal to that of the liquid, it seems weightless owing to buoyancy, but there is an apparent increase in mass when a sphere is accelerated as if that mass is half of the true mass of the body. We proceed by accepting that this analogy applies to the problem of the aether and so our lattice particles will exhibit an effective mass in their orbits of radius r of: mo = q2/3bc2 .................................... (7.4) The lattice particles, the quons, mutually repel by their Coulomb interaction. As in the formation of crystal structure within matter, we may then expect some kind of cubic or hexagonal lattice to form. This is the minimum energy structure that applies in the circumstances, but those circumstances as they exist in matter are quite different from the situation in the aether, because the minimum energy criterion in matter usually results in what is an overall negative energy density. This is because the omnipresent aether has a slightly positive energy density and so it can permit matter to exist in a crystal structure that the aether is denied owing to the fact that its minimum energy density attributable to electrical interaction has to be positive. I then found, from my analysis of the aether, that if minimum energy conditions were applied to the space medium and negative energy density were to be permitted, then the aether lattice particles would all be at rest at neutral positions in that charge continuum, each quon sitting in its own cell and in a structure that was body-centred cubic, as in iron. There would be no motion. Our universe would be dead and lifeless. The aether would have no character relating to time and the exercise of exploring its properties would be meaningless.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
100
However, by assuming that the lattice particles of the aether would form in a structure which involves the least possible electrical interaction energy consistent with it being everywhere positive, then, Eureka, everything fell into place. The aether lattice structure had to be simple cubic in form. There had to be displacement of the particles from the centres to which they were drawn by electrostatic action and, to keep that displacement, they had to move in orbit in synchronism with one another and so the aether became a clock which keeps perfect time, even though it ticks at the very high frequency we associate with electron creation. It has been shown in chapter 6 that the charge displacement distance is 2r, where r is the radius of the orbits involved, and that the angular speed in orbit is c/2r. Presenting again the electrostatic force expression (6.1) of that chapter and equating it to mo()2r, we have: mo()2r = (4q)D .............................. (7.5) where D is 2r, which gives us an energy term: moc2 = 32qr2................................ (7.6) Since the space medium is electrically neutral: q = d3 ...................................... (7.7) This brings us very close to obtaining a value of the quon mass in terms of r/d and the unitary charge e of the electron, presuming that q is equal to e, and so the onward task now is to determine the value of r/d. The Aethers r/d Factor This ratio r/d, as the orbital radius r of the rhythmic quantum jitter motion of the aether in terms of the aether lattice cell dimension d, is determined as being very slightly greater than the r/d value at which the charge q interacts with the continuum charge density to have zero electric interaction potential. Accordingly, the governing equation is:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
101
E =
( q2/2x) - ( q/x)dV + ( 2/2x)dVdV
.............. (7.8) The factors 2 in the denominators are introduced because each interaction if counted twice in the double summation and double integration. The summations and integrations extend over the whole volume of space but as we shall see it suffices to limit the range to just a few lattice spacings d. To simplify the presentation we regard d as unity in the stages of integration and summation. Boundary conditions are of little consequence. Electric interaction energies, when reduced to local energy density terms, can in no way depend upon remote boundary conditions. The lattice condition assumed need not hold as a rigid perfect lattice throughout space. It can be distorted, but we do not expect the synchronous character of the lattice particle motion to hold beyond the range of the boundaries of vast space domains of the aether, domain size being a matter of analysis in chapter 8. The next step in our analysis is to differentiate E of this equation (7.8) with respect to , after recognizing that incorporates an offset term 2q(2r)2 to allow for the 2r displacement. The object of this is to eliminate the - interaction by determining the minimal energy condition by equating the result to zero. Then we shall know that distance 2r. Differentiating (7.8) with respect to , equating to zero and then multiplying by , we obtain:
( q/x)dV
( q/x)dV = ( 2/x)dVdV
From (7.8) and (7.9) we then find that: E =
................ (7.9)
( q2/2x) - ( q/2x)dV ........... (7.10)
Since E is zero the factor 2 is not important as we now evaluate the relevant terms in five stages and consolidate the results in a sixth stage.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
102
Stage 1: ( q2/x) between one quon and surrounding quons Still regarding d as unit distance, the coordinates of all surrounding quons in a cubic lattice are given by l, m, n, where l, m, n may have any value in the series 0, and plus or minus 1, 2, 3, etc. with the co-ordinate 0,0,0 excluded. Consider concentric cubic shells of surrounding quons. The first shell has 33-1 particles, the second 5333, the third 73- 53, etc. Any shell is formed by a combination of quons such that, if z is the order of one shell, at least one of the co-ordinates l, m, n is equal to z and this value is equal to or greater than either of the other two co-ordinates. On this basis it is straightforward arithmetic to verify the following evaluations of this sequence of summations. Sz denotes the summation as applied to the z shell. S1 = 19.10408 S2 = 38.08313 S3 = 57.12236 S4 = 76.16268 S5 = 95.20320 By way of example, S2 is the sum of the six terms: 6%4 + 24/%5 + 24/%6 + 12/%8 + 24/%9 + 8/%12 and here 6+24+24+12+24+8 is equal to 53- 33. Stage 2: The evaluation of
( q/x)dV in relation to Sz
The limits of a range of integration corresponding with the z shell lie between plus or minus coordinates (z -1/2) and plus or minus coordinates (z+1/2). An integral of q/x over these limits is denoted qd2Iz where: Iz = 24z ( sinh-1[1+y2]-1/2 )dy
0 1
which, upon integration, is: Iz = 24z(cosh-12 - /6)

HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
103
and which, upon evaluation, is: Iz = 19.040619058z ............................ ...... (7.11) Note that within I1 there is a component I0 for which z in this latter expression is effectively 1/8 so that: I0 = 2.380077382 ...................................... (7.12) Stage 3:
( q/x)dV for quon 2r displacement
As already indicated this component of the integral is given by: 2q(2r)2 and this expression, in units of q2/d, with as q/d3 is, simply: 8(r/d)2 ............................................. (7.13) and so, once we merge the results of stage 1 and stage 2, we are close to determining the value of r/d from their difference. Stage 4: Correction for quon charge volume The stage 2 calculation did not allow for the physical displacement of charge owing to the finite size of the quon, which has a charge radius b. This correction term is the integral from 0 to b of q/x as it applies within a spherical shell of area 4x2 and thickness x. This is: 2(b/d)2(q2/d) ...................................... (7.14) and, from (7.4) and (7.6), we know that: b/d = (d/r)2/96 .................................. (7.15) so that, in units of q2/d, the correction found by combining (7.14) and (7.15), is: (d/r)4/4608 ......................................... (7.16) Stage 5: Combination of terms. One very minor term is still needed to complete the analysis. This is because the quons, along with any particles of matter that sits in the E frame, will be moving relative to the charge continuum at the relative speed c and this must drive the charge out of their way
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
104
and so compress to a moderate extent. It would seem appropriate to accept that the mutual repulsion within the charge owing to this compression will spread the effect over a relatively large region so as to minimize the energy needed, energy which will add in some measure to the - interaction. Because the volume of continuum charge displaced by the presence of a quon is very much greater than that displaced by protons and electrons, this consideration is a factor needing consideration only in respect of the quons. We proceed by estimating its significance in relative terms as referenced on the quantity defined by (7.16) as just derived. The charge displaced by the quon is 4b3/3 and its displacement is to a mean distance kb, where kb can have a value approaching d/2 if the displaced charge is spread over much of the aether cell, would imply an energy term given by: 4qb3/3kb which is: (4/3k)(b/d)2(q2/d) .................................. (7.17) This is 2/3k times (7.14) and so, since (7.16) was derived from (7.14), the result we seek is the factor 2/3k which must be small owing to the self-repulsion of but yet must not be less than 4b/3d. Stage 6: Consolidation of results We now need to find the difference between the summation of the S terms and the summation of the I terms. Their convergence is self-evident. Ignoring Io for the moment, the successive terms differ by a summation of the terms: 0.06346 + 0.00189 + 0.00050 + 0.00020 + 0.00010 .... and, to sum the series, we match it to: 0.01350[1/33 + 1/43 + 1/53 + 1/63 .......] or: 0.00050 + 0.00021 + 0.00011 +0.00006 .....
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
105
for terms from z = 3 onwards. This yields the summation 0.00105, which upon adding 0.06346 and 0.00189, gives 0.0664 to subtract from the I0 quantity of (7.12) to obtain 2.31368. This value is the number of units of energy q2/d that we derive per quon from the first two stages of this analysis. The third, fourth and fifth stage components are now combined to give the net zero energy quantity and leave us with the equation: 8(r/d)2 = 2.31368 - (1 - 2/3k)(d/r)4/4608 ......... (7.18) This is the equation we seek, because it allows us to obtain a very close estimate of the value of r/d. Ignoring the term involving k, r/d is found to be 0.302873. Now, before considering that k term, it is appropriate here to mention that I am indebted to certain independent initiatives taken by three individuals, including one in particular, who have put in a great deal of effort to verify the analysis I have presented here. The first such initiative was that of Peter N. McNeall, an Englishman living in USA, who drew my attention to a small numerical error in a version of this analysis presented in the 1966 edition of my book: The Theory of Gravitation. The second and most important contribution was that of another Englishman, Dr. D. M. Eagles, who, having seen my 1969 book: Physics without Einstein, met me to discuss what it claimed, whilst in U.K. between a relocation of his research employment in USA to the National Standards Laboratory in Australia. I mentioned him in chapter 2, when I referred to a table in a book by B. W. Petley where Petley had drawn attention to a paper which Dr. Eagles and I had jointly authored. This paper was the result of Dr. Eagles checking my manual efforts at analysis to compute r/d in the days when powerful computers were available only to scientists in major research facilities. With Dr. C. H. Burtons assistance at that Australian laboratory he produced the definitive result of such a calculation by using such facilities and duly advised me that r/d obtained by such analysis was 0.302874.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
106
Precision here was very important owing to the implications this had for determining, with a high degree of confidence, a numerical quantity which seemed, by coincidence, to be close to the protonelectron mass ratio but yet was somewhat higher. I refer here to the number N that was introduced earlier. As to the third independent initiative, which has greatly impressed me, it is that of Bill Buick, of an address in Scotland, who went to the trouble of providing a computer program which anyone can run on a home computer to give the results of the calculations involved in deriving r/d. In summary, therefore, since the whole of this aether theory hinges on the calculation of this quantity, I am able to assure readers that the analysis is sound and meaningful. We can, therefore, now proceed to the more interesting features of this work by deriving that quantity N that is key to the three constants of Mother Nature that we are decoding. Evaluating N We define N as the ratio of the charge volume of the quon to that of the electron. We shall examine the proposition that N must be an odd integer, simply because the quon is not only the ultimate decay product of an electron but is, as we have seen in chapter 4, the seat of birth of the proton, which implies input of sufficient energy to create a number of electrons and positrons that can coalesce to form the proton by shedding a little energy. We can, therefore, expect N to be of the same order as, but higher than, the proton-electron mass ratio. If we focus attention now on the photon unit we described in chapter 6 and take note of a topic discussed separately in Appendix II, the picture before us is that of a 3x3x3 cubic section of aether lattice being able to spin within enveloping aether lattice. Here we have a kind of spinning crystal formed by 27 quons of which 24 account for the quantum of angular momentum.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
107
Referring now to Fig. 7.1 it will be seen that a circle is drawn to depict a sphere which encloses those 27 quons seated at the lattice sites in the cubic array there depicted. The radius of that circle is 2r. Why is this? Well, we have just seen that r/d has a value of 0.302874, so 2 times r will be 1.903d, which is the basis on which the figure is drawn.
Fig. 7.1 From chapter 6, reproducing equation (6.20): I = 2h/ ........................................ (7.19) we know, because is c/2r, that this term I, now representing a moment of inertia, is: I = 4hr/c ......................................... (7.20) The moment of inertia of the 3x3x3 lattice, as we see from inspection for spin about a 3-quon axis, is 36mod2, because there are twelve quons distant d from the spin axis and 12 quons whose square of distance from that axis is 2d2. Equating this result to I then gives: 36mod2 = 4hr/c ................................. (7.21)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
108
Now, having regard to equations (7.6) and (7.7), we see that these combine to give: moc2 = 32(q2/d)(r/d)2........................... (7.22) and we can here once again restate equation (6.15): r = h/4mec ..................................... (7.23) to give us three equations which, in combination, can, by a little algebra be seen to yield two further equations: hc/2e2 = 144(r/d) ................................ (7.24) and: mo/me = (4/9)(r/d)2................................ (7.25) Note that e, the unitary charge of the electron, now replaces q, as the two are identical. We are now ready to determine N because the ratio of the two masses in (7.25), as multiplied by 2, is the inverse ratio of the charge radii of the electron and quon. This factor 2 arises because the effective mass of the muon in its aether E frame orbits is half that determined from the Thomson energy equation. We then establish that N, as the ratio of the quon charge volume to that of the electron, is given, from (7.25), by: N = (9/8)3(d/r)6 .................................. (7.26) which, with r/d as 0.302874, gives N as approximately 1844.53. This, however, is not allowing for that stage 6 correction mentioned above, nor are we taking into account that requirement that N is an odd integer, integer because the quon has to be able to transform by energy addition into a group of electrons and positrons and odd because charge parity has to be conserved. From equation (7.18) we see that the effect of that term involving k is to increase r/d slightly. This will decrease N. We seem therefore to be looking at a definitive value of N that is 1843, but let us just explore this by working (7.18) backwards to see how large k must be to ensure that we do not slip below this 1843 threshold as an integer value. This is when r/d has the value 0.302916 and k is 8.34.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
109
We can now proceed by first noting that equation (7.24) represents one of the numbers we set out to decipher, namely the fine structure constant. You can then check that an approximate value of r/d of 0.302916 will give the constant as quite close to the measured value of 137.0359895(61). Then note that the value of b/d is known from equation (7.15) as: b/d = (d/r)2/96 which allows us to estimate the significance of that factor k. We find from the above value of r/d that b/d is 0.035 and so the distance kb, with k as large as 8.34, tells us that the charge displaced by the quon must move away from the quon centre by a mean distance of more than 0.29d in order for the energy conditions to be consistent with the 1843 value of N rather than a lower value of 1841. This seems an ideal requirement, given that the charge displaced in the continuum will try to spread itself owing to its self-repulsion, but yet must be confined within the boundaries of a cubic cell of side dimension d. Accordingly, we have now arrived at the conclusion that N is 1843 and, this being a key factor in this theory by which we decipher Natures coded messages, we have accomplished the main task of this work. The fine-structure constant, as expressed in reciprocal form by equation (2.10) in chapter 2, has been derived, as can be seen by combining equations (7.24) and (7.26) to eliminate the ratio r/d. One remaining task, before we embark on the quest to explain how stars are created, is to justify the value of the energy Eo of a unit cell of space, this being the energy quantum we have assigned to the two virtual muons which live within each such cell. The Unit Energy Quantum of the Aether The relevant equation is that presented in the early paragraphs of this chapter, namely equation (7.3), which is: Eo = (1/2)q2d3/b4 This, plus the equation (7.15) just quoted above, combine to give: Eo = (1/2)(96)3(r/d)6q2/b .......................... (7.27)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
110
From (7.26) this becomes: Eo = (3/4)(108)3(1/N)(2q2/3b) ................. (7.28) which presents this energy quantum in units of the quon mass-energy according to the Thomson formula. The latter is the electron rest-mass energy divided by the cube root of N and so we obtain: Eo = (3/4)(108)3(1/N)4/3 mec2......................... (7.29) from which we find, with N as 1843, that this energy quantum becomes: 412.6658 electron rest-mass energy units. Here, then, is the energy quantum that is regarded as the virtual muon pair, the occupants of each cubic cell of aether. A Supplementary Note My object in this chapter 7 has been to present the analysis by which I did, during a period in the latter part of the 1950s, work out what had to be the necessary structure of the space medium, the aether, in order for it to determine the processes we refer to as quantum theory and gravitation. I did not in those early years have an adequate insight into the details underlying the creation of the proton or the graviton, but their basis of existence was clear and the picture came fully into focus with the passage of time, the g-graviton emerging first, in the mid 1960s and the proton by the mid 1970s. Admittedly, however, there remain unanswered questions, questions that may elude us for many generations to come, some forever. There is scope for others to address these problems and add to our enlightenment. A typical question is: How can it be that a fundamental particle having an electric charge e confined within a sphere does not expand indefinitely owing to the self-repulsion of its electrostatic charge? Can the answer lie in the rhetorical question: Well, owing to its spherical symmetry, it has a centre and, since that is also its centre of mass, if it were to expand and shed energy, meaning what can only be
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
111
kinetic energy, then what would determine the direction in which that centre of mass would move? Should we beg the question, as it were, by arguing that the charge is stable because it cannot move of its own accord and allow its energy to become kinetic energy? Another such question is: What is it in Nature that tells an electric charge it is positive or negative? Here, the answer could be in our awareness that electric charge forms tend to be created in pairs and with two fundamental particles of opposite charge one can visualise one expanding as the other contracts so that energy is exchanged between them without having to convert into kinetic energy. This is a picture of mutual stability enhancing particle lifetime, and suggesting a well-known saying that there is safety in numbers. The idea thus seeded is the notion that all electric charged particles are oscillating in their charge radius at a common very high frequency, probably that of the quantum motion of the E and G frames of the aether, and that whether a charge is positive or negative really depends solely on its phase of oscillation. To accept that you must accept that time, as set by the rhythm of the quantum underworld, is universal and governed by motion that is synchronized as if there is no retardation in the action. That may seem a debatable proposition, but it makes sense for conditions where there is no need for long range energy transfer. Before concluding this supplementary note to chapter 7, I will now raise and seek to answer three questions which mayalready have occurred to astute readers. Why is it that it is so important for the electrostatic interaction energy of the aether not to fall below zero, given that when two electric charges of opposite polarity do interact there has to be a negative energy component offsetting the self-energy of each charge? The answer lies, I believe, in the lack of reciprocity in the charge interaction combined with the fact that no vector direction is defined that can give scope for kinetic energy. If two charges of different electrical polarity but identical form interact then energy exchange can occur and even if of different form there is a line
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
112
between their charge centres along which the charges can move apart as any surplus energy is shed to become kinetic energy. This is not the case for those quons sitting in a charge continuum . It is just as well, because if the quons were to move to sites of minimum electrostatic interaction energy, meaning a negative energy density as offset by the self-energy of the quons, then the aether would be a solid devoid of any motion and we would not exist. The second question arises when we note how precise the aether analysis has been in defining numerical relationships but see an approximation in taking Eo as the total energy of a cubic cell of the aether, as if the quon is part of the virtual muon pair when it comes to using Eo as in the calculation of the proton-electron mass ratio in chapter 4. I answer this by saying, or rather hoping, that the ongoing creation and decay of those muons as they deploy from position to position in the aether will occur as if they have just such a spacing as to account for a negative interaction energy that exactly matches the positive energy of the quon and its equal measure of associated graviton energy. However, there may well be another answer, one bearing upon the inseparability of the quon charge from its counterpart continuum charge of opposite polarity. The quon with its matching unit of continuum charge is the most degenerate state that electric charge can adopt. Hence the quon, unlike the electron, may find that its electric field energy is somehow merged with and perhaps accounts for energy that represents the presence of that continuum. Note that the theory assumes the continuum proper has zero energy. We should not therefore expect the inertial properties of the quon to be the same as those of the electron, as implied by use of the Thomson mass-energy formulation E = 2e2/3a. Now here I have in mind what I wrote at pages 104-105 of my 1969 book: Physics Unified. I argued by reference to Appendix I of that book that the pressure in the medium enveloping the quons would be equal to that set up within the body of charge e, which I calculated as being given by the formula e2/4a4. From this, by
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
113
multiplying by the volume of a sphere of radius a, one can obtain a measure of the energy as e2/3a, which is half that given by the Thomson formula. A little intuition then leads to the appealing suggestion that the continuum counterpart to such a quantity as applied to the quon might then account for an equal amount of energy, so bringing their combination to the energy quantum that would apply to the quon by use of the Thomson formula. The latter concern may point to a weakness in the theory but only in the sense that one surely cannot expect the universe to yield all its secrets and be self-explanatory in every detail to fit within the pattern of this one sweeping account of Creation. One can but probe the aether step by step and I must admit that I have no idea how to explain or justify the existence of the continuum of charge density , nor can I say what electric charge actually is other than by describing its action and effect on other charge. This gives rise to the third question. What happens if, instead of the charge continuum yielding to compression owing to the motion through it of quons and matter at a relative speed c, it resists compression and stays uniform, but the quons are compressed to match exactly the volume of space taken up locally by the particles of matter? This would eliminate the need for that factor k in stage 5 above and ensure that the presence of matter does not distort the continuum charge distribution as a function of the volume of matter particles involved, meaning that gravitational interaction is exclusively that of the related graviton presence. The results of our analysis speak for themselves, but I do not have the slightest notion of how electric charge can spread itself to fill space in a uniform way, short of imagining that in its microcosmic form it is like a gas which somehow disperses uniformly in its pressure balance. We can, however, build on what has been discovered concerning the aether and this takes us into chapter 8 where we will see how stars are created.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
114
CHAPTER 8
Creation: Stars and Planets

Introduction There is something that cosmologists who theorize about what we see in outer space have yet to learn. There are two very basic errors in the scientific foundations on which they build their understanding of stars. Firstly, they ignore completely the fact that hydrogen as the gas from which stars are formed will, upon compression to a mass density of the order of 1.4 gm/cc as shown in Appendix IV, experience overlap of the electron shells, the K-shells of the atomic structure of hydrogen. This means that the star will be partially ionized, which means that many protons and electrons will roam free. In turn this means that, since the mutual rate of gravitational acceleration by two interacting protons is 1836 times that of two interacting electrons, the star must adopt a uniform mass density throughout its core and have a positive electric core charge density enclosed in a surface shell of negative charge density. The electrostatic repulsion of the core charge will balance exactly the internal gravitational attraction of the star as a whole. That electrical core charge density will be G1/2 times that mass density 1.4 gm/cc. This happens to be the mass density of our Sun but this fact is surely not a matter of coincidence! Secondly, there is the quite ludicrous assumption that starlight in its passage through the aether for billions of years as it traverses vast distances is not subject to frequency attenuation. Because cosmologists know that light waves of different frequency travel at different speeds through a material medium they see dispersion as the telltale property of a medium in space and assume, incorrectly, that
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
115
no frequency dispersion in the vacuum means no frequency attenuation and so no aether medium. One can but deplore the cosmological blunder that has ensued and bequeathed us with the nightmare syndrome of the Big Bang, an expanding universe and, in respect of that first error, Black Holes. Moreover, by ignoring that positive electric core charge possessed by a star one has not seen how Mother Nature, in interacting with a quantum aether, will develop a state of spin importing energy from that aether and so cosmologists have missed something of vital importance to our understanding of Creation. It does not need a genius to see the obvious and one can but wonder if the cosmological fraternity is composed of the blind leading the blind, which means that I address what I now have to say to the general reader rather than seeking to enlighten those who see themselves as specialists in cosmology. Such is my strength of feeling on this matter, especially as my earlier published work on this theme has not been heeded. This is my introduction to this chapter 8. Apart from the discussion concerning space domains, a subject addressed in my books Modern Aether Science (1972) and Physics Unified (1980) I base much of this chapter on a lecture I delivered to the Physics Department of Cardiff University in Wales in 1977 and an extended revision of the subject of a peer-reviewed paper of mine published by the Italian Institute of Physics in 1984. The latter paper was entitled: The Steady-State Free Electron Population of Free Space, Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252-256 (1984). The Cardiff lecture was the subject of a paper entitled Space, Energy and Creation. Also, added to this chapter since the first draft edition of this work was published on my website, is a very important development pertaining to what are referred to as neutron stars. The recent announcement of the firstever measurement of the magnetic field of such a star has provided data allowing my theory to be tested in a quite remarkable way.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
116
Deriving the Hubble Constant I believe that what astronomers see as the basis of the Hubble constant, the shift of the frequency of starlight towards the red end of the spectrum as a function of distance from a star, is a phenomenon associated with proton creation. Natures ongoing attempts to create protons everywhere in space must fail if there is inadequate energy available for a proton to materialize in a permanent form. In lending energy momentarily to test the water, as it were, and see if proton creation is possible, the aether is constantly experiencing failure, given that almost all of its surplus energy has already been deployed in the creation of matter. The aether is vast and those attempts at proton creation are occurring in a very small proportion of its unit cells at any instant and so its overall transparency is only slightly blemished by this activity. So, you see, in now mentioning those blemishes that arise from proton creation, we are holding firm to the theme of this work The Physics of Creation. In summary, the proton creation activity already discussed in chapter 4 is ongoing everywhere in its failure mode on a universal scale where there is no energy surplus feeding the creation of protons that can survive, but yet is effective in a way that does reveal itself by determining the value of what we refer to as the Hubble constant. In physics one has the choice of believing that the vacuum is a true void or that it is a real aether medium. There is no halfway house in which one can shelter, as by inventing a geometrical multidimensional fabric and dressing accordingly as one plays a part on an imaginary stage and so pretends that the universe is a mere illusion. The sensible approach is to say that the aether exists and functions as a kind of workshop that accepts energy shed by matter and recycles it by fabricating protons and electrons which can be drawn back by gravity into the real world. This is the vision of an everlasting universe, a steady-state universe in the overall energy sense, but one which evolves by creation and decay of its component parts.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
117
At the very least, however reluctant one might be to accept this proposition, one should explore its implications theoretically before accepting the alternative, a universe in which protons and electrons were created at time zero and which then ceased their manufacture in favour of a slow death. Indeed, ask yourself why would our universe start creating protons and electrons and then stop suddenly or is one to believe that God operated a switch called Creation and, alarmed by hearing the Big Bang, immediately opened the switch and adopted a low profile just to watch events from then on? So I have envisaged an aether which is ongoing and trying all the time to create protons and electrons, succeeding only by using any surplus energy that finds its way into its system. Then, supposing there are vast regions of space where there is no such surplus energy, that aether in those regions would at all times exhibit a kind of haze as it tries, using its own latent energy resource, to create protons and electrons, only to find that they promptly decay, but yet their transient existence provides a permanent but very faint haze throughout space which can obstruct the passage of electromagnetic waves. We have, in chapter 4, seen how the muon activity of the aether can create a proton. This is, I believe, a process in which nine muons act in concert by attacking a quon in the time interval of one oscillation at the Compton electron frequency or in an immediate succession of such time intervals. The chance of such an event occurring is found as follows. Quoting from the above-referenced paper in Lettere al Nuovo Cimento: We look to the event when four muon pairs plus one muon of charge opposite to q all combine within the volume of q in the same cycle of migration. The muon pairs have a random chance of movement and are not confined to a particular cell. The chance of one muon entering the q volume is (1/N)1/3(me/2m). Therefore the chance of nine muons entering this same volume is this
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
118
factor raised to the power 9. The logic of this supposes that each muon arrives independently and simultaneously and that the chance of four negative muons appearing is the factor raised to the power 4, whereas the chance of five positive muons appearing is the factor raised to the power 5, the total chance being the product of the two. We find that the overall effect is that at any time the chance of a q element converting according to the equation: q = N(e+, e-) is (1/N)3(me/2m)9. It is supposed that the reverse transition occurs at the end of each cycle when the muons migrate to new positions. In effect, however, the condition just described is ever present and is a steadystate condition. Here, I interject a comment that qualifies what is said above. Arising from the discovery claimed by Dr. Paul Rowe (see chapter 9), I now believe that the transient state left even by one muon impact upon q, the quon, will hold the energy just long enough to carry the action into the next muon cycle. This means that the numerical factor still applies but to a sequence of successive impacts on the same quon target. The odds of a quon being hit by nine muons in the unit time interval are the same as that of a sequence of single muon hits on the same quon target in a succession of unit time intervals. This reverts the aether model to that for which a muon pair is confined to each unit cell of the aether, given that their combined energy is the mass-energy of a unit cell of the charge continuum. Note that N, as 1843, the number derived theoretically in our earlier analysis of photon theory in chapter 7, is the charge volume of the quon in terms of the charge volume of the electron. To complete the quotation from that 1984 paper:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
119
The formula for d, the lattice dimension of the cubic cell of aether, as 72e2/mec2, can be used to evaluate d as 6.37x10-11 cm, meaning that there are 3.87x1036 cells per cubic metre of space. With N as 1843 and m/me as 207 it is evident that one cell in 2.2x1033 is subject to the transition just discussed. There are, therefore, approximately 1,760 excited electron cells in each cubic metre of space. The state of excitation involves a q charge becoming an electron and the nine muons shedding energy and creating 921 electron-positron pairs to leave the residual energy nucleated in a positive charge of larger energy content, but physically very much smaller in size than the electron. The question then is whether 1760 such systems in each cubic metre of free space might be detected owing to the disorder they represent in what is otherwise a transparent and wholly ordered medium. The electron-positron pairs will not obstruct the passage of electromagnetic waves because they have a mutual inertial balance and are collectively neutral in their response to electric fields. This leaves the electrons, 1760 per cubic metre, as the dominant factor presenting a scattering cross-section to radiation. Here is the cause of that haze mentioned above. The approach I now take is to assume that the wave must shed some of its energy in passing through this haze. As a self-propagating oscillating wave it will shed energy during both the up and down parts of its lateral displacement cycle. During its ups it will move the distance required to match the amplitude of its electric field, not travelling quite as far as it would were there no loss of energy. However, during its down periods it must traverse the same displacement distance before
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
120
beginning the next up and down cycle, albeit in the opposite direction, but, ask yourself: How can it then reveal that it has lost energy? The answer, given that we are considering a system in which electric field energy is being exchanged by oscillation into kinetic energy, which Clerk Maxwell would say is magnetic energy, is that we must look to a reduction in speed, given the same distance of travel, and so a frequency reduction. By speed is meant the speed of the quon charge oscillations in a direction lateral to the wave propagation direction. In summary, to the extent that the electron haze absorbs energy from the wave, half of the energy loss will mean amplitude attenuation, even for a plane wave, with the other half of the energy loss producing frequency attenuation. This is why light from distant stars suffers a loss of frequency. Upon encountering an electron as an obstruction in the path of an electromagnetic wave, the wave sheds some of its energy density W and also suffers a related loss of frequency f. Since, for a given oscillation amplitude of electric field intensity in a medium where charge displacement is subjected to a linear restoring force, W is proportional to frequency squared, the relationship between these two quantities, expressed as a function of distance s travelled, can be formulated thus: (1/f)df/ds = (1/2W)dW/ds ............................ (8.1) However, since the attenuation of frequency occurs only during half of the wave cycle, this equation needs to be further modified to become: (1/f)df/ds = (1/4W)dW/ds ............................. (8.2) Now, when I wrote the 1984 paper from which the above quotations are taken, I proceeded upon deriving this equation (8.2) to show that this implied a value for the Hubble constant determined by estimating the energy dissipation in the aether as if each of those 1760 transiently-created electrons per cubic metre presented the electron scattering cross-section according to the standard Thomson formula.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
121
Unfortunately, I misquoted the value of this quantity by a factor of and so derived a Hubble time factor of 11,400 million years, whereas the theory based on such assumption indicates a lower value of the order of 4 billion years. I am now somewhat hesitant about relying on such a formula and would rather simply make the point that an electromagnetic wave travelling through such an field of electrons must suffer a loss of energy and a reduction of frequency. That frequency attenuation is scaled as a function of frequency exactly as it would be if it were due to the Doppler effect. Inevitably therefore, the notion of an expanding universe is unsound and it becomes of interest here to denote the empirical value of the Hubble constant as N billion years, this being the relevant exponential decay time constant, and deduce from this the scattering cross section of those electrons. 4% energy absorption corresponds to a 1% frequency reduction over 1% of the distance travelled at the speed of light and so 1% of the Hubble time constant. Suppose the scattering cross section of each electron to be times 10-25 sq. cm. To achieve 4% energy absorption this means that the wave travels a sufficient distance to encounter 4 times 1023 times (1/) electrons per sq. cm. of wave cross-sectional area. At 1,760 electrons per cubic metre this means that the wave must travel over a distance of (1/) times 2.27x1026 cm to suffer a 1% frequency reduction. Since 1 billion light years is a distance of 9.45x1026 cm we then find that the 1% frequency reduction occurs in a period of (1/) times 0.24N billion years. This gives the relationship between N and as one for which N is equal to 24. On the basis of the electron scattering cross-section according to the J. J. Thomson formula of 6.65x10-25 sq. cm, the Hubble time period should be 3.6 billion years, which seems too low. We must remember, however, that this is not a measure of the age of the universe. It is merely the time constant of an exponential frequency reduction curve. It is reasonable to suppose that the process by which we have explained the successful creation of the proton in chapter 4,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
122
as attributable to nine muons coming together within the space occupied by quon charge, may, even so far as unsuccessful events are concerned fall short of achieving that 1760 transient electron level per cubic metre. A one in five chance would enhance the Hubble time period by a factor five. Also, one can even question the merit of using the Thomson radiation scattering formula for reasons to be discussed in Appendix II and readers who need to know more about this before delving into the creation of stars should pause here to read through Appendix II. Had we used instead the cross-sectional area of the electron as based on the Thomson electron form discussed in the early chapters of this work then that Hubble time period would be longer by a factor of 6, meaning that it would be of the order of 20 billion years. Such a step would, however, need theoretical justification as to precisely how the physical interception of an electromagnetic wave extracts energy from that wave. Also, it seems illogical to ignore the physics underlying the derivation and experimental support for the conventional theory of the scattering cross-section of the electron. Given the Hubble constant the theory which involves the Big Bang notion of creation with the universe expanding from the moment of Creation necessarily involves theoretical assumptions that are difficult to verify but suggest that the age of the universe is somewhat smaller than that measured as the Hubble time period. Our uncertainty here in our theory concerns the effective crosssectional area of an electron obstructing passage of an electromagnetic wave in outer space populated by a mere 1,760 electrons per cubic metre of mass density 1.6x10-27 kg/m3. This, incidentally, is of the same order as the mass density of the so-called missing matter that cosmologists say should be present in space to give account of certain features of their theories. I feel, however, that enough has been said to show that we need not belong to an expanding universe with its Big Bang scenario. It seems far more preferable to accept that the facts of record support the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
123
case for a steady-state universe, thanks to our understanding based on this work of how protons are created and the ongoing role of our aether in that activity. This is especially the case as we now address the problem of how a star is created, but go on from there to show how the space domains that feature in this star creation role define boundaries which must one day be traversed by the star at a very acute angle. This means that the star will be located astride that boundary and be partially in one domain and partially in an adjacent domain. Since, as we shall see, the force of gravity does not act in an attractive sense between matter in different space domains, there are then conditions which arise that may cause the star to explode and disperse, as by a supernova event. Accordingly the cycle of life and death of a star becomes part of the syndrome of a steady-state universe rather than one exhibiting the one-off Big Bang scenario. It is one thing to accept that the universe exists and for us to try to probe its secrets, but quite another to say when it came into existence and confront the mystery of what was there before that event. We can never know the answers to these questions but the picture we can form has more clarity if founded on the notion of a steady-state universe. The Creation of a Star Why are there so many stars and not just one large star that sits at the centre of the universe? What causes a star to rotate? How is the energy which it radiates sustained? Cosmologists have answers. It all happened in the Big Bang and within a fraction of a second what had appeared blew apart as its numerous fragments interacted one upon the other to impart angular momentum in opposite spin directions and so form stars that rotate in their ever-expanding distribution in space. They supposedly feed on energy, nuclear energy as they transmute their hydrogen into inferior lower forms of matter such as helium and so emit their radiation. The aether is not a part of this picture of Creation.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
124
The source of their expert knowledge on these matters is their observation of what they see in distant space using high powered telescopes plus laboratory analysis of that pattern of radiation as it reaches Earth. The reason that the energy has to be nuclear is because they can conceive of no other source adequate to sustain the Suns radiation for billions of years. So you may ask how it is that I can claim any special insight into these matters. What have I seen in a telescope that others have missed? As to insight, is that what is needed to ask the obvious question: Why cannot the energy radiated by a star come from the collisions of those electrons of its adjacent hydrogen atoms, given that their energy is sustained by interaction with the quantum underworld of the space medium, the energy of the aether itself? As to that telescope, my answer is that I was looking instead at a situation one can see by looking through a microscope, not at a crystal ball but at the surface of a crystal of iron. My experimental Ph.D. research concerned an energy anomaly found in iron and I spent a great deal of time one summer supplementing that effort by trying to develop a theoretical model justifying the ferromagnetic state of iron, as based on electrostatic and electrodynamic interaction of 3d state electrons in iron atoms. Those atoms are arrayed in a body-centred cubic lattice and I was exploring the trade-off between the negative energy potential of the interactions versus the accompanying mechanical strain energy to explore, not only the ferromagnetic condition, but property dependence upon mechanical stresses as I had measured the loss anomaly factor as a function of such stress. That theoretical research convinced me that a phenomenon known as the gyromagnetic ratio was not attributable to electron spin, as theoretical physicists assumed, but was in fact attributable to the existence of a reaction which halved the strength of an applied magnetic field, a reaction that must also be exhibited by the vacuum medium, the aether.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
125
I later realized that my ferromagnetic model of an iron crystal, if adapted to the simple cubic structure, had something to tell me about the properties of the aether, because it had a message concerning angular momentum and rotation. More than this, however, the iron crystal has an intrinsic structure that is characterized by energy deployment and what one could see in a microscope is what are called magnetic domains, regions of the crystal bounded by planar separating walls which divide the iron into parts in which the electron orbital motion accounting for ferromagnetism have opposite directions. It does not take a genius then to imagine that, possibly, the aether itself might have the characteristic feature of incorporating domains on a large scale and that this might have some bearing on the distribution pattern of stars when born, meaning one star or one binary pair of stars per space domain. I had in mind also the great mystery posed by the hope that gravitation might prove to be a phenomenon linked in some way to electromagnetism. So there I was, at Cambridge, having ideas that I dare not express for fear of ridicule, but pursuing in private my hobby of delving into theoretical physics when my formal discipline was connected with electrical engineering. I was, after all, at the venue where, some two decades earlier Nobel Laureate Paul Dirac had been acclaimed for establishing the case for electron spin by which that gyromagnetic factor of 2 is supposed to come from what I can best describe as pseudo-relativistic mathematical equations. It was a little consolation to think that Dirac had graduated in engineering in his first university, Bristol, and a comfort to think that he saw space as a sea of states from which a missing electron would appear as a positive hole, the positron, but the aether was still a taboo subject and I had a living to earn upon leaving academia. I had already spent three years at Manchester University obtaining my first degree and had two years of graduate apprenticeship before entering Cambridge. At least, being at Trinity College, the venue of Isaac Newton and J. J. Thomson, whose portraits
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
126
overlooked ones dining habits in Hall for some three years, I could hope that that might engender some creative inspiration and, indeed, courage as I quietly pursued my hobby of exploring the aether in the years ahead. As to the creation of a star, I saw that as an event resulting from the aether cooling from a chaotic state into an ordered state, just as magnetic domains form in iron as its crystalline form sheds extra energy in cooling through its Curie temperature. In the aether, however, that energy is released as gravitational potential of the star or binary star pair so formed within each domain. In other words, we are looking at the situation in which gravity as a phenomenon is switched on by domain formation just as the state of ferromagnetism comes into being only when those domains form. Creation as applied to a star then involves the coalescence of dispersed matter, protons and electrons, which means, once the gravity switch is thrown, that many of the protons rush in ahead of the electrons because their mutual rate of acceleration is 1836 times that of the electron-electron interaction. Here is the trigger causing a star to spin, the initial state of it having a positive electric core charge, and this brings us to the point of primary importance in this work. It is a factor that can explain the spin of a photon as well as the spin of a star and may even explain something I shall reveal in the last section of chapter 9, something having technological implications for the alternative energy field. I did, at the end of 1959, document this aspect of the theory in printed form [The Theory of Gravitation, (1960)], but at that time I had not seen the link to any technological implications, as otherwise I might well have changed course much earlier in my career pursuit. The book just mentioned was privately published at that time only to make a break as I changed from a professional role with a major engineering company, English Electric, to a higher management role with IBM in their Patent Operations.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
127
I was sure that a star forms owing to it acquiring a positive core charge density at its creation, a charge which is later sustained by virtue of its hydrogen atoms being crushed together by gravity so as to be close enough for their electron shells to overlap and so develop the ionized state which leaves enough protons free to move inwards under gravity and so sustain that core charge. The charge density would be the square root of G times the mass density of hydrogen corresponding to that overlap of their electron shells. The result is the mean mass density of our Sun, a little over 1.4 gm/cc as I show in Appendix IV. So now let us see how the aether coextensive with the Sun reacts to the presence of this charge. Being a little impatient here I rush to say that it shares the spin of the Sun at the time the Sun comes into being, simply because aether spin means electric charge induction, displacement of charge from its core body to its spherical aether boundary. You might then say that such a proposition would mean that the Sun along with other stars would then have a magnetic moment and so a magnetic field should be in evidence. You could even suspect that body Earth, if also having a coextensive aether sphere spinning with it, would be subject to an internal electric strain and also possess a magnetic moment giving rise to a magnetic field. All very well, you might then say, but how does theory yield quantitative results that we can check with observation and measurement? As I now show, the solar system can be obliging in this endeavour but we need to be cautious. We will proceed in stages and I am sure you will find the commentary interesting and convincing. The Schuster-Wilson Hypothesis That comment above that the sun should exhibit an electric charge density in its core equal to the square root of G times the suns mean mass density should remind any well-read cosmologist of what came to be known as the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis. A. Schuster [Proc. Roy. Soc., 24, 121-137 (1912)] and H. A. Wilson have shown
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
128
that the magnetic moments and angular momenta of the Sun and Earth are approximately related in a common ratio. This led to the hypothesis, the speculation that a moving element of mass as measured in gravitational units might have the same magnetic effect as an electric charge measured in electrostatic units. It seems not to have occurred to those interested in this hypothesis that rotation of an astronomical body might entrain rotation of aether, which could involve the induction of an electric field and so electric charge displacement duly cancelled by charge displacement in that astronomical body. If the latter and not the former gives rise to magnetic action one has here a situation where one can explain the presence of a magnetic moment with no commensurate evident presence of an electric charge. Wilson sought to prove the hypothesis by experiment based on seeking to detect the magnetic action of a swinging iron bar [Proc. Roy. Soc. A., 104, pp. 415-455 (1923)]. The null result of the experiment is hardly surprising. I would not expect the aether to respond to the oscillations of an iron bar though I could contemplate a response if a rotor spinning at the same speed for a prolonged period was used and there were some effect akin to the presence of an electric charge within that rotor. However, one must keep in mind that in 1923 the aether was not surviving as a popular notion in the vocabulary of science. Nor, indeed, could one expect that hypothesis to survive, given the boldness of what it claimed. However, interest in the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis revived in 1947 when W. W. Babcock [Publ. Astr. Soc. Pacif., 59, 112-124 (1947)] succeeded in measuring the magnetic field of the star 78 Virginis. The hypothesis was verified as being fully applicable to three bodies instead of two, the range of angular momenta then being 1010:1. Nobel Laureate P. M. S. Blackett [Nature, 159, 658-666 (1947)] then became very interested and wrote an extensive article on the subject. He began by presenting the hypothesis in the form: (Magnetic moment)/(angular momentum) = G (/c)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
129
where is a constant of the order of unity, c is the ratio of electrostatic to electromagnetic units and G is the constant of gravitation. This was followed by a Table I in which he presented numerical data in support of the above formulation before then enlarging on the whole theme by reference to the research findings of several authors. What is however perplexing for a serious reader of his account is the data he provides in that table for the magnetic moments and angular momenta of the Sun and the Earth. The ratios of magnetic moment to angular momentum for Earth and Sun are shown to be 1.11x10-15 and 0.79x10-15, respectively, whereas my calculation of G (/c) gives the value times 0.86x10-14. There is a factor of 10 discrepancy if is to be of the order of unity and I can but suspect that there has been a numerical miscalculation on Blacketts part which is quite misleading even if an error factor of 10 was seen as of the order of unity in the context of a number 10 raised to the fifteenth power. In the event, however, Blackett himself was sufficiently intrigued by the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis to mount a further experiment [Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 245A, 309-370 (1952/53)]. He contrived to acquire a quite large object of pure gold just for the period of the experiment and placed this in a wooden shed in a rural location remote from any metal objects or external power supply equipment, his purpose being to use an extremely sensitive magnetometer to see if the concentration of mass by the high density of gold allowed that object to reveal a magnetic property attributable to its rotation with body Earth. Again, not surprisingly, there was a null result, because surely, if we are really looking at a property of the aether, one cannot expect the aether itself to increase its action merely because of a mass seated in very dense matter. So here was an astronomical observation of major importance but, owing to it not complying with ones hopes on the laboratory front and in spite of the related efforts of many authors, it was merely a hypothesis that had somehow to be buried and forgotten. The aether
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
130
had not been seen as a factor involved owing to it also having been buried and forgotten for not itself complying with an assumed property that it did not possess and yet the basis of the SchusterWilson hypothesis was a pointer to the existence of the aether. Such is the arena of scientific endeavour, at least where cosmology is concerned. If the aether spins with an astronomical body and such spin can induce electric charge displacement, then one might still expect that hypothesis to hold true at least in a limited sense as applied to hydrogen in a star, and all the more so, given the opening comments of this chapter, my observation that ionization in the Sun must endow it with a core charge that has the density implied by that SchusterWilson hypothesis. It could well be that there is something fortuitous about the way in which the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis has crept into physics. The problem with the numerical data might well arise because it is so difficult to be sure what magnetic properties a star has. There are Sun spots on the Sun which signify regions of ionized gas spinning independently of the general spin of the Sun itself. The magnetic fields in evidence from spectral line shifts in radiation from the hydrogen atom fluctuate over time and make estimates of magnetic moment unreliable. Accordingly, whilst accepting that the G (/c) factor has a role in cosmology by linking gravitational action on ionized gas with an astronomical body having a core electrical charge density and core mass density that are uniform and related, we will not ponder further on the specific values of magnetic moments of such ionized bodies. Instead, we shall look to the aether to reveal something of relevance to this curious factor. We are converging onto the proposition that aether spin involves induction of a charge density within the spinning aether sphere, owing to charge being displaced to or from its spherical boundary. This charge density is neutralized in its electrostatic effects by virtue of a corresponding charge deployment of opposite polarity
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
131
within the astronomical body seated within that aether sphere. Accordingly, one can only sense the magnetic effects associated with one of those charge components, namely the action of the charge displaced within matter. This is further supported by my contention that the ionization of hydrogen in a star will, owing to collisions between K shell electrons in gravitationally compacted hydrogen atoms, free just enough protons to set up the precise density of positive core charge that the hypothesis requires. I can provide some further insight into the reasons why aether charge itself, absent a reaction in coextensive matter, does not set up a primary magnetic field action. Reason (a) is that we found in chapter 7 that all the right results emerged from analysis of aether structure without our incorporating any magnetic interaction in the aether model considered. Reason (b) will emerge from chapter 9 where we derive the Neumann potential and see that we need to retain the Fechner hypothesis to explain the phenomenon of electromagnetic interaction. The Fechner hypothesis requires quantum electrodynamic charge pair creation and annihilation of the kind we associate with moving electrons, but electrons are not part of the basic aether medium. Reason (c), also to be discussed in chapter 9, is that the aether charge that has freedom of movement is governed by statistical factors by which the energy involved optimizes its deployment. The aether can set up a magnetic effect by the reaction which accounts for that gyromagnetic factor of 2 being halved, but this is a reaction and not a primary action unless, as applies where we have stored field energy in an inductance, we deliberately terminate current flow in matter with the result that the aether induces the back-EMF that feeds the return flow of the induction energy. Reason (d) is the fact that, contrary to general expectation, one can explain gravity and derive the value of G as an aether property without associating gravitation with an electrodynamic action. Enough has now been said to show that the aether figures prominently in the process of star creation. In contrast with my earlier
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
132
accounts of the theory involved, where I discussed first how the setting up of an electric charge density in a body of astronomical proportions accounted for the creation of our Sun and the planets, I will, before delving into the mathematics of space domains, start here by introducing space domain theory. Space Domains Although cosmologists like to think that the action of gravity knows no bounds and that matter, however separated by distance, will be subject to the unabated action of gravity as defined by the value of G that we measure here on Earth, I think otherwise. Gravity has a limited range of action. It only operates between matter seated in the same space domain or between matter and quons of the aether lattice seated in the same space domain. The latter can be verified in the following way. Consider a region of aether in the near vicinity of Earth and the effect of the gravitational potential of Earth and Sun on quons located in that region. Those quons, which define the E frame of the aether, move in circular orbits in which they are dynamically balanced by the gravitons in the G frame. Each has a mass mo which, subject to gravitational potential , imports an amount of energy mo which is held at the seat of that quon as the thermal vibration energy of that quon. This is an energy quantum kT, owing to the quon having only two degrees of freedom, imposed by the constraint of keeping in synchronism with the orbital motion of other quons, this constraint precluding the third degree of freedom. T is the temperature in Kelvin and k is Boltzmanns constant, 1.38x10-16 ergs/K. This gives us the equation: mo = kT ........................................... (8.3) Now, in chapter 7, we were able to show that the mass of the quon was 0.0408 times the mass of the electron, as one can see from equation (7.25) by substituting the value we derived for r/d. Since we then know that the electron has a mass of 9.109x10-28 gm, the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
133
temperature of the quon system, which we can refer to as the aether temperature or cosmic background temperature, if it can be measured, will give us the value of , the gravitational potential in the near vicinity of Earth. Now, of course, we can only be referring here to the 2.7 K temperature exhibited by any rarefied form of matter that interacts with the aether at high altitudes above the Earth. It appears that radiometers carried by U-2 aircraft flying at altitudes of 20 km detected a 390 km/s component of Earth motion through space by interpreting the observed local anisotropy of the 2.7 K temperature by reference to an assumed isotropic distribution. This was reported in October 1977 [Phys. Rev. Lett., 39, 898] and again, on November 3rd 1977, under the title: Aether Drift Detected at Last at page 9 of the journal Nature, followed in May 1978 by an article The Cosmic Background Radiation and the New Aether Drift in Scientific American. With T as 2.7 K, equation (8.3) tells us that is 1.002x1013 erg/gm. So here we have an approximate measure of the local gravitational effect of all the matter in the universe that lies within the range of gravitational action. I say approximate because one cannot rule out a small contribution to temperature from another source and because the assumption concerning the two degrees of freedom may be too rigid an assertion. However, since G is 6.67x10-8 cgs units, body Earth of mass 5.977x1027 gm and radius 6.378x108 cm contributes about 6.2% of this value of . Also, the Sun of mass 1.989x1033 gm at a distance of 1.496x1013 cm contributes 88% of this value of and so, even if the other planets plus the rest of the universe within gravitational range contribute nothing to this potential, we can account for 2.6 K of that temperature. This is close enough to justify my assertion that gravitation has a limited range. As I show in Appendix II, the inertial property of a particle vests in its electric charge responding to the influence of an accelerating electric field in just such a way as to conserve its energy
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
134
and avoid radiation of its intrinsic electric field energy. This is not to say that the accelerated electron is inactive in the role of radiating energy, because a group of electrons accelerated together can operate collectively in developing such radiation and one has to look also at the kinetic energy (magnetic energy) associated with electromagnetic wave propagation. This key to understanding the nature of inertia is of vital importance to cosmological theory. Ernst Mach (1893) regarded the background of very distant stars as a firm base of reference for the determination of inertial action. Quoting from p. 169 of the book: The Structure of the Universe by J. Narlikar (Oxford University Press; 1977): Mach concluded that inertia owes its origin to the background of distant stars. Remove the background and the body will cease to have any inertia! This reasoning is known as Machs Principle. Then on p. 170 of that book one reads: In the early 1950s the Cambridge physicist Dennis Sciama suggested an interesting interpretation of Machs principle. He argued that, when a non-inertial coordinate frame is used, the inertial forces arose because of gravitational forces exerted by distant matter. Imagine a body like the Earth which is being attracted by the Suns gravitational field. In the frame of reference in which the Earth is at rest, we can argue that it is acted on by two equal and opposite forces: (1) the Suns gravitational force of attraction and (2) the force exerted by the rest of the Universe. The latter is expected to depend on the density of distant matter and its distance from the Earth. Starting with this idea Sciama deduced from general arguments the relation: GT2 = 1
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
135
In this relation, is the mean density of matter in the Universe and T is the time scale associated with the expansion of the Universe. If we use Hubbles constant H, we may write T = 1/H. Sciamas ideas on this theme are typical of the reasoning used by cosmologists who cannot contemplate gravity having a limited range of action, and look to find answers to the problem of inertia in the far distance of space, whereas the phenomenon of inertia is something they can research on a laboratory bench. All they have to do is to look into the physics of the electron and avoid the a priori assumption that a single accelerated electron must radiate energy by saying instead that it seeks to conserve the energy it acquires from its interaction with the electric field that produces that acceleration [see Appendix II]. In mentioning Sciama, I am reminded that I received my Cambridge Ph.D. in 1954 as did Sciama, and that a few years later I met with Sciama to discuss my ideas and the aether theory I present in this work. He was polite and attentive but showed little interest other than saying: We all believe in the aether, but we call it space-time. The message was clear; relativity rules in the mind of the cosmologist and unification of field theory means building on Einsteins foundations to discover the ultimate link. I maintain that the 2.7 K cosmic background temperature, coupled with the theoretical derivation of the quon mass, in the aether which I have explored in deciphering Natures coded messages, provides the evidence that gravitation has a restricted range of action. I would have liked in this section on space domains to be able to explain what, on an ab initio basis, determines the size of such a space domain. That is a problem I have not solved and one which I can but bequeath to future researchers. In the analogous situation, that of the magnetic domains which form in the crystals of a ferromagnetic material, domain size is determined, as ever, by an energy
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
136
optimization process. The domain walls which divide adjacent domains have an energy density per unit area owing to the field reversal that occurs in traversing the wall. The volume of domain enclosed by the domain walls determines an energy which scales in proportion to domain size, the energy density being partially strain energy (positive potential) and magnetic field energy (negative potential). Combining these energies, optimum (minimum) energy criteria determine the domain size, of the order of 100 microns or so in iron. It is not so easy to see a way forward along these lines when considering the space domain, bearing in mind we are dealing with distances measured in light years. However, before moving on from this chapter section, we will approach the problem by imagining the initial creation of our Sun in a space domain and looking to see if, in acquiring its initial angular momentum, it did that by drawing on the resource of the space domain in which it was born. We shall assume one single space domain devoted to the creation of the Sun and see if we can deduce the physical size of that domain, using the data we have derived for the photon in chapter 6 and for aether structure in chapter 7. In deriving equation (6.17) we saw that an energy E fed into the aether involves the addition of an angular momentum of E/ and, from equation (6.16), half of this energy goes into kinetic energy. Conversely, if the aether sheds an energy E as gravitational energy it loses angular momentum E/ and kinetic energy E/2. This angular momentum, as shed by an entire space domain, is assumed to go to the star. On this basis each quon in the domain will shed energy given by the equation: mo = .......................................... (8.4) where H is here the angular momentum released by each unit cell of the aether. We have seen that the mass of the quon is 0.0408 times that of the electron and we know r/d is 0.3029, where r is the Compton
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
137
electron wavelength 2.426x10-10 cm divided by 4, and so can determine d. From this, given that each cubic cell of the aether has a volume d3 and that electron mass is 9.109x10-28 gm, the mass density of the quon lattice is approximately 144 gm/cc. When we double this to add the equal mass density of the graviton system, the total mass density of what might be referred to as the structured space medium is 288 gm/cc. It is high compared with the mass density of Earth or Sun but low in comparison with the massenergy density that applies to the virtual muon population of the aether. Yet we do not sense any resistance in moving through this aether, thanks to the inherent inertial balance of the aether medium. We shall see presently in this chapter how such a mass density can be confirmed by the evidence available. Meanwhile we denote this 288 gm/cc mass density as o and formulate an equation for the total angular momentum (AM) shed by a domain to form a star. Although space domains must have planar boundaries as with magnetic domains and so are likely to be cubic in form, it eases calculation to assume a spherical form of radius D, merely to estimate the scale involved. From (8.4), bearing in mind that only half of o is effective in interacting with the gravitational potential , the total angular moment shed in forming the star is: (AM) = The result is: and so D is given by: (AM) = GMD2/ .............................. (8.6) D2 = S/Go .................................... (8.7) where S is the parameter angular momentum /mass of the star. We can now calculate D as it applies to the creation of the Sun. At creation, prior to the Sun shedding its planets, its angular momentum, as evaluated in Appendix V, was some 3.2x1050 cgs units
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
( GM/R)( /2)(4R )(1/)dR ................. (8.5)

o 2
0
138
and its mass 2x1033 gm. With o as 288, G as 6.67x10-8 and as 7.8x1020 also in cgs units, we then find that D is 4.6x1020 cm or 480 light years. If the Sun was created within a cubic space domain one would expect its cube dimension to be of the order of 760 light years on this basis, a figure that might seem to be a useless piece of information, were it not for certain geological evidence. Given that our solar system is travelling through the aether at some 390 km/s subject to an uncertainty of 60 km/s, as detected from the U-2 aircraft radiometer experiments measuring anisotropy of the 2.7 K cosmic background radiation, the Earth would surely traverse a domain boundary more than once in every period of one million years. Such an event must be quite traumatic if the range of gravitational action is confined within a space domain. One would need to pray for a fast crossing in a direction normal to the planar boundary of the domain, as a crossing at a very acute angle would prolong the lapse of gravity and involve enormous upheaval and earthquake activity. So, you see, understanding more about Creation even in a steady-state universe can bring with it the threat, one day, of impending doom. Geological history must have its own messages of record and such history will inevitably repeat itself one way or the other. We will end this chapter by digressing into this subject and also into the theme of neutron stars, but first we must complete our analysis of the aether properties by considering the theory of aether spin by reference to Fig. 8.1 and the one bright hope that it brings for the prospect of our tapping energy from the aether itself. Aether Spin We have seen how the photon is explained as a tiny unit of aether structure spinning about a central axis. It was implied that the presence of an electron might suffice to nucleate such a spin on the basis that its electric field acting on the group of quons and from the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
139
centre of that group might induce that state of spin. Now we shall look at this picture to see what happens on an astronomical scale. Referring to Fig. 8.1, a quon, denoted q, describes an orbit of radius r at the angular frequency of our quantum underworld and we will now assume that, for some reason, there is a superimposed rotation of the centre of that orbit owing to motion at angular velocity R about a central axis at a distance R. We suppose these two circular motions are coplanar, meaning their axes of spin are mutually parallel.
Fig. 8.1 Now, the overriding constraint that governs our aether and accounts for so much of what is fundamental to the physics of our universe is the synchrony of time keeping that ensures there is no departure from conformity with the angular frequency. One then sees from Fig. 8.1 that, when the two motions are compounded, the radius of the quon orbit is affected and must vary between r(1+R/r) and r(1- R/r) for the condition of synchronous motion to apply. In effect, the quon moves at a steady speed in orbit about a new centre radially displaced from the remote axis through a distance R/. This means that, if a spherical body of aether with its quon lattice spins at the angular frequency , there will be an accompanying
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
140
induction of charge density s given by incrementing the radius R of a disc of charge density by this amount R/. We then have: (s)R2 = [(R + R/)2 - R2] .................... (8.8) Which gives: s = 2/ ......................................... (8.9) This is a formula for aether spin by which a charge density of s is induced in the aether when it spins bodily at the angular frequency and, conversely, a formula giving the rate of spin produced by the presence of a charge of density s. Here we have something that has eluded the efforts of generations of physicists who seek to understand the mechanics of the universe, whether as believers in the existence of an aether or not. The value of as the charge density of the continuum is known from the theory, but it is charge which is neutralized by the presence of the quon population. This means that the only charge density which is in evidence is the induced charge density s. However, even this, when present owing to aether spin, can induce charge displacement in matter, and vice versa, in a way which, in certain circumstances, reveals itself by setting up a magnetic moment without exhibiting a measurable electric field. Having now regard to equation (6.8) in chapter 6, since we proved that x is 2r, we can write: 8qr = mo2r ................................. (8.10) which, by writing o as 2mo(/q), tells us that; o = 16(/)2 ................................ (8.11) Then, having in mind the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis and the charge induction in a star by virtue of the K-shell atomic electrons of hydrogen colliding to set protons free and so develop a positive core charge density of G1/2 times the mass density m of the star, we can now formulate: s = m (G) ..................................... (8.12) which, from (8.9) and (8.11), gives the following relationship between the angular velocity of the aether spin and the mass density of the star:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
141
= m (4G/o) ........................... (8.13) Since we have, by theoretical analysis of the aether derived the numerical values of G and the mass density o of the quon-graviton system, the term in brackets is known to be 5.39x10-5 rad/sec per gm/cc. The equation (8.13) is important because it tells us how fast the aether of a star spins owing to its positively charged electrical core, assuming our theory is correct. This spin is sustained by the presence of that distributed charge set up by gravitational forces being balanced by proton charge repulsion to cause the core mass density to be uniform at the value 1.4 gm/cc set by the K-shell electron collisions in the close contact between the stars hydrogen atoms. Now, although we are progressing in our quest to understand the processes involved in Creation, the formation of our universe, there is an element of speculation involved, once our analysis involves us in looking too far beyond our own solar system. You may regard the space domain as a mere notion but you will see the evidence before we end this chapter. Meanwhile, however, I shall concentrate on giving my account of how our Sun was created and how it evolved to form the planets. The Creation of the Sun The aether was in a chaotic state having no structure and no order. Then it found order just as iron does when it cools from its molten state to form crystals and then, at a lower temperature, the Curie temperature, form magnetic domains and bring ferromagnetism into being. However, the aether analogy is the formation of the quon lattice structure with its space domains and with gravitation as the emerging phenomenon, rather than ferromagnetism. So somewhere in this sea of aether there was the space domain in which our sun was born. That space domain had a certain physical size which our theory suggests was a cube of the order of 760 light years in its side dimensions. With order and a surplus of free energy
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
142
came the creation of protons and electrons to keep electrical charge in balance, but gravity was now in control and those protons came together faster than the electrons and so set up a stellar body, our sun, with a positively charged core. The relatively few electrons that came in late converged on the Sun at its boundary spherical surface but were held there because by then the aether coextensive with the body of the Sun was spinning at the speed determined by equation (8.13) above. Independently from this, however, the matter which constituted our sun was also spinning because it had acquired the angular momentum shed by the aether owing to its gravitational potential. That angular momentum was the quantity defined by equation (8.6) above, which was the value 3.2x1050 cgs units that we have already related to the space domain size. As one can work out from these data, given the mass of the sun together with that of the planets and its radius, the Sun at creation was spinning at an angular velocity of 8.3x10-5 rad/sec or about once every 21 hours [See Appendix V]. Is it not then interesting to find, from equation (8.13) that our aether theory tells us that the Suns aether, even now, spins at 7.5x10-5 rad/sec or about once per day, like the Earth today? Is this a message that says, working backwards, that the size of a space domain is determined over eons of time by stars being created and then suffering annihilation in a cycle of events which are governed by an overall process of equilibrium in energy and angular momentum deployment? I leave that thought here on record and move on in my more immediate quest. How did the planets form as our Sun somehow shed its angular momentum? Well, I can but assume that, once formed at the centre of its space domain, the sun was left in limbo for quite a while before it drifted into a boundary wall of that domain. Here it would, being so slow in traversing that first boundary, be subject to enormous gravitational upheaval as its surface material would tend to break away. Once released, of course, by being thrown off, the inertial
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
143
reaction would impart momentum through the centre of the Sun and it would then travel much faster through cosmic space and many a domain boundary from then on without suffering much loss of matter. I remind you that I cannot claim to know all the answers and at this stage I can but rely on something I referred to on page 158 of my book: Physics Unified. I there stated: R. A. Lyttleton in his book Mysteries of the Solar System, (Clarendon press, Oxford, p.34; 1968), has explained how magnetic forces exerted within a system of charge by its rotation and self-gravitation will force angular momentum outwards. Thus the transfer of angular momentum X to a concentrated surface zone is understandable. In a sense this can be thought of as a phenomenon similar to the gyromagnetic reaction already discussed. The reaction angular momentum of the field absorbs angular momentum from the centre of the body and the primary balance of angular momentum is driven to the outer periphery of the rotating system, all as a result of the diamagnetic screening effects within the electrical core. Here that reference to gyromagnetic reaction will be seen as a topic we discuss in chapter 9, and that quantity X as belonging to the matter shed by the sun to form the planets is here introduced in the following equation: kQ2/R2 = X2/mR3 .............................. (8.14) This equation merely says that a positive electrical charge Q sitting inside a charged sphere of radius R and interacting with a negative charge Q at the surface of that sphere will develop a force that can be balanced by matter of mass m having an angular momentum X. The factor k is merely a coefficient introduced to help the onward discussion.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
144
The Creation of the Planets The argument is that when the sun traversed its domain boundary the normal gravitational pull on mass m was eliminated for much of the transit period. Also the result the electrical attraction would be affected because one can see space domains as defining regions of space and anti-space in which electric polarities are reversed. By this I mean that, whereas here in our own space domain of the present era, we have protons that are electrically positive and electrons that are electrically negative, one could find the situation reversed in an adjacent space domain. On this basis it is plausible to suggest that the mass m with its angular momentum X could break away from the Sun when the domain boundary is crossed or, perhaps, there might be a sequence of such eruptions and separations as successive domain boundary crossings occur in the early life of the sun. The overall consequence has to be what we see today, which is a system in which the total planetary mass m in relation to the Suns mass M can be formulated as: m/M = 32/25mGk .............................. (8.15) This equation is derived from (8.14) given that Q is G1/2M and that M is 4mR3/3, with X as 2MR2/5. Consider what this equation (8.15) means. It tells us that, if we know the total mass and angular momentum of the solar system and accept that this was all seated in the Sun when it was created then we know . With m then known to be 1.4 gm/cc from our hydrogen ionization theme, as discussed in Appendix IV, or as is evident by dividing the Suns mass by its volume, we are in a position to deduce the value of m/M theoretically. Surely, then, if this were to be even reasonably close to the value we derive from astronomical measurement of our solar system, we would be justified in crying out: Eureka. After all, we are discussing Creation and the birth of our planets, including Earth, and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
145
it is indeed a challenge for physics to give a justified foundation for such a claim. Well, Appendix V, shows the value of m/M based on observation. The total mass of the planets as divided by the mass of the Sun is 1/745. So what does equation (8.15) tell us? Remember that G is 6.67x10-8 cgs and we have just shown that is 8.3x10-5 rad/sec, so with m as 1.4 gm/cc we find that m/M is 1/355k. Now you see why that factor k was included. If only it were to have the value 2, then the m/M ratio of 1/710 would be close enough to 1/745 for the cry: Eureka! We can but move on now to consider how the Earth itself was created. The Creation of the Earth The Earth has a m value of 5.5 gm/cc and of the initial Earth before the Moon was ejected was, according Lyttleton (Science Journal, 5, 53; 1969), 5.5 hours per revolution or 3.2x10-5 rad/sec. This is easily verified by adding the Moons angular momentum in its lunar orbit to that now possessed by the Earths spin, given the assumption that angular momentum is conserved. In this case we find that for k =1 the Moon/Earth mass ratio given by equation (8.15) is 1/83. Here we can shout: Eureka because the mass is known from astronomical measurement data to be 1/81 and that surely is close enough for us to see merit in our theory. We do seem to have a viable theory of Creation as applicable to planetary formation, but must somehow explain how k as pertaining to the sun can have the value 2. What is the difference between the Earth in its state of crossing a space domain boundary and the sun in crossing such a boundary? In this primeval state the Earth can hardly have consolidated as a solid body. It must have condensed from an ionized gas and the core charge induction of G1/2 times that mass would hold for atoms that have shed an electron as it is not restricted to protons. The problem, however, is
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
146
why our Earth formed from a spread of atoms of many forms given its source in the hydrogen atmosphere of the Sun. If there were such heavy atoms in the Sun, how is they were the ones expelled to form Earth along with its partner of similar form Venus? Maybe Jupiter and Saturn were created in the first domain boundary crossing by the Sun, and Uranus and Neptune in the next boundary crossing, then Earth and Venus, followed by Pluto and Mars, with Mercury and a body that broke up to form the asteroids as the final traversal that created any satellites. Maybe atomic transmutations to form heavy atoms can occur in profusion at times of traversal of space domain boundaries, particularly in smaller bodies. Whatever the answers are, one at least can see a reason for physics to operate in an unusual way during the transitions at those domain boundaries. One possibility that I have in mind is the thought that Venus and Earth were expelled in opposite directions when the Sun traversed a domain boundary at an oblique angle. The surface segment of the solar sphere that penetrates into the adjacent domain will then lie to one side of the Suns spin axis and the ionized matter that is shed will tend to be thrown off in a plane at right angles to that spin axis. Inevitably, therefore, if the matter which formed Venus went off into the forward direction and so moved faster into the new domain, the matter forming our Earth would be thrown backwards and, being still in ionized gaseous form, it could experience its own excursion back across the domain boundary and so back into the domain it had just left as part of the Sun. In that case it too would be subject to break up on the basis of equation (8.14). The moon would then emerge as the Earths satellite in virtually the same creation stage as the Earth itself. This would be long before the Earth solidified and so implies the creation of the moon independently of the notion that its creation might account for the Pacific Ocean being so large. As to the Earth solidifying, that would begin to occur as the gaseous matter rapidly deionized and as the Earth cooled upon moving well away from the sun. As to the processes regulating those atomic transmutations
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
147
necessary to build the heavy atoms of the Earths composition, that has to remain a matter of speculation, though such processes could well be activated during the many successive crossings of space domain boundaries over eons of time, possibly hundreds of millions of years, before the Earth assumed its present form. Meanwhile the Sun itself would remain immune from such transmutation activity, because its tremendous physical size would, by its strong gravitational pull, keep its hydrogen atoms in close enough contact to remain ionized. Note that the ionization condition, if in accordance with what is outlined in Appendix IV, will preclude direct contact of the protons of adjacent atoms and so make atomic transmutation into heavier atoms less likely. Moving on, we come now to our next Eureka exclamation as we find the answer to that k=1 or k=2 dilemma. The answer, it seems, depends on whether the astronomical body in question has a spinning aether of larger or smaller radius than the body itself. The Ionospheric Aether Upon crossing a domain boundary there is a transition between space and anti-space, analogous to the transition between matter and antimatter, meaning a reversal of charge polarity in the aether itself. So our Sun with its proton charged positive core, as compensated by a negative charge induced by aether spin and charge displacement to the spherical surface, will, in crossing a domain boundary, suddenly find that the core charge polarity induced by aether spin is reversed. There will then, according to whether the aether spin radius lies outside the Sun or inside the Sun, be an effect as defined by equation (8.14), where k is 1 or 2. This action is depicted in Fig. 8.2 where the red circles represent the bounding contour of the astronomical body and the blue circles the bounding contour of the associated spinning aether.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
148
Fig. 8.2 The two alternatives are illustrated in the upper part of Fig. 8.2 and one can see that the electric field effects of the core charge plus aether spin charge cancel in both cases to leave a charge Q, negative in one case and positive in the other, sitting within the outer charge Q of opposite polarity. Remember that we are discussing circumstances that apply in the very early stages of Creation. When the space domain boundary is crossed the lower part of Fig. 8.2 represents the charge deployment. The core charge Q of the body remains as before, but the aether spin, being sustained in direction by angular momentum conservation, involves quons and charge continuum the polarities of which have reversed and so we have a charge 2Q sitting within a negative charge Q at the body surface in one case but 2Q as offset by a negative aether surface charge Q sitting within a negative charge Q at the body surface in the other case. Here is the explanation of how k can be 2 or 1. We can conclude that the Sun has, or at least had during the planetary creation phase, an aether spin that was of larger radius than the Sun itself,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
149
whereas Earth, for which k is 1, had an aether spin bounded within what was effectively its physical surface. The story unfolding from this is that our Sun was created by an onset of gravity accompanied by an inflow of protons ahead of electrons and by an inflow of aether angular momentum. This was a one-off event occasioned by aether structure crystallization which introduced the synchronous dynamic state and allowed gravitons to form and so introduce the action of gravity. Since Creation, our sun has shed much of its initial angular momentum to form planets, but its inherent core charge is maintained by gravity acting on its ionized atoms in a preferential sense focussed on free protons. In its turn, this core charge sustains aether spin at a rate of spin that is unrelated to the actual spin of the matter comprising the sun, but an aether spin which, over time, must reverse in direction to adapt to the normal state where core charge is compensated by a neutralizing charge displacement. The conditions prevailing for a short period during and after crossing a space domain boundary are therefore exceptional and are in no way representative of what we observe today as our Sun moves through space well within the confines of the local space domain. As to our Earth, during this initial creation phase it must have been gaseous in form and so of much larger physical size that it is today. As its ionization vanished and heavier matter evolved so that it became consolidated in the form we see today its aether spin would be sustained, not by gravitationally induced core charge, but by its residual aether angular momentum. Aether spin would become the primary factor resulting in electric charge displacement and the Earth would respond by deploying electrons in its metallic and semiconductor composition and ionic displacement in its oceans along with deployment of free charge in the aether itself. The spin of the quon lattice system sets up radial charge displacement from the spin axis and so a charge system that shares that spin but the counterflow of non-spinning aether charge, as needed to balance linear momentum owing to the cosmic motion of our Earth with its spinning aether
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
150
provides the action which neutralizes the induced charge electrostatically but not its magnetic effects. We therefore have the situation where, after the moon had been shed by the Earth, it could, for a short period, induce the charge effect which produced aether spin and imported angular momentum and, thereafter, as it lost its charge induction capability when no longer ionized, leaving the aether already spinning to hold on to whatever angular spin momentum it had acquired. This would keep the Earths aether spinning in the same direction as the Earth traverses successive domain boundaries in its onward cosmic motion with the solar system, but owing to the charge polarity reversals of the aether as each new space domain is entered, there then needs to be a reversal of the Earths magnetic moment at each domain boundary crossing. Such a reversal would take effect over a period governed by eddy-current reaction as the currents induced in the Earth retarded the transition, but our expectation then has to be that our space domain theory is open to test by our search for the geological fingerprints left by such reversals. This brings us to the final topic of this chapter, geomagnetism. Geomagnetism Before we delve too deeply into this question of the Earths magnetic field, it is appropriate to note that two compensating charge effects are involved in an electrostatic sense, one seated in the Earths body form and the other seated in the aether spinning within body Earth. Additionally, there is the factor that the aether spin is about an axis that does not share the precession of the Earths spin. Here may lie the reason why the geomagnetic poles are at latitudes offset from the geographic poles by as much as 17o and why those geomagnetic poles move around the Earth at the 73o latitude in cycles of 960 years duration. In 1659 the magnetic declination at London, England was zero. By 1820 this declination had reached its maximum westerly of 24.5o and it reduced to 11o 52' W by 1933, the expectation being that it will be zero again in the year 2139.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
151
So here you can see that something involved in setting up the Earths magnetic field is moving within body Earth and changing its spin axis very slowly, a sure sign of something having a very large amount of angular momentum subjected to forces that cause the kind of precession one sees in a spinning top. This has to be a message which says the aether is there spinning within body Earth! A great deal of effort has been expended by physicists in trying to prove or disprove claims concerning the source of the Earths magnetic field. Some decry the idea of a magnet sitting in the Earths core. The reason is that the shape of the Earths magnetic field does not fit the dipole pattern. Some have argued also that the field cannot arise from an electric charge sharing the Earths rotation, even allowing for some factor neutralizing its electrostatic action. Their reason is the same, the shape of the field as measured at the Earths surface and in comparison with measurements at depths a few miles below the Earths surface. None, however, seem to have factored into their analysis the simple fact that a distributed core charge of one polarity accompanied by a compensating surface charge of opposite polarity would combine to determine a magnetic field pattern that fits what is observed. As to the magnitude of the field, we can calculate the geomagnetic moment involved, noting that whatever the component for the distributed core charge, the surface charge will set up double that in the reverse sense. The net magnetic moment in theory is, therefore, 1/2c times the electric charge velocity moment, or: (1/2c)(2/5)(4s/3)R5 .............................. (8.16) Here, R is the radius enclosing the charge of density s and is the angular velocity of its rate of spin. Since the charge here is induced by aether spin we need to use the equation (8.9) to eliminate the charge density term and give a result dependent only on R and plus two constant parameters of the aether. We then obtain: (8/15c)R52(/) ............................... (8.17)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
152
which, since is e/d3 and is c/2r, gives us our final formula for the magnetic moment induced by aether spin as: (16/15)erR52/d3c2 ............................... (8.18) In this expression er is the Bohr magneton, known from experiment to be 9.27x10-21 cgs units, d is 6.37x10-11 cm as we know from the evaluation of r/d in chapter 7 and e and c as measured are 4.803x10-10 esu and 2.998x1010 cm/s, respectively. Applying this to our Earths aether, if deemed to spin at the same angular velocity as Earth itself, namely 7.27x10-5 rad/s, and if R is 6.45x108 cm, we obtain a magnetic moment of 7.86x1025 in cgs emu. Now the corresponding value of the geomagnetic moment as estimated from measurement of the Earths magnetic field is 8.06x1025 which is close to our theoretical value. If R were 6.50x108 cm then the magnetic moment in these units would be 8.17x1025. I conclude from this that the Earths magnetic field is generated by aether spin and that the aether sphere spinning with body Earth, albeit with its spin axis tilted with respect to that of Earth and there being precession causing the geomagnetic poles to move around the Earths geographic poles. The Earths radius is 6.38x108 cm and so its aether sphere extends a little way above the Earths surface and this may have a role in accounting for the outer ionosphere layer of our upper atmosphere. As to the magnetic action involved, I see the primary induction as that of charge displacement in the aether which is matched by a balancing charge displacement in the matter constituting body Earth, but the latter charge providing the magnetic field and the aether charge having a passive role in that respect. Such is my theory of geomagnetism, a theory which convinces me that the subject of aether spin, whether by entrainment with a rotating material body to so induce an electrically charged condition or by a spin action arising from the prior existence of a charged state, has a potential role in future energy technology. Note that, whereas we needed to argue that the Earths aether spin was bounded within the Earths material radius in its primordial
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
153
creation state, as evident from the k = 1 factor, we find that, upon consolidation and contraction to its ultimate form, it has come within the aether spin boundary. This seems a consistent picture and so, our final task in this chapter 8, is now to show how geomagnetism can tell us something about the space domain pattern on a universal scale. For the record I can say that discovering the basis of aether spin and obtaining this result for the geomagnetic moment were very early achievements in my theoretical efforts. They date from the second half of the 1950s as one can verify by referring to my work entitled: The Theory of Gravitation, the preface of which is dated 22nd November, 1959. On page 32 of that work, under the heading The Calculation of the Geomagnetic Moment, one can see how the same numbers emerge from the same formulae as those introduced above. As there noted the results obtained suggested: ... that the Earths aether terminates at a mean height of about 140 miles above the Earths surface. This suggests that the ionosphere may be a phenomenon arising at the aether boundary. It should be noted that it could be that the aether boundary is graded and occurs in stages , corresponding to different ionosphere levels. These levels are at mean altitudes of 45, 75, 105 and 155 miles respectively. There was, in fact, one difference which affected the resulting numerical derivation, in that my analysis in that early work took account of the 23.5 degree tilt between the Earths spin axis and the axis in space about which it precesses. Charge induction by aether spin is subject to a reducing factor, according to the cosine of any such angle of tilt, because the quon orbits of radius r are about an independent axis in space, which I assume is closer to that about which the planets orbit the sun than to the Earths spin axis. This was factored into that earlier treatment of the subject, but is omitted here
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
154
to keep the presentation simple and avoid digression along tracks that are open to debate but do not affect the primary case presented. The derivation of the geomagnetic moment by such a theory was, of course, enough for me to cry Eureka at the time, nearly 50 years ago, but, as ever, the doctrine of the aether was the bugbear. When opportunity presented itself some ten and more years later, I was able to draw my theory to the attention of Sir Edward Bullard, who was a key contributor to the physics of geomagnetism. He had published papers on the theory of the origin of the Earths magnetic field in terms of differential rotation of parts of the Earths core and the theory of hydromagnetism that was of interest in the middle of the 20th century [E. C. Bullard et al., Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 243A, 67-92 (1950)]. The only reaction I drew from that contact was his comment that my theory did not explain the magnetic moment of planet Mars. Inevitably, you see, such contacts lead to one being side-tracked and diverted, with really no scope for recovery that addresses the main issue. Another such example was after my 1969 book: Physics without Einstein was published and led to a published reviewed by a scientist of the National Physical Laboratory in U.K. My theoretical derivation of the fine structure constant on page 115 of that work had given the result: hc/2e2 = 137.038 in agreement with what was previously of record as its measured value, whereas the latest consensus as to its experimental value had become a figure of 137.036. The tone of the review, though guarded, made me feel that it was thought my way of deriving this number was contrived to give a fit, rather than being good physics. Yet I had on page 111 introduced a section entitled: Space Polarization Energy, which was evidently a little speculative as to a term which enhanced r/d from its formal zero energy aether structure value of 0.30289 to 0.30292 and a fine structure value of 137.036 requires, according to the formula given by the theory, equation (7.24), that r/d should be 0.302916, which might excuse my error in relying on the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
155
approximate value 0.30292. Happily, thanks to the intervention of Dr. D. M. Eagles and his employment at the National Standard Laboratory in Australia Measurement, the necessary fine-tuning of my theory owing to discovering a resonance that governed that space polarization energy duly emerged. It led to evaluation of that factor governing N in the decoding exercise introduced in this work and gave the required result for the fine structure constant. As to our final Eureka of this pursuit to fathom the secrets of Creation, it concerns a theme I first wrote about in 1977 by a paper published in a little known periodical named Catastrophist Geology. It appears in volume 2 at p. 42 and describes space domains and their correlation with geomagnetic field reversals and geological disturbances. Then, in 1980, I discussed the subject again at pp. 168-174 of my book: Physics Unified. The following text is, for the most part, a replica of the account there presented. The Eureka cry is warranted because, not only does the historical pattern of geomagnetic field reversals tell us that there is a cubic pattern in space dividing domain regions of interchanged charge polarities as between electrons and protons and aether continuum and quons, but it also gives us a measure the dimensions of those domains and the latter matches what we have deduced from the dynamics of the suns creation. I hope the reader will agree that, given evidence which shows the Earths magnetic field has reversed, albeit over a period of a few thousand years owing to retardation as by induction of eddy currents in the Earths core, and then retained its direction of polarization for a few hundred thousand years before flipping direction again, it is a very difficult proposition to justify by physical theory. One may then begin to think the unimaginable, namely that, for some reason, with the Earth maintaining its direction of rotation owing to its very high inertia, that positive electricity has become negative and negative electricity has become positive. Yet, even then, there will be those who argue that if source of an electrical action reverses polarity and so field direction the sensors indicating that field direction, being
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
156
electrical themselves, must reverse polarity too and so detect no change at all. Either way, however, there is another circumstance that can result in a reversal that would be sensed. This applies if, in moving from one space domain to the next, the quons and gravitons in keeping to the precise rhythm of their dynamic balance, happen to orbit clockwise in one domain and anticlockwise in the adjacent domain. This has the merit of explaining how, on a universal scale, the angular momentum overall can be in balance, as seems likely given that the domain structure condenses from a chaotic state that would have no overall rotary motion. On this latter basis, the key factor governing geomagnetic field reversal is the sustained direction of spin of the Earth and its entrapped aether, regardless of domain boundary transit. Then, since charge polarity induced by aether spin reverses with the change direction of , we would surely have a geomagnetic field reversal at each domain boundary crossing. Although it is convenient to assume that the space domains all have the same size so as to fit together well in a cubic pattern, this may not be the case but we will make the assumption nevertheless. If each domain gives birth at Creation to a single star or a binary star pair, then the size of stars ought really to be more uniform than appears. However, much depends upon the energy in surplus in each domain and so available to create matter, those protons and electrons that form hydrogen. More critical, so far as uniformity of domain size is concerned, is the resulting angular momentum acquired by a star at birth. The key parameter here is that factor S in equation (8.7), the ratio of the angular momentum of a star to its mass. Constant space domain size means that this quantity must be constant, which in turn, for a star which has not shed any planets, means, from equation (8.13), a fixed ratio of mass/radius. However, a likely scenario affecting most distant stars is that there will be planets, in spite of our difficulty in detecting their existence. Accordingly, there is little point in trying to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
157
compare such data but, for what it is worth, let us take an extreme example of a red giant star. Betelgeuse is said by Jeans [The Stars in their Courses, Cambridge University Press, p. 92 (1931)] to be about 40 times as massive as the Sun and to occupy 25,000,000 times as much volume. The mass/radius parameter is 0.137 compared with the sun and the value of D given by (8.7), the radius dimension of the space domain in which Betelgeuse was created, would on this basis be 0.37 of that applicable to our Sun at creation. However, a red giant is believed to be the decaying form of a star, rather than the form it may have had upon initial creation. Since the majority of stars are similar to the Sun, we can, therefore, expect a reasonablyrepresentative pattern of geomagnetic field reversals to emerge from the choice of a simple cubic structured simple domain system. As the reader can see, those who theorize about stars and their creation, the cosmologists, have plenty of scope for research without imagining the Big Bang scenario, but they do need to get a better grasp of the physics which underlies the phenomena we observe here on Earth and within our solar system. Deciphering the secrets which determine the numerical parameters that physicists measure, often with incredible precision, is a pursuit which surely cannot be ignored, given that it can lead us along paths such as we are exploring here in relation to geomagnetic field reversals. If the domain cube dimension were to be such that its volume is that of a sphere having the radius of 480 light years estimated from the Suns data, or 780 light years as that of a cube matched to the volume of the assumed domain sphere in the earlier calculation, then, at its cosmic speed of the order of 390 km/s, our Earth would cross a domain boundary every 600,000 years or so if moving parallel with a cube side. That U-2 speed measurement was, however, subject to an uncertainty factor of 60 km/s and so a reversal period of the order of 700,000 years is consistent with the Suns data. In general, however, the motion will be inclined to such an axis and the planes separating domain boundaries will be crossed more frequently than this.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
158
In Fig. 8.3 the hypothetical pattern of reversals due to motion through cubic domain space is shown in a time scale measured in millions of years before the present time. The solar system is imagined to move in a straight line through the domain space over this period of time, though it does move in a slight arc owing to its galactic motion. The inclination of the line with the domain cube axes is chosen deliberately to give results which resemble the observed reversal sequence and the time scale has been matched accordingly. The names assigned to the reversals are those used conventionally to designate these events. There is a reasonably close correlation. The interesting result, however, is that such an erratic pattern of events lends itself to decoding in this way. I believe that this is affirmative support for the domain theory suggested, especially as the size of the domains derived from the empirical data fit is in close accord with that calculated for the Sun. A textbook showing the Earths magnetic field reversal pattern over the past four million years is one by D. H. Tarling and M. P. Tarling [Continental Drift , Bell, London, pp. 52 and 66 (1971)]. They also comment on the rather perplexing evidence which shows that fossil species have disappeared at times of reversal and new species have appeared shortly thereafter. This implies that the geomagnetic field reversal was accompanied by a rather more traumatic event. Reporting on documentary evidence gleaned from the deepsea floor of the Indian Ocean, the Science Correspondent of the U.K. newspaper The Times wrote in 1972: .... tiny metallic and glass beads that originated from outer space were fragments from some great cosmic catastrophe that caused molten particles to splash into the upper atmosphere some 700,000 years ago. The shower
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
159
Fig. 8.3
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
160
of debris coincided with the last reversal of the Earths magnetic field. The reader will notice that Fig. 8.3 shows a recent reversal of the geomagnetic field. The above report and the Tarling book both suggest that the last reversal was 700,000 years ago. If this were true then another reversal would be imminent on the time scale used in Fig. 8.3. However, since these reports were written, evidence of a reversal about 12,000 years ago, a very short-lived reversal, has emerged. This fits very well with the empirical evidence in Fig. 8.3, which shows a near crossing of a cube domain edge, meaning two reversals in rapid succession. I was unaware of the latest discovery when outlining this domain theory at the end of my book Modern Aether Science, published early in 1972. The fact that we have had a magnetic reversal in relatively recent times is reassuring if such events are accompanied by cosmic upheavals. One may well wonder whether catastrophic geological events can be traced to this recent period. On a longer time scale it is interesting to consider the circuital motion of the solar system in its galactic cycle and contemplate the fact that the Earth would cross the domain boundaries at different angles of incidence with a four-fold periodicity per galactic cycle. If, as my theory indicates, the gravitational field between matter in the Earth is disturbed when the domain boundaries are traversed, the faster the crossing, the less this disturbance. The crossing will be most rapid when the Earth approaches the boundary in the normal direction. If it approaches a boundary at a low angle it will take much longer to traverse it. Indeed, it seems statistically possible for an approach to be at such a low angle that the Earth could disintegrate on reaching the domain boundary. The probability is very small but it is a consequence of this theory and one might wonder whether the asteroids really originated in a planet broken up in this way. These ideas are rather speculative but they take encouragement from the researches of J. Steiner [Jour. Geol. Soc. Australia, 14, 99 (1967)], who did, in fact, visit me in England to discuss my theory
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
161
several years ago after becoming aware of my book: Modern Aether Science. He has made an extensive study of the possible correlation between geological events and the galactic motion and concluded that the constant of gravitation G may, in some way, depend upon the period in the galactic cycle. The theoretical interpretation of such data is difficult in view of the uncertainty in the present state of cosmological theory, particularly so far as concerns variation of G. The problem is further confused by the expanding Earth hypothesis which is dependent upon a slowly varying G. Yet Einsteins theory hardly permits G to vary and my theory as presented in this work requires G to be as constant as the charge-mass ratio of the electron. One feels that if the latter were to change then all other parameters, such as speed of light and the dimensions of the aether quon lattice structure, would change as well. I therefore favour the supposition that G is constant but only acts between matter within the confines of a common space domain. This renders G effectively dependent upon the close proximity of a domain boundary as far as geological events are concerned and seems to offer scope for relating geological events and galactic motion. Reverting, therefore, to the statement above that there would be a four-fold periodicity of gravitational upset in the galactic cycle, given the space domain picture, I draw attention to another of Steiners papers [Geology, p.89 (1973)] in which he writes: If Phanerozoic geological history incorporates any periodicities, they are of the order of 60 or perhaps 70 million years .... The galactic periodicity of the solar system is, however, approximately 274 million years, representing the length of the cosmic year, or one revolution around the galactic centre. I see this as a message which says that space itself has a cubic structure and have in mind a circular orbit traversed by the solar system which cuts across space domain boundaries almost tangentially four times per revolution and so results in tremendous gravitational upheavals in body Earth. A crossing normal to the space domain
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
162
boundary would be about a half a minute in duration, certainly enough to leave a trace in geological history, but the crossings that occur at very acute angles some four times per galactic cycle could be of several minutes duration and the loss of gravity between matter temporarily astride the boundary would be devastating at such times. Can you wonder, therefore, if I am slightly amused when those knowledgeable on such matters declare with confidence that dinosaurs became extinct some 70 or so million years ago owing to our Earth suffering impact from a large asteroid at about that time? Doomsday, or rather the next doomsday, at least for mankind, may be a game of chance encounter with an asteroid but if we want to predict how far away we are from certain extinction then future generations of cosmologists need to map those space domains and chart our motion to predict when and at what angle we are due to cross those boundaries as we progress along our collision course. My guess, from Fig. 8.3, is that we are safe for about 300,000 years, but only if there was, in fact, a boundary crossing some 12,000 years ago. That said, one could speculate concerning the long-term future of our Earth as it is transported through the vastness of space, riding, as it were, on the back of our Sun, a star that itself will surely have an eventual encounter ending in its demise, possibly as an event we call a supernova. To be sure, when our Sun explodes in such a way, our Earth will become nothing other than a multitude of energetic particles dissolved into and then swallowed by the all-pervading aether. Our speculation, however, has purpose because astrophysicists do witness such rare events from a very far distance and ponder over the data that they collect, looking for inspiration to guide their curiosity into the creative and destructive forces that prevail in our universe. Such data includes evidence which points to the debris of stellar destruction by creating what they believe are neutron stars, stars that are minute in size, when compared with a normal star, yet having an enormous mass density. So we shall now engage in a brief journey of
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
163
exploration as we probe the structure of such stars and seek to understand how they are created. Neutrons, Neutron Stars and the Aether Physicists in general are indoctrinated into the belief that neutrons exist in atoms in order to account for the imbalance of charge and mass of the atomic nucleus, the Z and A parameters. For the basic hydrogen atom, which has a proton as its nucleus, Z = A = 1. For all other atoms A is greater than Z and so these atoms are deemed to contain A-Z neutrons. Yet one surely must wonder why such higher order atoms cannot be conceived as having a charge of Z units nucleated by a core of small mass but centred within a system of A neutrons, the latter being protons or anti-protons that are rendered neutral by displacing charges normally occupying sites in the aether. However, as atomic theory developed with the discovery of the neutron, physicists were led to believe that the aether is a pre-20th century notion that became unnecessary once Einstein introduced his four-dimensional mathematical portrayal of space-time. This was even though the curvature of space-time was deemed to account for gravity but yet could not bring the long-sought unification as between gravitation and electrodynamics, nor account for the quantitative value of G, the constant of gravitation, in terms of, for example, the charge/mass ratio of the electron or proton. Now, sitting between these two problems, that of the neutron and that of the aether, there is, as it were, neutral ground, which might offer a decisive insight into this authors completely opposite perception that neutrons, as distinct from protons or anti-protons, do not exist within atoms, but that the aether does exist and is needed to explain gravitation and provide field unification as between electrical interaction and gravitation. Here I am assuming that some physicists, and particularly astrophysicists, who have glanced through the preceding chapters of this work, will have the neutron in mind and be reluctant to accept that I can jettison the notion of a neutron as something having a real
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
164
existence in atoms, given also their insight into the discovery of what they term neutron stars. Accordingly, the issue now to be addressed is the question: Do neutron stars really exist and if so what form does the so-called neutron assume in such a star? This is a truly fascinating question, given the mounting evidence from astrophysics that stars do exist which have enormous mass densities as if the mass of a normal star is squeezed into a very small volume of space. I persist in contending that neutrons, as particles distinct from protons, do not exist in atomic structure and my reason, simply, is that what atomic physicists presume to be neutrons are really anti-protons that have unseated and replaced quons in a region of aether occupied by the atomic nucleus. The hydrogen atom is special. It comprises, in A = 1 form a proton having a satellite electron. In A = 2 and A = 3 forms it comprises a deuteron or triton, respectively, along with a satellite electron, the deuteron and triton being rather special particles comprising protons bonded by an electron-positron accompaniment, as discussed elsewhere. See the paper entitled: 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, v. 9, pp. 129-136 (1986), also reproduced as Paper No. 1 in the Appendix of my book: Aether Science Papers , published in 1996. See also my Energy Science Report No. 5, 'Power from Water: Cold Fusion: Part I', 26 April 1994, which discusses the creation of the triton. These items are all of record on my website www.aspden.org . For atoms other than hydrogen, the physics of their creation has involved transit across a space domain boundary, owing to the motion of a star through space by which it leaves the domain of its birth and so moves into an adjacent space domain in which the charge polarities of the aether components are reversed. In adapting to this new domain environment, a small proportion of the protons that have been created to form the star can become seated in aether sites normally occupied by the quons. Owing to the electrically-neutralizing effect of the aether charge continuum they then exhibit the properties that we
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
165
ascribe to the neutron as an atomic constituent. The charged nucleus central to such groups of neutrons is formed from the merger of electrons, made possible during the space domain transit phase owing to the charge polarity inversion that features in the transition between what is, in effect, a region of matter and anti-matter or aether and antiaether, a process by which they are converted into a merged positron form of charge Z times the unitary charge e. The message here is that atoms of higher order than hydrogen are probably created over time as a star traverses space domain boundaries every few hundred thousand years or so, a subject discussed in the previous section of this chapter. Certainly also such atoms of higher order than hydrogen do not contain protons that are free from aether structure. The protons, or rather their anti-particle form, the anti-protons, that exist in such atomic nuclei are locked into the aether structure and indeed nucleate a unit of aether that can move through enveloping aether, each such proton contributing in effect to the atomic weight of the atom in proportion to the quantity A of nucleons that are deemed to be present with a quite small mass contribution from the charged composite positron charge of Z units. This argument as to atomic structure is well supported by the authors analysis dating from 1974 and published under the title 'The Chain Structure of the Nucleus', also of record on my website: www.aspden.org . However, it is mentioned here solely because we are considering what is meant by a neutron and are about to engage in a discussion of the composition of what is termed a neutron star. So, by way of summary, I have, in earlier chapters of this work, introduced the notion that the aether is composed of charged particles which I have called quons, these being set in a cubic structured array, owing to their mutual electrostatic repulsion, within a uniform continuum of opposite charge polarity, whereby the aether is electrically neutral overall. This is the defining structure of the aether, but there are other particles, particle-antiparticle pairs of charges, present, the gravitons, the taons and the muons, which make the aether an omnipresent sea of activity, seething with energy, but yet
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
166
somehow preserving an internal equilibrium and contriving to avoid detection, except by indirect, but very important intrusion into the physical world as we know it. So how do I approach the problem posed by the neutron star? Well, one can see that those quons defining the structure of the aether itself are, so far as we are aware, hiding as electrically neutral entities in that neutralizing background continuum and their mass effect in a gravitational sense is absorbed by the equilibrium of the aether so far as concerns its interaction with the mass of any matter present. However, the point I am coming to, be it a wild suggestion or not, but it surely being one worth exploring, given evidence that stars having enormous mass densities seem to have a real existence, is the suggestion that maybe a normal star, in contending with an excess of spin energy, can collapse into a form nucleated by a region of aether in which protons unseat and replace all the quons, so creating a very dense star in mass terms. At least this possibility warrants consideration, first in quantitative terms to see if the results fit with what is observed, and then in qualitative terms to see if we can provide a physical account of how this rare event in stellar evolution might occur. As we shall see, we encounter a quite extraordinary situation, because the factors governing gravity as we know it are severely affected. Yet, here again, thanks to the authors independent research on a theme not directly related to astrophysics but what is primarily a technological issue, there is insight which guides our enquiry. Here I refer to the subject of high temperature superconductivity as a pointer to the existence of the supergraviton as needed to provide dynamic balance for atomic molecules that are of high mass or even certain atoms at the upper end of the atomic mass scale. This has been the subject of work published elsewhere: 'The Supergraviton and its Technological Connection', Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 12, pp. 179-186 (1989). This paper is also of record on my website www.aspden.org . The key point is that the gravitons present in association with a highly concentrated mass in matter form
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
167
must themselves have high enough mass and be close enough to provide that dynamic balance by a close direct coupling with matter. The optimum state is one where these gravitons, though present in equal numbers in positive and negative electrical charge form, are not so prevalent or are such as to distort the aether from its normal state of equilibrium, that form in which it determines the values of the fundamental dimensionless physical constants on a universal scale. However, where exceptional conditions prevail and matter finds itself compacted to very high mass densities, then the aether is subject to some distortion but it will strive to adapt and must keep that dynamic balance that is the basis of gravitational action. Under such circumstances where matter is present in very highly concentrated mass form, the optimum energy equilibrium conditions favour the creation of a form of graviton that has a much higher gravitational effect than provided by the g-graviton or the graviton. It follows therefore that we must expect to encounter a gravitational anomaly if we seek to understand the state of a star which, from the evidence of astronomical observation, exhibits a very high mass density. It is appropriate here to note that the theory by which we have in this work explained the creation of our Sun and Earth, is based on an aether that has been shown to have a mass density that is some 200 times that of the Sun, half being in the quon constituent of the quantum underworld and half being in its graviton constituent. We are about to embark on a discussion of the neutron star for which the evidence of observation is said to indicate a mass density that is so enormous that it dwarfs the mass density of the aether we are considering. Indeed, in seeking here to discuss the neutron star we entering a realm of orthodox physics that loses sight of reality and introduces notions that are manifestly absurd. Any clear-headed reader will surely see that the following statement quoted from a news item on p. 3 of the July 2003 issue of Physics World, the monthly journal issued
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
168
to members of the U.K. Institute of Physics, contains a message that cannot possibly be valid: Isolated neutron stars are highly magnetized, rapidly rotating objects that are formed by the collapse of massive stars. Although they are typically only about 10 km across, neutron stars are at least 40% heavier than the Sun and their core density is higher than that of an atomic nucleus. One is tempted to ask in expletive form: How on Earth can the core density be higher than that of an atomic nucleus?, but know the answer will be: We are not talking about anything experienced on Earth! Instead, one must surely ask: Without an understanding of the true nature of the force of gravity what justification can there be for assuming that G is the same regardless of the mass density of the interacting matter involved? If the answer to that is: Isaac Newton proved that G is a universal constant and so it must apply to neutron stars then I say it is time to wake up and think again. Surely, once we begin to think that the evidence from a gravitational effect points to a source that is of higher mass density than the atomic nucleus, we ought to suspect that G, as a factor governing gravitational interaction, has itself increased in value and misled us by giving far too high a v alue for the measure of the mass density. Can G be Greater in a Neutron Star? Since this work offers an insight into what governs G, the force of gravity, let us ask how the aether might react (a) if it has to balance a system of protons taking up a full occupancy of the quon sites and (b) if, instead of the heavy leptons serving the graviton role, we substitute the very prevalent muon as the only alternative available. Now, before proceeding any further, I must make the point that, for a neutron star to have a mass of the same order as that of our Sun, whilst having a radius that is of the order of 10 km, it would need to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
169
have a mass density that is greater than that of the Sun by a factor in excess of 3x1014 and a mass density close to 5x1014 gm/cc. Then, in adhering to my belief in the aether theory presented in this work, I need to compare this with the mass density of the aether corresponding to its total energy density and almost wholly seated in the pair of virtual muons that populate each cubic cell of aether, this mass density having the limiting value which is less than 4x106 gm/cc. Note that these virtual muon pairs already exist in the aether and so, in adopting the role of the graviton, any distortion will be minimal especially in terms of energy adjustment. Going further and presuming that the creation of the neutron star will involve decay of numerous protons which revert to the muon form from which they were created, one can see that there could well be enough muons available to fill the needed super-gravitational role posed by very dense matter. However, here we confront the limiting mass density imposed by that proton occupancy of the quon sites in the aether and this mass density is the proton-electron mass ratio 1836 times 24.52 times the graviton-coupled quon mass density of 144 gm/cc. The factor 24.52 is the mass of the electron in terms of the effective dynamic mass of the quon, the latter being half of the cube root of that fundamental factor N of 1843 discussed earlier in this work, it being the volume of a sphere of charge constituting the quon as divided by the charge volume of the electron. This mass density is therefore some 6.48x106 gm/cc, a value in no way comparable with the astrophysicists standard assumption concerning the mass density of the neutron star. You will see from this that my vision of the aether can in no way support the belief that the neutron star has the very high mass density that is claimed on the basis of observation. By observation here I mean the inferences drawn from observation as based on that unproven assumption that G, the constant of gravitation, is a universal constant that applies within the very dense matter of a neutron star. I would rather be prepared for G to be different under such circumstances and contend that those virtual muons can replace
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
170
gravitons and that the mass density of a neutron star is no more than that value of 6.48x106 gm/cc just derived. Note that this is 4.6x106 times the mass density of our Sun, a typical star composed of hydrogen gas nucleated by protons that can move freely in the aether. Now, as to G and the possibility that it can become greatly enhanced in value by those virtual muons assuming the graviton role, we are here looking at a lepton form that has a charge volume some 14,769 times greater than the g-graviton and a mass that is 0.0407 times that of the g-graviton. To check this, keep in mind the derivation of g as 5062.3 from equation (2.6) in chapter 2 and the derivation of the energy quantum 412.6658 as that of a virtual muon pair from equation (7.29) in chapter 7. Then cube the mass-ratio 5062.3/206.33 and evaluate 206.33/5062.3. The ratio is 3.62x105 but is subject to a one third factor (corresponding to the factors involved in deriving equation (2.3) in chapter 2), modifying it to 1.21x105 and this has to be squared to derive the scaling factor for G itself. So you see, G within the neutron star will be greater than the normal value here on Earth by a factor of some 1.46x1010. The new combination of G and the stars mass density come into play when a normal star such as the Sun traverses a space domain boundary at an extremely acute angle, a very rare event which means that the stellar body sits astride the boundary for a period long enough to create the mayhem in which the protons of the normal star displace aether quons and so form the nucleus we call a neutron star. During this process the energy of the star is conserved, which means preservation of the magnitude of the quantity: 3GM2/5R .............................................(8.19) or: (4)2GR5/15 ..........................................(8.20) as both and G adjust to the new values. Evidently R changes in this process and even M changes but our primary consideration is the conservation of the energy that characterizes the creation of the original star, inasmuch as during this
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
171
period of violent activity as the star sits astride the boundary between two space domains, a boundary across which charge polarity reverses, particles of matter, even protons, have independent existence and can conserve mass-energy by being transmuted into other forms, reverting to the virtual muon state from which they were created. Expression (8.20) simply tells us that R has reduced by a factor that is the fifth root of the amount by which G2 has increased, the inverse of the fifth root of (4.6x106)2(1.46x1010) so that R is reduced from its parent star radius by a factor of 4.99x104. Taking the Sun as typical of the star which undergoes this transmutation into a neutron star, we can now estimate the radius of the neutron star as being of the order of 14 km, the Sun having a radius close to 700,000 km. Our theory therefore does provide a way of estimating the size of a neutron star that conforms with observational data. A Comparison with Standard Theory According to standard theory neutron stars are formed when the degenerate core of an aging supergiant star nears the Chandrasekhar limit and collapses. Supposedly, a neutron star of 1.4 solar-mass units, consists of some 1057 neutrons held together by gravity and supported by neutron degeneracy pressure. In explaining this, Carroll and Ostlie in their book An Introduction to Modern Astrophysics, published in 1996 (AddisonWesley), derive a formula for the radius of the neutron star at p. 598, based on theory analogous to that applicable to a white dwarf star, of which they say: For a neutron star of 1.4 solar-mass units, this yields a value of 4.4x105 cm. As was found for white dwarfs, this estimate is too small by a factor of about 3. That is, the actual radius of a 1.4 solar-mass neutron star lies roughly between 10 and 15 km. As will be seen, there are many uncertainties involved in the construction of a model neutron star.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
172
Well, here you see what standard theory has to offer. It lacks the benefit of insight into the true nature of gravitation and imagines that neutrons exist as some kind of gas, without explaining how they emerge by degeneration from the hydrogen of a normal star, and the result is an estimated physical size that is of the order of one thirtieth of the volume of a neutron star actually observed. My theory has led directly and unambiguously to a 14 km radius that conforms with observation. My theory does not rely on the mere speculation that, given the discovery of the free neutron by James Chadwick in 1932, it was feasible to imagine that such free neutrons could coalesce to form a neutron star. Instead I have explained the true nature of gravitation and derived the correct value of G by pure theory based on an aether sub-structure and, after showing how protons are produced, have explored whether those protons might, under certain circumstances, become seated in the aether and so exhibit the property we regard as that of the neutron. Accordingly, far from it being a weakness of my theory that I discard the notion of neutrons as being present in atoms having a Z value greater than 1 in spite of the evidence pointing to the existence of a neutron star, I claim a better understanding of the composition and structure of such stars than is available from standard theory presently of record. Conversely, in the light of this account of the neutron star, I see this as strengthening the basis on which I have, in that 1974 reference above, explained the atomic structure of atoms of Z value greater than 1, those purportedly containing neutrons. Indeed, in a sense, I could say that a neutron star is, in effect, an enormous atom, so far as its internal structure is concerned. I go further in my own speculations by suggesting that any normal hydrogen star can, if it happens to traverse a space domain boundary at a very acute angle, experience the traumatic upheaval of its protons sitting astride a boundary between space and anti-space in the sense of charge polarity inversion, a clear recipe for decay shedding an enormous amount of energy in what surely is a supernova.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
173
The geological evidence of recurrence of gravitational upset for a few seconds as body Earth along with the Sun traverse a space domain boundary at a cosmic speed of some 300-400 km/s in a direction at right angles to that boundary is surely enough to point the finger at this scenario of stellar evolution, without delving into theory as to how stars might evolve as they shed their energy slowly over time in the form of thermal radiation powered by nuclear transmutation. Keep in mind that stars were created, each in its own space domain, rather than at a common point in an event called a Big Bang. They radiate energy but that energy is absorbed into the aether and the aether has a way of regenerating matter from that energy, protons and electrons which inevitably are drawn into the stars by gravity. Therefore, in developing theory as to how stars evolve one should factor into the analysis those space domain crossings which are a matter of life and death where stars are concerned. The Magnetic Field of a Neutron Star It is a curious fact that astrophysicists see no problem in declaring that a neutron star has a very powerful magnetic field but yet is composed of particles that are neutral in electric polarity. Here in this work, however, we have seen why our Sun, owing to its composition of hydrogen atoms squeezed closely together by the action of gravity, has developed a state of ionization by which enough of those atoms shed electrons to leave electrically charged protons in a free state. Their stronger mutual rate of acceleration under gravitational attraction pulls them more closely together than their associated free electrons and so the sun has a positively charged core sitting within a spherical bounding shell of negative charge. This, as we have also seen, is a recipe for inducing aether spin as the whole body of aether bounded within that same shell is caused to rotate to set up a compensating charge displacement. The mathematical analysis involved revealed that G2 was a measure of the charge thereby neutralized by aether spin, but,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
174
conversely, should, for some reason, there be already a body of aether that has been set rotating, the matter sitting within it not acting as the primary charge causing that rotation, then aether rotation itself could become the primary action with charge induction in matter becoming the secondary effect. You will see here that I am picturing a situation just discussed where the protons of the normal star are somehow replaced by neutrons and looking for a basis on which to infer that the neutron star can set up a magnetic field owing to it sharing the spin of the coextensive aether. If those protons are seen as anti-protons once they enter the new space domain and so can unseat and replace quons in the aether, then they will appear electrically neutral. Although their mass is far greater than the quon mass that need not unduly distort the aether in a dynamic sense so far as affecting the quantum-related aether radius parameter r within that neutron star body, because of the synchronizing constraints asserted by the powerful electrostatic interaction prevailing within the relevant space domain. This assures that aether rotation must develop a magnetic field in a neutron star, just as it does in a normal hydrogen star in which electrons neutralize the action of almost all of the protons present. Already we have deduced a typical radius value for the neutron star based on application of the aether theory advanced in this work. Also for that typical neutron star we have deduced by theory the amount by which that quantity G2 exceeds the value normal for a star such as the Sun. This is all we need to derive an estimate of the magnetic field set up by a neutron star in its surface regions, as based on data for the Sun. However, owing to various factors, including sun spot activity, taking the Sun as a basis of reference for this computation, though possibly sufficient as an approximation, is not as reliable as an estimate based on the data we have for our Earths geomagnetic properties. So, taking Earth, which has a magnetic field strength of the order of 0.5 gauss at its surface, an aether radius slightly larger
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
175
than its actual equatorial radius of 6,378 km, a mean mass density of 5.5 gm/cc and an angular velocity of 7.27x10-5 rad/s, as the basis of reference, we should be able to estimate the magnetic field at the surface of a neutron star. Take note that, in the system of units we are using , the magnetic field of a spherical object can be estimated, given knowledge of its magnetic moment, by dividing that magnetic moment by the volume of the object and multiplying by the factor 4. This assumes that the magnetic field within the sphere is uniform. In fact, as applied to the Earth, the history of physics records that the greatest step forward in terrestrial magnetism was made by Gauss in a memoir entitled Allgemeine Theorie des Erdmagntismus dated 1839, in which Gauss calculated the positions of the Earths north and south poles and estimated its magnetic moment as 0.33R3, where R is Earth radius. This corresponds to a magnetic moment of 0.08 per unit volume and, multiplying this by 4 indicates a mean magnetic field within body Earth of about 1 gauss, whereas we know that the field strength over much of the Earths surface, as directed along lines that dip at an angle with respect to the horizontal, is closer to 0.5 gauss. Now, remembering the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis introduced earlier in this chapter, the magnetic moment of a spherical astronomical body of radius R spinning about an axis through its centre is proportional to G1/2 times its rate of rotation times R5. This means that the magnetic field of that body is proportional to G1/2R2. So, for the above estimate of the physical size of a neutron star, a 14 km radius based on the assumption that the source star from which it forms is similar to our Sun and in forming the neutron star deploys energy equivalent in magnitude to all of its gravitational potential energy, we can estimate the factor by which R changes. It is 14/6500 or 2.13x10-3 based on Earths aether having a radius estimated as being 6,500 km. We know the factor by which G changes. It is 1.46x1010, as was shown above. As to , this is the quantity 6.48x106 gm/cc as divided by 5.5 gm/cc, a factor of 1.18x106,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
176
and this then leaves us with the task of estimating the factor by which changes. Now, unfortunately, I have not, as yet, seen a way of deducing theoretically the rate of spin of the neutron star formed by the collapse of the source star, as otherwise this theory of neutron star formation would have been included in the earlier first draft edition of this work. Fortunately, however, in June 2003 it was reported in the journal Nature (v. 423, pp. 725-727) that both the speed of rotation and the magnetic field of a neutron star had been measured. That news item already mentioned as being at p. 3 of the July, 2003 issue of Physics World declared that this was the first ever measurement of the magnetic field of a neutron star and, concerning the measured field of 8x1010 gauss, the onward report at pages 27 to 30 of the September, 2003 issue of that same periodical declared: Although huge by terrestrial standards, this is much lower than expected, and the discrepancy is still not understood. This being the first reported measurement of the magnetic field of a neutron star, it is therefore very opportune and indeed very gratifying to find that this authors analysis does explain the magnetic field both quantitatively and qualitatively. The period of the star was stated as being 0.42413076 s, thereby giving as 14.8 rad/s, whereas the magnetic field strength measured was said to be as high as 8x1010 gauss. The neutron star factor by which scales in relation to that of Earth is, therefore, 14.8 divided by 7.27x10-5 or 2.04x105. Collecting the various factors together to evaluate the magnetic field of the neutron star using the overall scaling factor G1/2R2, we obtain: (1.46x1010)(1.18x106)( 2.04x105)( 2.13x10-3)2 which, upon evaluation, is 13.2x1010. This is the factor by which we estimate the magnetic field of the neutron star to exceed that of body Earth. Now, the 8x1010 gauss measurement of the neutron stars
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
177
magnetic field was based on cyclotron resonance of electrons close to its surface and so, if we were to relate this to an Earth measurement of magnetic field strength of 0.6 gauss, we have the truly astonishing result that a neutron star magnetic field some hundred billion times the strength of the field here on Earth has been fully explained by the aether theory of record in the earlier draft edition of this work and elsewhere in the authors other publications before that measurement was reported in the science literature. So you see, we have here an account of the properties of a neutron star, based on a theory which does not admit the existence of neutrons as having a stable existence in matter, whether that matter be an isolated atom or a stellar body. We are looking instead at the notion that protons or antiprotons exist in such matter but to appear as stable electrically neutral particles such protons or antiprotons have to displace like-polarity charges in the structural underworld of the aether, as evidenced by the so-called neutron star. As to the free but short-lived form of neutron detected in the experiments of high-energy physics, that has already been fully explained by this author elsewhere. See that reference above in this section to the paper entitled: 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, v. 9, pp. 129-136 (1986), where one has of record the full theoretical derivation of its mass, its magnetic moment and is mean lifetime, all in terms of the aether parameters as derived in this work. What is particularly satisfying from my point of view, as author, is that the extension of the theory to account for the neutron star has added weight to the argument that indeed there are space domain boundaries built into the underworld space fabric of our universe, as otherwise it would be far too speculative to devise a reason why a normal star might suddenly collapse to form a neutron star. It was intuition that set me on course to the belief that space domains might exist, but intuition born some 50 years before writing these words, a time when I was engaged on researching the magnetic energy properties of iron in relation to anomalous activity in what is a
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
178
crystalline substance containing within each crystal a pattern of magnetic domains bounded by planar domain walls. Apart from one further comment, this completes the main thrust of what I have to say on this subject and on the aether in particular. That comment is the reiteration that, whereas I have suggested that atoms of higher order than hydrogen are created during the traversals of space domain boundaries by normal hydrogen stars shedding protons which take up quon sites in sectors of aether that become locked into the structure of the newly formed atomic nucleus, there is the very rare occasion when the action escalates to the point where what emerges is a truly enormous heavy atom in the form of a neutron star. What remains now in the next chapter is the need to collect together certain loose ends and, in particular, clarify where electrodynamic action fits into the physics of Creation. Hopefully, however, enough has already been said to satisfy the reader that our decoding exercise is complete, or at least sufficiently complete to meet our set objectives. Whether what has been said will cause cosmologists to alter course in their theory concerning the Big Bang scenario remains to be seen. It will, I am sure, take some time, but at least I have done my best in presenting the case against that belief and the best I can hope for is that those who read this work will begin to understand what is implied by the word Creation.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
179
CHAPTER 9
General Discussion
Introduction Having outlined what I regard as the physics of Creation by concentrating on the essential foundations and features of the theory, there remains much that now needs discussion, particularly as a result of the author having confronted a problem in the theory as originally developed. That problem is at the very heart of the theory of gravitation where it is unified with the physics we associate with electricity and magnetism. As readers have seen, the theoretical derivation of G, the constant of gravitation, has been based on gravitation being an electrostatic phenomenon arising from the displacement of charge of density from space taken up by the gravitons needed to provide the dynamic balance for the mass of matter which thereby experiences gravitational attraction. The self-repulsion of means that holes in it will be attracted to one another and, by their coupling with matter, rendering matter self-attractive and so establishing the phenomenon of gravitation. In the authors earlier theory, the conventional assumption was made that gravitation had to be unified with electromagnetic action, but such assumption must fail for the reason now to be explained in the first part of the following discussion. Though much of this chapter will be devoted to discussion of several other topics of interest peripheral to the main theme already covered, there is also need to give special attention to an important issue of technological importance. This probably
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
180
warrants a book of its own, but it is so diverse in character and is ever evolving, besides lacking in academic recognition, that it seems best to mention it but briefly in this final discussion section rather than give it a chapter or two of its own. I refer here to the prospect of our being able, as it were, to mimic some of the creative forces in Nature by tapping into the energy resource of the aether in an effort to extract energy which we can use to replace our dwindling oil and gas reserves. This, therefore, is the scope of this chapter 9 and it is hoped the reader will find it of interest, whilst appreciating that it is no easy task to find that my study of electrodynamics, as motivated by the desire to forge the connection with gravitation, though having spin-off pointing to new energy technology, has, in the process, failed on the gravity front. Thankfully, however, the pillars on which the theory stood, meaning the formulae for those coded messages concerning the basic dimensionless physical constants, stand firm. Thankfully, also, the theory as it now exists is much simpler and easier to understand, since the theory of gravitation is now devoid of dependence upon the intricacies of electrodynamics as rooted in the Fechner hypothesis and its quantum electrodynamic equivalent. The Neumann Potential The Neumann potential dates from 1845 and is an empirical formulation derived from electrodynamic theory by which the energy potential of two interacting current circuit elements, here denoted QV/c and qv/c, is: Qq(V.v)/Rc2 ....................................... (9.1) where R is the spacing between two charges Q, q moving at velocities V, v respectively and c is the speed of light. The dot between V and v signifies that the term in brackets is a scalar product which means that if the angle between V and v is , then the product has the value Vvcos. For our purposes here, it is
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
181
noted that, by applying this Neumann potential to calculate the force of attraction as between two charges moving mutually parallel at the speed of light with respect to the electromagnetic reference frame in which matter is seated, I did in my earlier theory obtain a force of mutual attraction in which the (V.v)/c2 term reduced to unity. I seized upon this situation to build a theory of gravitation around the electrodynamic formula, assigning charge to gravitons according to volume of continuum charge that they displaced and so arrived at the same value of G as that derived above in chapter 2. The problem that arises is that the Neumann potential applies only to actions which are supported by a quantum electrodynamic process akin to that found for electron currents. That empirical formulation does not have a textbook derivation from first principles but when we really delve into such a first principle derivation it becomes evident why the gravitons as a current source behave differently from electrons as a current source. The analysis is as follows. Considering two charges Q and q spaced apart by that distance R, energy is transferred at speed c between their kinetic energy and the Coulomb interaction energy and, owing to its momentum and massequivalence, this results in a force given by: (1/c)(E/R)(R/t) ................................. (9.2) where: E = T [(Qq/R)/t] ................................. (9.3) Here E is the energy in transit between the potential and kinetic forms and T is the time taken for energy to traverse a distance R at speed c. Equation (9.3) reduces to: E = - (R/c)(Qq/R2)(R/t) ........................... (9.4) and so the force term given by (9.2) becomes: (Qq/R2 c2)[(R/t)2 - R(2R/t2)] ...................... (9.5)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
182
Since R/t is the velocity component along the line of R and (- 2R/t2) is the acceleration term given by the square of the velocity component at right angles to R as divided by R, then we see that (9.5) reduces to: (Qq/R2 c2)U2 ....................................... (9.6) where U is the relative velocity between Q and q. By supposing that there is an electrodynamic frame of reference in which elemental current elements as individual electrons each comprise two charges +e and -e moving with opposite velocities that are each half that of the primary charge, the above force expression has four components. The U2 term becomes: (V - v)2/4 - (-V - v)2/4 - (V + v)2/4 + (-V + v)2/4 ......... (9.7) which emerges as -2(V.v) and so makes the force term (9.6): -2Qq(V.v)/R2c2 ..................................... (9.8) When this force is integrated with respect to R from R to infinity, we find that it corresponds in magnitude to double the empirical term (9.1) that we refer to as the Neumann potential. This means that the magnetic field set up by any electron current is really double that we have assigned from our measurements but do note here that we are delving into action at the truly fundamental level and have not accounted for the reaction effects of any charge that might be moving in that field. This introduces us to the problem of the gyromagnetic reaction. That assumption introduced in making the step between (9.6) and (9.8) dates from classical physics of the 19th century and is known as the Fechner hypothesis. Its modern equivalent is a feature of quantum electrodynamics by which an electron in motion is accompanied by the statistical presence of electronpositron pairs created by quantum fluctuations in measure related to the kinetic energy. This adds mass and explains why the mass of an electron increases according to the formula prescribed by the theory of relativity, but also it explains how an
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
183
electron current is conveyed. This involves the progressive creation and mutual annihilation of opposite charges e, allowing an electron to convey current, but by moving towards a positron coming in the opposite direction, sharing that action, then decaying by annihilation with that positron to leave an electron ahead in the field as if the primary electron itself is the sole mover. The Gyromagnetic Reaction Here, as a preliminary, it is appropriate to take note that, in deriving equation (9.6), we need not have presumed that both Q and q were leptonic in the sense that they involved charge pair creation and decay. It suffices to say that q has that property but not Q. It may then be verified that the U2 term becomes: (2V - v)2/4 - (2V + v)2/4 = - 2(V.v) .............. (9.9) as before. Note also that, in saying that energy travels between Q and q, a distance R at the speed c, it may seem that we are ignoring what is normally assumed, namely that the energy possessed by an electric charge is distributed over its field, rather than concentrated in the body of the charge. It is an interesting mathematical exercise to work out the field distribution of the interaction component of the mutual energy of the two charges as a function of distance from either charge. The fascinating result of this exercise is, surprisingly, the fact that there is a zero net interaction energy within the sphere of radius R centred on either charge and that the interaction energy density reduces as the inverse square of distance as the radius of such a notional sphere increases beyond that distance R. This means, quite simply, that, in shedding some of the interaction field energy owing to change of R, the energy so released must traverse that exact distance R regardless of which of the two charges is to receive that energy as added kinetic energy. The reverse also
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
184
applies and so T as used in (9.3) above is definitely R/c. The mathematical proof of this is to be found in my paper entitled: The Spatial Energy Distribution for Coulomb Interaction published in the periodical Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 25, 456458 (1979). The question then of interest stems from the fact that the energy can only travel from Q to q or from q to Q at any given instant, and there is the further complication, that we really never ever can have two electric charges in isolation from the rest of the universe, given that the aether is seething with numerous electric charges which sustain the oscillations we associate with the passage of electromagnetic waves. I can envisage, for example, a charge Q with two charges q, one on each side of the charge Q. If energy flows from Q to both of the q charges at the same time, then there need be no reaction force on Q but yet there are forces acting on both of the q charges. Looking purely at each component interaction as between any two charges in an electrodynamic system, we cannot therefore contend that action and reaction must balance. What we can say, given a choice between balance of linear action and reaction and balance of turning action as produced by a force couple, is that the latter must surely balance so far as two-charge interaction is concerned, but the former need not be in balance. This is a vital factor in the development of electrodynamic theory, where, historically, the wrong assumption was made. Just test your knowledge of physics by considering two electric charges moving in general directions relative to one another, work out the magnetic field that one produces on the other and then apply the Lorentz force law, which you are told is valid because it is consistent with Einsteins theory. You will find that there is an out-of-balance force set up by such a charge system. Action and reaction are not equal. There is balance for the force components acting along a line drawn between Q and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
185
q but there are outof-balance forces acting on the charges at right angles to that line. To get answers which fit what is observed the tests have to involve an electron current flow around a closed circuit as part of the interaction. So you see, accepted electrodynamic theory breaks down when applied to the physical underworld and the charges that move as part of the aether. So, how can we proceed? The answer is that we must explore the significance of that factor 2 in expression (9.8). Let us now consider the action of electron current flowing around a solenoid which has a cylindrical copper core. Textbooks will tell you that each cc. of copper has as many free electrons moving through the metal as there are atoms in that 1 cc. volume. Those electrons experience the magnetic field of the solenoid and so are deflected into reacting orbits which set up a magnetic field in opposition to the applied field. By the accepted electrodynamic laws of physics it is then found that the reaction field must virtually cancel out the effect of the primary field. In theory a magnetic field cannot penetrate a lump of copper, but in reality we know that it can! We then face the problem of free electron diamagnetism, a problem which baffled physicists of the early 20th century. The problem was never solved. It was ignored, in a sense, by resorting to a vague notions such as one that depended on a governing rule prescribed as a law of statistics and which bears the name of Miss Van Leeuwens theorem. It is an absurd proposition devised to get the books to balance and one that does not warrant further consideration here but I give the reference as J. de Physique. (6) 2, 361 (1921), particularly pp. 372-374. The proper approach was to see those reacting electrons as interacting with the primary electrons in the solenoid and exchanging energy as part of an equilibrium process rather than being servile in their response as if energy can only flow one
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
186
way. The force which the motion of one electric charge asserts on another such moving charge is not something that is ruled by a mathematical formulation. It depends upon energy equilibrium criteria and may or may not exist if the energy so dictates. With this in mind, therefore, let us, for the moment, replace that factor 2 by a factor k and see where a little analysis can take us. Let the true applied magnetic field be of strength Ho and suppose this to be offset by a diamagnetic reaction field Hr to produce an effective field H given by: Ho - Hr = H ........................................ (9.10) By Lorentzs force law, which we can use because Ho is deemed to be produced by a solenoidal electron current flow or the equivalent, the force Hev/c acts on a charge e of mass m moving at speed v perpendicular to the magnetic field of strength H. This charge e is, for example, an electron in that copper core. The charge will be deflected into a circular orbit with this force in balance with centrifugal action: Hev/c = mv2/x ...................................... (9.11) Here x is the radius of the orbit. Regardless of the direction of motion or polarity of the reacting charge, the deflection is always in the sense that results in a reaction field opposing the primary field Ho. This reacting field strength is found from the reaction current moment evx/2c, that is the area x2 times the current ev/2xc. Thus the total reaction current moment per unit volume of the field is given by: (evx/2c) = (mv2/2)/H ............................... (9.12) from (9.11). The summations apply to unit volume . The value of Hr is, conventionally, 4 times this quantity, but we need to introduce that factor k and so: Hr = 4kE/H ..................................... (9.13) where E now replaces the kinetic energy density of this reaction. Combining (9.10) and (9.13) we obtain:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
187
HoH - 4kE = H2 ................................ (9.14) With k constant and assuming that magnetic interaction energy criteria require the energy fed into the kinetic energy density to be the maximum that is possible we see that, to make E a maximum, we must have 2H equal to Ho. In turn, this means that k has to have the value 2 that we deduced above from first principle analysis based on Coulombs law, because this gives the result that E is H2/8, which is the magnetic field energy density within that copper core. There is no free electron diamagnetism on this basis and we have found that the anomalous factor of 2 introduced in (9.8) is wholly consistent with what is observed, which means that the Neumann potential is no longer an empirical quantity but rather one derived from and wholly justified by fundamental theory based on Coulombs law. The by-product of this, however, is the implication that the aether must exist as a medium that can itself react to halve the action of any primary magnetic field. Here is a case supporting the aether and based on pure theoretical foundation. More than this, however, we have to confront evidence that tells us that a fundamental unit of magnetic moment set up by a reacting charge in motion will be double the strength expected from standard theory. The magnetic moment to angular momentum ratio, otherwise known as the gyromagnetic ratio, will be double that implied by classical theory. This is a phenomenon that is observed experimentally and been totally misunderstood as being attributable to an anomalous spin property, the so-called half-spin feature of quantum theory. In fact it is evidence which points a finger clearly at the reality of the aether. Furthermore, it is a phenomenon that is further fully supported by the ferromagnetic properties of iron, nickel and cobalt in a truly impressive manner as one can see from my paper Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism in the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
188
periodical: Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 281-288 (1978). The Law of Electrodynamics Allowing for aether reaction and the equivalent free electron diamagnetic reaction present in electrically conductive media we have seen why the Neumann potential governs electrodynamic interaction. Also, an astute reader will have noticed that in invoking Fechners hypothesis to advance from the force expression (9.6) we made it impossible for us to use the Neumann potential as a basis for gravitational force. The reason is that our graviton system requires the force of gravity to arise from the interaction of gravitons that have a common motion at speed relative to the E frame, a motion that assures that those gravitons move in unison in mutually parallel directions at all times. Therefore, that expression (9.6) says that, since there is no relative motion, there can be no electrodynamic action as between the gravitons and so no electrodynamic contribution to the force of gravity. This may also explain why, in formulating our detailed analysis of aether structure in chapter 7, we avoided completely assigning electrodynamic properties to the aether itself and so avoided magnetic field energy considerations. The latter, it seems, belong only to the province of electrons, namely the material world. It is in this latter world, our real world, that we make the measurements pertaining to magnetic fields and electrodynamic forces, and having introduced a theoretical derivation of the Neumann potential, it is of interest now to explore how this leads us to the formulation of the proper law of electrodynamics. Here I use the word proper because physicists concerned with electrodynamic action have been too willing to cut corners, as it were, and be satisfied by rules of thumb and contracted versions of electrodynamic law, such as that of Lorentz. The latter only
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
189
applies to actions which arise from steady current flow around a complete closed circuit, current flow that must be that of electrons and cannot be that of charge displaced, as across capacitor plates, where the aether is involved. The research on this question was motivated by the quest to connect electromagnetism and gravitation but there were also certain anomalies as to the cathode reaction forces exerted in cold cathode discharges in gas at very low pressure. I do not intend here to go through the formal analysis by which I derived the law of electrodynamics. It is of record elsewhere, as in my paper The Law of Electrodynamics in Journal of the Franklin Institute, 287, 179-183 (1969). Energy from Nowhere? At this stage, as we approach the end of this work, I feel I must explain that after many years of developing this theory of Creation by challenging much that is today accepted as correct, particularly Einsteins Theory of Relativity, I have in recent years been drawn into the forum of discussion that concerns what some call free energy. This is energy tapped as if from nowhere, meaning the aether. If, as I claim, the aether is a scene of ongoing creation of matter which eventually decays but which, in the meantime, feeds our energy needs, as by the Suns radiation, then one can but wonder whether we can get into the act, as it were, and invent a few shortcuts by which to tap energy from the aether directly and so help mankind to face up to the impending energy problems of our future. As already stated, this energy topic warrants a book of its own, but, owing to age, destined to be a spent force as a pioneer in the research arena, I wish to be remembered for my theory of the aether as outlined in this book and the many papers and earlier work I have authored.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
190
The free energy theme does, however, warrant mention in these closing pages. So, as we continue with this DISCUSSION theme, I pose the following question that could, I feel, have been addressed by researchers back in the 1910-1920 period when that free electron diamagnetism topic was much debated. Given that the magnetic deflection of free conduction electrons in a copper core embraced by a magnetizing solenoid will surely cause those electrons to set up a reaction field opposing the field applied by that solenoid, why cannot we draw energy from those electrons and so gain power from whatever it is that sustains the perpetual motion of electrons in atoms? Consider the following argument. We switch the current on in that solenoid and it produces a magnetic field H in that core. This field acts on the free electrons in the core and causes them to produce an opposing field. The back EMF induced in the solenoid will be proportional to the switching speed and the difference between H and that field reaction. The energy input will be so determined. Then, opening the switch suddenly to reduce H to zero, the reaction field will become responsible for the primary change of magnetic flux linking that core and will induce an unopposed EMF that adds power to the solenoidal current as it is reduced by the opening of that switch, no doubt by forming an arc discharge, but possibly delivering more output energy than was injected as input. Wishful thinking you say, because everyone knows that one cannot get something for nothing, particularly energy, given our acceptance of the Law of Conservation of Energy. However, look again at the physical structure under consideration. If the diamagnetic effect were to be so overwhelming that it virtually equalled the strength of the applied magnetic field, a reasonable proposition given that there are so many electrons moving freely in that copper core at very
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
191
high speeds, then the input energy would be very small. In contrast, given a little inertia in the magnetic moment and related angular momentum reactions of those electrons owing to their reacting orbital motion, we would see the full reaction field active in delivering energy output and that would be far in excess of the energy input. So, here we see that standard physical doctrine of the early 20th century, doctrines we adhere to today, suggest that we can, as it were, get energy from nowhere. You say that is impossible. I say that you then have to face up to the fact that the physics you rely on is faulty. Now, why was this aspect of the subject not explored and resolved long ago? If one begins by assuming that this is a no-gain situation then logic says that the applied magnetic field is really double the value indicated by standard physics and the reaction field is half the strength of the applied field. Then the difference in field strength during power input is the same as that during power output, given the latter is a sudden switch-off of the applied EMF but the current decay lags owing to the inertia involved. So, here, by use of simple logic one can reason that the applied field really does have to be double that of the reacting field thereby induced. That factor of 2 we deduced above by the mathematical reasoning of theoretical physics has to be correct. So where is the error in standard physics? It resides in the fact that we formulate our laws of physics and our theories on the basis of experiment in which currents act on individual electric charges in motion, whereas certain hidden factors need consideration when numerous reacting charges are affected by those currents. In the context of the above analysis by which we derived the Neumann potential I can but point my finger at that term T in equation (9.3). The time T is the distance R divided by c. Energy travels at speed c over the distance R in time T, but that energy travels one way and the question is: Which way?
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
192
It will surely travel in the direction, Q to q or q to Q, according to optimum energy criteria, rather than according to a man-made law that suits certain conditions that do find support by Mother Nature working according to those same energy criteria. Remember that without energy there is no force and, whenever you rely on force equations to tell you something, do be sure there is enough energy at the right place to support what you say. The case I put is that those free conduction electrons in that copper core are only deflected by a magnetic field to the extent that the kinetic energy of the reaction has reached its maximum level as determined by the strength of the resulting magnetic field. This may seem to be an arbitrary way of overriding the principles of accepted physics, but at least it is a process based on optimization of energy deployment and the alternative seems to be to let physics sink in a sea of confusion, because physicists in general are too stubborn to question what they have been taught and look to others to deal with the anomalous issues that arise, but seldom get a hearing in refereed publications. As to the scope for tapping aether energy by the method outlined above, I submit that it is not possible, even though standard physics would say it is, but do not lose heart, we will come to a ray of hope on that theme before we conclude this DISCUSSION chapter. Concerning the Michelson-Morley Experiment I well know that there will be some readers who wonder how, in advocating the existence of a real aether, I have disposed of the implications drawn from the Michelson-Morley experiment. This was an experiment in which rays of light were reflected back on themselves in one direction of the Earths motion and compared with corresponding rays reflected back on
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
193
themselves at right angles to that motion. No consideration was given to the fact that a ray of light encountering the energy of a ray of light coming the other way might have its propagation speed affected by that encounter, but, that aside, the experiment purported to imply that the speed of light is referenced more on the apparatus used in the test than on motion though the aether. Now, unlike the effects in a solid material medium, where lateral field oscillations occur on the passage of electromagnetic waves, with the atomic structure of the solid absorbing the strain, the aether copes by setting up a reciprocal field oscillation. Remember that we have in the aether the structured system of quons immersed in a sea of muons. If the quons are displaced laterally in setting up an electric field as the wave propagates in a forward direction, so some of the relatively massive muons must be displaced in an opposite sense to provide dynamic balance. This duality applies also where the quon lattice system is moving steadily along as it shares the motion through space of body Earth itself. This primary action would involve a build up of quons at the forward boundaries of the Earths aether, were it not for the quons suffering annihilation along with an equal amount of continuum charge, with the energy being merged to create muon pairs which, as a secondary system, migrate through the Earths aether in the reverse direction to transform back into quons and continuum charge where needed at the boundary where the lattice system separates. The net inertial effect of this is then zero. One then sees that, by analogy with an optical effect named after Fresnel, we can expect this reverse flow to affect the speed of light through the primary structure. Fresnels theory explains why the speed of light increases in proportion to u(1-1/n2) where u is the velocity of the disturbing medium and n is the applicable refractive index. This can be deduced from electron theory, but
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
194
it has been verified by experiments in which the speed of light through moving water is measured. Applying this same theory to the aether itself, and recognizing the counter displacement, it is an easy matter to arrive at the result observed experimentally by the famous Michelson-Morley observations. Let there be N like charges e per unit volume within an electrical continuum of uniform but opposite charge density . Then: Ne = ......................................... (9.15) Let N1 and N2 denote the population density in the primary structure (the quon system) and secondary structure (the muon counter flow), respectively. Then: N = N1 + N2 ................................... (9.16) On the basis of electron theory the propagation velocity is proportional to (Noe2/m), where there are No charges e of mass m per unit volume, and the system has a resonant mode at frequency given by the angular velocity: 2 = 4Noe2/m ....................... (9.17) By analogy with the properties of matter we know that the propagation velocity is given by (P/), where P is the pressure modulus of the medium and its mass density and so this guides us to the formula: c1 = (P/N1m) .................................... (9.18) for the speed of light c1 set by the primary structure of the aether, where becomes N1m. Let v denote the velocity of the primary structure (the quon system) and u the velocity of the secondary structure, the reverse flow of muons. The linear momentum of the aether has to be zero unless there is a build up of electric field. Hence: vN1 + uN2 = 0 ................................ (9.19)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
195
Now refractive index n is the ratio of light speed in an active medium to that in the undisturbed vacuum state, the latter being denoted c. Hence: n = c/c1 ........................................ (9.20) The speed of light in the frame of reference set by the quon system, the Earths frame so far as our laboratory experiments are concerned, then becomes c as augmented by the Fresnel drag of u(1-1/n2) caused by the reverse flow of muons. From (9.18) and (9.20), n2 becomes proportional to N1, with P constant, so that, from (9.14), n2 is 1-N2/N so that 1-1/n2 is -N2 /N1. We then see from (9.19) that 1-1/n2 becomes simply v/u. Thus the Fresnel drag in the vacuum, which is u(1-1/n2), is the velocity v of the primary structure, proving, from simple classical electron theory, that the speed of light will be referenced on the vacuum structure moving with the Earth, as was found by Michelson and Morley. That vacuum structure is the system of lattice charges, the quons, in the aether theory presented in this work. The Numbers Game I have founded this account of Creation on the task of deciphering the significance of the measured numerical values of certain dimensionless physical constants. In discovering the physical formulae by which these constants are determined it is found that there is very close agreement between what the theory indicates and what is actually observed. In this quest, however, it is a cause of very considerable anxiety to find that theory can, for example, bring one within, say, 0.1% of the measured value, when the estimated range of error in that measurement is somewhat less than this. One wonders if there is something that one has missed or whether there is an overriding factor such as a wave resonance that modifies the physical parameter involved.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
196
Interested readers who study my published work and see how the theory evolved will notice many such situations, including the step that determined N as being necessarily an odd integer which was 1843 that value of N introduced in chapter 2, and I can but say that it would make this account of The Physics of Creation far too long had I sought to include them all. One must also keep in mind that the techniques by which physical constants are measured can bring in their own uncertainties, apart from the range of error attributable to merging data from different measurements at different laboratories that are based on the same measurement method. Furthermore, if one struggles to get the perfect fit between theory and experiment then one may be seen as cooking the books, as it were, when one is only exploring tentative hypotheses to see if one can discover the physics that underlie the true reason for the discrepancy. By way of example, consider the two graviton forms discussed in Chapter 2, the -graviton and the g-graviton, as well as the quon or aether lattice particle introduced in that chapter by reference to the integer factor N of 1843 . When I first discovered the structure of the aether and published this in my 1960 booklet The Theory of Gravitation, I pictured the graviton as a minute element of charge occupying a spherical hole and moving in circles around the inner bounding surface of that hole to set up the electrodynamic interaction that accounted for the force of gravity. I had the concept of dynamic balance but had not been bold enough to see the graviton system as one having mass equal to that of its dynamic partners including matter. I was writing at a time when reference works indicated that the measured value of the fine-structure constant (-1) was 137.038 and not 137.0359, as now measured. I struggled a little in that work to make sense of the correction for the finite size of the aether lattice particle which put doubts on my theoretical
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
197
quantification in the digits beyond 137.0. Only by the passage of time, six years to 1966, when I published a new edition of The Theory of Gravitation, was that lattice particle question resolved, but by then also I had the correct picture of the graviton, or rather the g-graviton form, which I saw as having a mass of some 5063 electron units. I derived that value of 5063 by theory (equation 5.19, pp. 76-79) of that work but at that time had no inkling that the tau-lepton would emerge in my later theory as a partner to the g-graviton. Indeed, since the taulepton had yet to be discovered at that time, it was bad enough having to predict the existence of an unknown particle, the graviton, of 5063 electron mass units (2.587 Gev), as a feature of my theory of gravitation. On the question of whether the 2.587 GeV particle has ever revealed itself in high energy particle experiments, I did find reference to a so-called (2585) bump listed by the Particle Data Group on p. 314 of Physics Letters, 170B, published in 1986. It was specified as 2586 +/- 45 MeV. I also found that there had been interest in Japan in the research of Hasegawa who had proposed the existence of a fundamental energy quantum with a rest mass two or three times as high as nucleon rest energy (the H-quantum) which a 1973 paper by Nanjo and Takana (Suppl. Prog. Theor. Phys.) 54, 120 said had a mass energy between 2.4 and 2.6 GeV. As my theory of gravitation evolved, with its dependence upon gravitons of mass-energy 2.587 GeV, so I was ahead of the field in this regard, but it came as a massive boost to my theory when I read about the discovery of the tau-particle in 1979 and was able to show how its mass is derived theoretically in my book Physics Unified, page 121 (1980). Even so it was not until 1988 that I was able to publish papers revealing the role of the tau-particle as a graviton alongside the g-graviton, by virtue of their functional link as described in chapter 2 above.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
198
The perplexing question that I will not attempt to answer is whether that link is a 100 per cent rigorous relationship by which the precise mass of one determines the precise mass of the other. Extraneous influence regulating the precise value of either quantity can affect the evaluation of G at the part per 10,000 level and I feel this is best left for future research consideration. I am mindful also that I have, in my writings (Hadronic Journal, 9, 153-157; 1986) given reason for suggesting that the taon has a mass energy related to the proton by a ratio which is the cube root of 3 times the fourth root of 3. This may seem a curious contention but perhaps less so in the light of what has been said about hyperon creation at the end of chapter 4. One finds from this that the taon has a mass-energy of 1.8982 times 1836.152 times 0.511 MeV or 1.781 GeV, which is 3485 electron mass units. This commentary on graviton mass values will give meaning to the numbers 3485 and 5063 as introduced in the section of text which follows, but I would just add a note here to say that in my published work there is mention of the supergraviton which I suspect is generated in the presence of very concentrated elements of matter, typically a heavy atomic nucleus. The value of G must remain the same but to provide local dynamic balance for a very heavy element of mass the normal gravitons would need to get too close to one another and so, by their combination, I suggest they can cope with this situation in an interesting way. This phenomenon reveals itself in the field of warm superconductivity where it appears that, when integer clusters of super-gravitons provide the dynamic balance for atoms or groups of atoms, the energy of electron flow is sustained by tapping the thermal energy of the atoms. See my paper entitled The Supergraviton and its Technological Connection, Speculations in Science and Technology, 12, 179186 (1989).
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
199
At another extreme, as I have already shown in chapter 8 when discussing the neutron star and as I shall mention below in the next chapter THE EPILOGUE, it is conceivable that the energy activity affecting gravitons can be so intense in some parts of the universe that they cannot form in a quasi-stable form and so the virtual muons themselves have to stand in, as it were, and provide the dynamic balance that is associated with gravity. This can lead to an enormous escalation of the value of G, making stars centred in that activity exhibit an extremely high anomalous mass in no way commensurate with their inertial mass by the standards set within our solar system. Hydrogen Creation by Graviton Decay Here I now wish to engage in a rather speculative digression. It is prompted by having received, when half way through the writing the original version of this work, a rather unusual communication from a scientist named Dr. Paul Rowe. He claims to have found experimental evidence showing that, under certain circumstances, hydrogen can appear as if from nowhere and he sees this as sourced in the aether. He is also able to quote references to the earlier research of other scientists who have discovered the anomalous appearance of gas, presumably hydrogen, in their experiments. The common feature of these experiments is an electrical discharge or an explosive reaction in the presence of metal, aluminium or tungsten. Now, it has been shown earlier in this work that, though the aether is not a system of rather elusive protons, it can, from its muon activity, create protons. Also we have seen that matter once formed by those protons combining with electrons can take up position in the E-frame of the aether and share its harmonious jitter motion. In so doing it puts the aether out-of-balance dynamically which is why the aether responds to provide the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
200
counterbalancing motion of a system of gravitons created in the G-frame, thereby giving rise to the force of gravity. Upon consideration of Dr. Rowes claim in the context of the theory governing proton creation, theory which we verified earlier by deriving the Hubble constant, one finds that it is impossible for protons to be created on demand by explosions or electric discharge, unless there are other factors needing consideration. Note that proton creation according to this authors theory arises only where there is energy present that is surplus to the equilibrium requirements of the aether. One cannot then see how a chemical laboratory bench experiment can involve energy input on a scale that can create hydrogen atoms, meaning creation of matter according to the equation E = Mc2. However, I have engaged in a little speculative enquiry and taken note of the factor posed by the metal flakes of Dr. Rowes own experiments and the metal electrodes of the other experiments he has in mind. I asked myself how a piece of metal, that is electrically conductive and of higher mass density than its immediate environment, might cope with the cosmic motion through space in requiring the aether to adapt its graviton system to the presence of that metal. Note that a unit of mass that is part of an element of matter moving through the aether will have an inertia not shared by the corresponding unit of mass in the graviton system. The gravitons are part of a leptonic underworld that governs quantum mechanics and they are created where required from the energy of the aether. The passage through space of a piece of metal will involve the creation of gravitons at its forward surfaces and the corresponding demise of gravitons at its receding surfaces. In short, this poses the interesting question of how gravitons shed their energy in their decay mode. It is a question I have not addressed until now [February 2003] but one which captured my attention when I asked myself how many graviton groups, those
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
201
two -gravitons plus one g-graviton, would be needed to create protons with a negligible energy surplus, given a decay stimulus, namely the impact of a virtual muon upon one of those gravitons by which it exchanges polarity with the muon and so can engage in pair annihilation with its associate -graviton. This becomes a question of how many units of 3485+3485+5063+207 are needed to create an integer number of proton-antiproton pairs. I was then surprised, indeed very surprised, to find that only three such units, totalling 36,720 electron mass units would be needed, as this is exactly 20x1836, 1836 being the proton-electron mass ratio. Now, do bear in mind that this diversion is a speculative exercise, but consider too the implications in the light of Dr. Rowes experimental findings. I was intrigued and so I took the analysis further. Dr. Rowe had measured the volume of gas that had appeared anomalously in his discharge experiments. It was only a few cc. at atmospheric pressure and so I wondered how I might account for that. My thoughts were on the possibility that the creation of protons and anti-protons at the receding metal surface could capture electrons from the metal and so create hydrogen from the protons, whereas the anti-proton might even combine with the nucleus of a metal atom and change its isotopic character. In a sense this is creating matter from the aether by stealth, but one has cause to wonder given the anomalous atomic transmutations that are reported to occur in so-called cold-fusion experiments. I have in mind here the paper by David Moon entitled The MODS Theory of Cold Fusion can explain Tungsten Cathode Plasma Electrolysis that was published in the Volume 8, Issue 47, 2003 of the periodical Infinite Energy . In any event, with the problem of estimating how much hydrogen gas might be created per sq. cm. of metal surface by graviton decay still in mind, I reasoned that we move through
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
202
space at a cosmic speed of some 3.5x107 cm/s and I was able to put a rough figure on the lifetime of the gravitons and so could proceed. I quote from my paper An Empirical Approach to Meson Energy Correlation that was published in Hadronic Journal9, 153-157 (1986): The one direct indication which the author has seen arises from the likely possibility that the decay of the tau and the decay of the g-particle may be associated. The tau has a lifetime of 4.6x10-13 s and falls in a class of particles discussed by J. D. Prentice [Physics Reports, 83, 102 (1982)] as in the 10-13 s range. One such reported decay time was 10.69x10-13 s for the longest-lived entry .... giving a fitted mass of 2583 +/- 26 MeV/c2..... This might be direct evidence of the g(2587) particle. Multiplying a lifetime of this order by that cosmic speed one finds a range of a few hundredths of a micron. Then taking the mass density of the metal times this as a measure of the mass of hydrogen produced per square cm of metal surface per discharge event we expect hydrogen gas at atmospheric temperature and pressure to be of cubic cm order, as Rowe found. Accordingly, I do think we need to take Dr. Rowes claim seriously and see that he has discovered a way of generating hydrogen from the aether. Whether or not this could be developed into a new source of power depends upon the energy involved in setting up those electrical discharges, but at the very least research confirming his findings will surely be research proving that a real aether of the kind envisaged in this work does exist. Such research could include testing the composition of the hydrogen produced to see if it contains the normal percentage of deuterium. Newly created atomic hydrogen should not be
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
203
contaminated by the presence of the deuterium isotope. Such a finding would confirm Dr. Rowes claim that hydrogen is being produced ab initio rather than being absorbed somehow from the chemical environment of the test apparatus. In conclusion, I feel obliged to draw attention to the fact that the generation of hydrogen from the aether, if pursued on a large scale, could, in the long term, be destructive of life on Earth because our oxygen supply is limited and by creating water as we burn up our atmospheric oxygen resource we merely add a few metres to the levels of our oceans to leave us with only nitrogen to breathe. Some other energy resource is needed and that brings me to our next and final topic of discussion. Vacuum Spin as a Prospective Energy Technology The aether was shown in chapter 8 to have properties conducive to what was termed vacuum spin, this being the basis on which stars and planets acquired their rotation and much of their kinetic energy. In this final discussion section I now give my reasons for thinking that, by exercising a little ingenuity, we might be able to tap energy from the aether by replicating in laboratory apparatus the conditions which govern the vacuum spin phenomenon. This account which now follows is the unamended text of a paper I presented in Berlin on June 14th, 2002 to an audience interested in alternative energy techniques. Since it was compiled before this work: The Physics of Creation was written it will, so far as concerns the vacuum spin theme, be somewhat repetitive, but I thought it best to leave the text of the paper unamended. It now follows as a conclusion to this chapter 9. ______________________
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
204
OUR FUTURE ENERGY SOURCE: THE VACUUM A Scientific Introduction Whilst oil companies scan ocean beds in search of future drilling sites by which to replenish our dwindling energy resources there seems to be little or no interest in looking for energy within the omnipresent vacuum medium which exists everywhere, both here on Earth and in outer space. The reason, of course, is that scientists do not recognize the vacuum as a source of energy. They tell us that the vacuum is, in simple words, a mere nothing, but yet they teach by reference to textbooks which declare that the vacuum has a magnetic permeability expressed as o of value 410-7 henries per metre and a permittivity 1/oc2 of 8.854187817x10-12 farads per metre. How can the vacuum, as a medium devoid of matter, be said to have such curious properties if it is a mere nothing? Consider what we mean by that word permittivity. It tells us how much energy we can store by setting up a voltage between two metal plates in a vacuum. That energy sits in the vacuum not in those metal plates! The vacuum has a way of releasing that energy when that voltage is reduced and that mysterious quantity we call `permittivity' governs that action. Note now my point that a magnetic property is also involved owing to that o term, as is c, the speed of light. Magnetism is basically a dynamic action arising from electric charge in motion and motion implies energy. The vacuum, that mere nothing, also somehow determines the speed of light c, a factor in the famous energy equation E = Mc2, and yet scientists ignore the vacuum as a potential source of energy. There is indeed much they have to learn about this aspect of
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
205
Energy Science and I intend here to summarize this in four stages. In the first and third of these I will point to free energy technology that has been demonstrated. In the second stage I will outline the physical principles involved and in the fourth stage I will conclude my message by reminding you that our universe had to be created from energy that apparently came from nowhere and cast some light on that great mystery. I. Capacitor Magic or a Mere Dream? I want you to imagine that you have discovered an electrical capacitor that you can charge with energy and which, on discharge, gives you double that amount of energy as output. It is as if you can perform magic, though you are merely dreaming.
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
How would you turn this into a practical device? The problem you face is that the capacitance is quite small. Let me tell you how I would do it. I would connect two identical capacitors through an inductive circuit to form a resonant system and let the energy oscillate between the two capacitors, as one discharges whilst the other charges. I would draw power off, as,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
206
for example, by incorporating an electrical load denoted R in Fig. 1. Now, the chances are, that if I built such a device it would not work because of that low capacitance property and the energy loss owing to the resistance of the inductive circuit. So, exercising my ingenuity, I would connect a high d.c. voltage V to the capacitors (see Fig. 2), knowing that this additional source could not deliver energy continuously, once I had switched the device on. The reason is that d.c. does not flow through capacitors. For a high enough d.c. voltage this would, as I can verify by basic electrical theory, have the quite remarkable effect of making the energy oscillations escalate in strength sufficiently to overcome the resistance loss problem. I would then surely have a working free energy device. If I did not use that high voltage d.c. polarizing source then there is still the possibility that I could get a self-sustaining oscillation and draw as output a small amount of free energy, but only if I made sure that the inductors were quite large and wound from thick gauge wire so as to have a very low resistance. Can solving our future energy problems really be so simple? It is such a wonderful dream, truly magical, but we have, of course, to live with reality and here we need to face up to the facts of life. Can such a capacitor property ever be a reality? As to facts, I have several examples in mind, three of which I now mention. Firstly, as long ago as 1871, there was a U.S. patent granted which comprised two cross-coupled inductive components each having two concentric windings separated by insulation and so constituting, in effect, a capacitor which could develop a resonant oscillation with the inductance of the other cross-coupled component. Fig. 3 is a copy of Fig. 2 of that
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
207
patent. The introductory paragraph of the patent specification stated that the invention: relates to the combination of two or more simple or compound helices and iron cores or magnets in such a manner as to produce a constant electric current without the aid of a galvanic battery. Here then in 1871 was U.S. Patent No. 119,825, as granted to Daniel McFarland Cook of Mansfield, Ohio, telling us how to build a device which somehow generates electricity with no evident power input source. Here I see a device in which electric charge can oscillate between the two components and somehow generate a steady excess of output energy which is supplied by the windings on those two inductive components. Here there was no priming d.c. high voltage input source, but large gauge wire was specified as essential for the inductive windings.
Fig. 3
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
208
These were very early days in the history of the electrical power industry. Thomas Edison was only 24 years old and Nicola Tesla was 15 years of age at the time, so it is no wonder that this very important invention was buried in Patent Office records. Secondly, there is the almost incredible story of the efforts of Dr. Henry Moray. It was reported that on 21 December 1925, Moray and three others, who went along to witness what was to be demonstrated, took a trip to a canyon in USA which was well removed from any electric power lines. A wire antenna was strung between two points well above the ground and connection made from the antenna to Morays apparatus, which itself had a ground connection. Electric power was delivered as if from nowhere. It was said to be powered by radiant energy, energy somehow delivered via the aether, but in spite of repeated demonstrations, some delivering substantial power measured in kilowatt terms, Morays discovery, notwithstanding our developing hunger for a new energy source, has not found its way into modern technology. The reason, of course, is incredulity on the part of our learned scientists plus lack of insight as to the true energy source. A description of the Moray device by T. J. Yates of Cornell University, dated 16 March 1929, says that, in the demonstration he witnessed, two wooden boxes were placed on a table. On one box there was a high-frequency transformer and in the other box there were ten large capacitors and ten small capacitors, these all being connected by wires in a circuit including the antenna. One can see, therefore, that somehow it is possible to set up a resonant inductor-capacitor circuit which can deliver aether energy with the help of an antenna placed well above ground level in open air which delivers that high d.c. input voltage but not the steady input power needed to explain what was observed.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
209
It is, by the way, experimental fact that atmospheric electricity exists everywhere in the open air and has a vertical voltage gradient of several hundred V/m. It is caused by solarpowered thermal radiation exerting a downward pressure on electrons in the atoms of our atmosphere. Of itself, this is not a useful source of power but, as the Moray apparatus shows, it can serve as a priming agency in setting up the operating charge on those capacitors. Thirdly, there are the reports on the free energy apparatus of the Methernitha community in Switzerland. They have an electrical generating machine they call Thesta-Distatica. It produces a substantial output of electrical power. Its main features are inductive coils connected to a pair of glass Leyden jars plus an electrostatic generator that we in England call a Wimshurst machine. When the discs of that Wimshurst machine rotate high voltages are generated and the pulsed output somehow activates the energy-generating properties of those two Leyden jars. A Leyden jar is merely a capacitor having concentric cylindrical electrodes, one on the outside and one on the inside of that glass jar. Here also we have two capacitors in an oscillatory circuit and a d.c. source that can supply high voltage but very little energy. Yet, somehow those capacitors can tap aether energy and generate electricity which serves that Swiss community. I believe we have here a situation where there is skill and knowledge in that community as to how to build this free energy device, but I feel sure that no one there understands the physics that can explain where the energy that is generated really comes from. An extensive account of both this Swiss discovery and the story of Henry Morays efforts is provided in a recentlypublished book by Keith Tutt entitled The Search for Free Energy, published in 2001 by Simon & Schuster (ISBN 0-68486660-9).
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
210
II. The Physics of the Magic Capacitor All physicists have heard of Clerk Maxwell and Werner Heisenberg. Some few may have heard of Alexandre Veronnet. Maxwell's name is associated with electrical displacement within the aether (the medium we refer to as the `vacuum'). Heisenberg's name is linked to quantum mechanics and the Principle of Uncertainty by which matter has an underlying jitter motion as if sharing a universal circular motion in tiny orbits at the very frequency physicists associate with the creation of the electron. As to Veronnet, he has also a place in history. On December 16, 1929 the French Academie des Sciences conferred the Henry Poincare medal on Louis de Broglie for his work on wave mechanics, but on that same occasion Veronnet was presented with the Prix Lalande for his works in astronomy. The point I want to make is that Veronnet saw the aether as having electrical structure and an underlying quantized angular motion akin the that we learn of from Bohr's theory. Veronnet realised that jitter motion in the aether could perhaps explain why electrons in atoms have a quantized angular momentum, that is, why they have specific energy quanta linked to their rotation.
Fig. 4 So, as I see it, it is quite logical that we should be influenced by the perceptions of these three great men of science
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
211
and begin to portray the aether as I do in Fig. 4 which I copy here from page 89 of my 1980 book Physics Unified (ISBN 085056-009-8). Here I depict the vacuum as having a cubic structure, a state of order of the kind we see in crystals or in the magnetic domains of a ferromagnetic material. In each notional cubic cell there is an aether particle describing a circular orbit with all such particles keeping in step in a synchronous motion. They all have the same electrical polarity and are immersed in a continuum of uniform charge of opposite polarity and are attracted to their respective centres of those cubic cells, but are displaced from those centres to radii at which their mutual electrostatic energy avoids being negative. Therefore they must move in orbit to assure that their centrifugal force is in balance with the electrostatic force attracting them to the centres of those cubic cells. It all sounds very hypothetical, but I can assure you that this model of the aether holds the key to solving the prevailing mysteries of physics, and it is unquestionably correct.
Fig. 5 However, here my subject is concerned with capacitors and their free energy potential and I must not digress into other fascinating realms of fundamental physics. So let us now consider a parallel plate capacitor sitting in the aether as just portrayed. I refer now to Fig. 5.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
212
When I asked myself what happens when an electric voltage is applied between those two capacitor plates I could see that the aether charges would all be displaced in unison relative to the centres about which they are in circular orbit. Then I could see that they could not keep strictly in synchronism with their counterparts elsewhere in nearby space unless they were subject to a continuous very high frequency oscillation of energy exchange, something I felt was impossible. Then, and by then I mean nearly 50 years ago, I saw how Mother Nature deals with this problem. If that applied voltage has a two-fold effect, in that it displaces the aether charge in the direction of the electric field to a new equilibrium position but also produces, between the capacitor plates, a continuous motion of that charge at right angles to that direction, then there can be absolute synchrony with external space charge with no high frequency energy exchange problems. In Fig. 5 the centres of the charge orbits are indicated and one can see that charges seated between the capacitor plates have an eccentric orbital motion and so their velocities in orbit need to be compounded with a superimposed velocity in order to keep in synchronism throughout their orbital period. This means the whole structure of aether particles must acquire a linear motion in the space between the capacitor plates, a motion which increases as the voltage between those plates is increased. In other words, I could see that one unit of electrical energy added to charge the capacitor would be supplemented by a further unit of energy accounting for that linear motion and it would be supplied by the external quantum jitter of the aether, since it was the external aether that was applying the constraint that assures the universal synchrony. Here was the free energy source but the extra energy was locked into that aether motion and, as soon as the capacitor was discharged, that motion would collapse and dissipate the energy within the aether itself as it recovers and sustains its equilibrium.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
213
What I have just described applies to the parallel plate capacitor but even back in the late 1950 era when I was researching on these matters I knew that that aether motion produced by electric field action could import both energy and angular momentum but I saw this as limited to the realm of cosmology and so of no technological significance. I earned my living by dealing with technological issues but still let my thoughts wander into pure physics and that higher plane that is the realm of those who seek to understand our universe on a grand scale and delve into that quest for the Holy Grail that is termed Unified Field Theory and the problem of gravitation. With a Ph.D. in electrical engineering and working in a high technology corporate environment I really had no platform from which to project my scientific contribution, especially as my belief in a real aether medium made me an outcast from the world of theoretical physics. Nevertheless, 20 years on, in the 1970s I had seen how the aether feeds energy into events on body Earth, as evidenced by the creation of the thunderball and the inflow of energy to power the action of a tornado. This was still far from the free energy technology theme we are discussing today.
Fig. 6
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
214
To jump rapidly ahead, now consider Fig. 6. Here I show a section of a concentric capacitor. That aether motion I mentioned is now not linear motion but rotary motion confined between the capacitor electrodes and so, when the capacitor voltage is reduced, that motion will have inertia and not dissipate by collisions which feed energy back into the enveloping aether. Instead, it will try to sustain the electric displacement, meaning that it will deploy its energy into the release of electrical energy which can be drawn from the capacitor. In other words, we have our magic capacitor. It can deliver very nearly twice as much energy on discharge as is supplied during charging! One, therefore, now has a physical explanation of the energy source that may have been tapped accidentally and in ignorance of the true physics involved, by Cook back in 1871, Henry Moray in the 1920s and the Methernitha community in the 1980s. That, at least is my personal assumption, and I leave it to others to judge on such matters, whilst I am all too conscious of the implications of what I say here from the point of view of patenting technology in this field. If we now move ahead to develop technology that taps energy from the aether, guided by the physical principles just outlined, will the U.S. patent granted in 1871 be seen as prior disclosure? Will the work of Henry Moray, which was denied U.S. Patent protection, be seen as prior disclosure? Will the confusing reports we have heard concerning that Methernitha apparatus be seen as prior disclosure, when the only inference is that Leyden jars (concentric capacitors) were used in conjunction with a Wimshurst machine to deliver the `free energy' as they claim? If so, then the patent system offers no incentive to those who pioneer the forthcoming revolution in the free energy field, but we must do our best to take things forward in spite of the inevitable hostility of those who oppose our efforts.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
215
III. Free Energy: The Way Forward Fig. 7 shows how one can design a circuit aimed at tapping aether energy. I leave it to those of you who understand electrical circuit theory to work out what may be the practical scale of what is suggested on the basis of this magic capacitor theme. Nevertheless, 20 years on, in the 1970s I had seen how the aether feeds energy into events on body Earth, as evidenced by the creation of the thunderball and the inflow of energy to power the action of a tornado. This was still far from the free energy technology theme we are discussing today. To jump rapidly ahead, now consider Fig. 6. Here I show a section of a concentric capacitor. That aether motion I mentioned is now not linear motion but rotary motion confined between the capacitor electrodes and so, when the capacitor voltage is reduced, that motion will have inertia and not dissipate by collisions which feed energy back into the enveloping aether. Instead, it will try to sustain the electric displacement, meaning that it will deploy its energy into the release of electrical energy which can be drawn from the capacitor. In other words, we have our magic capacitor. It can deliver very nearly twice as much energy on discharge as is supplied during charging!
Fig. 7
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
216
My own calculations assure me that a concentric capacitor system running at a bias of, say, 25,000 volts and oscillating at, say, 100 kHz, can deliver power, whether on a power/size or a power/weight basis, that can more than rival existing power plant technology - all with no chemical pollution and no cost for fuel input. It can even suit the needs we have for powering an automobile when our oil resources dry up. One can, therefore, dream of what might be possible, but, as ever, one might be deluded and encounter new obstacles, but, at least, one should confront those who ridicule the possibility by getting them to heed the underlying scientific message in the hope that they will wake up and see the sense of joining us, or leading us, in our efforts. As to those obstacles, one might doubt whether aether energy can flow in fast enough to satisfy one's design specification, but I feel assured on that from the performance data reported by those who have witnessed Henry Moray's demonstrations. The one obstacle I would see as warranting special attention is the effect of large current oscillations at a high kHz or even MHz frequency in the large inductors of a future power generating plant. There are those who worry about the adverse EM (electromagnetic wave) radiation effects of using mobile telephones. To allay such concerns I draw attention to the Energy Science Report No. 10 that I published in 1997, Cyclotron Resonance in Human body Cells (ISBN 085056-011-X), where I discussed the real danger, which occurs at the much lower power frequencies as used in overhead power lines and in electric blanket heating. High frequency EM power radiation leaking from our future power generating systems need only be an interference problem affecting radio communication that happens to be in the same frequency band. As to the way forward, I can but draw attention to my 1996 publication Energy Science Report No. 8, entitled Power from Space: The Correa Invention - (ISBN 0-85056-016-0).
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
217
That report was essentially directed at highlighting the experimental findings in Canada of Alexandra and Paulo Correa, who have already proved over-unity operation of their PAGD (Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge) technology. As that report explains I see there the same physical action for generating excess power that I have just discussed. Also I mention that I was so interested by the recently reported experimental efforts of the Correas on another anomalous energy generating theme [The Reproducible Thermal Anomaly of the Reich-Einstein Experiment under Limit Conditions, Infinite Energy, 7, 37, pp. 12-21, 2001] that it caused me to write about this energy inflow from the aether topic in a related article published earlier this year [Gravity and its Thermal Anomaly, Infinite Energy, 7, 41, pp. 61-65, 2002]. In that Report No. 8 I also mentioned the apparatus designed by Geoffrey Spence, an inventor based in U.K. This is the subject of his U.S. Patent No. 4,772,816. I feel, after what I have explained to you about the physical principles of tapping energy from the aether, that, just by looking at Fig. 8, copied from that patent, you will see how this relates to the Spence invention. Electrons injected into a chamber formed between two concentric electrodes are deflected into the inner electrode by a pair of magnets that provide and magnetic field along the central axis of the concentric electrodes. Of itself, this should add no excess energy, because the energy fed into accelerating the electrons is merely absorbed by electrostatic repulsion in charging the central electrode and so the capacitor. However, if that electron flow pulsates and there are connections to draw electron current from that central electrode then the pulsation implies a recurring sequence of charge and discharge. That magic capacitor function is then harnessed.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
218
Fig. 8 The questions then are whether the Spence invention really works and whether it is commercially viable? Well, I wrote that Energy Science Report back in 1996, six years ago, and it is only a few months ago that I heard any more of that project. Geoffrey Spence has developed the prototype product to the stage where he has closed the loop in the sense that a portion of the output power was fed back to impart the energy needed to sustain the electron beams. He has a self-sustaining unit that can deliver kilowatts of useful electrical power with no visible energy input. In the light of what I have discussed here, there will, no doubt, be those who take note of my message but say: "Well, we have heard it all before; so, when will see aether energy heating our houses and powering our automobiles?" My answer is that it will be only be when the scientific explanation of that potential source of energy is well understood and endorsed by our energy research community. That is the real hurdle that stands in the way of progress, given that inventors in this field who see excess energy are mystified themselves. I recall Stanley Meyer in 1993 at the International Symposium on New Energy held in Denver, Colorado (April, 1993) describing his so-called Water Fuel Cell. He claimed to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
219
be producing a combustible gas mixture of hydrogen and oxygen by the electrical pulsing of a concentric cylindrical capacitor using water as a dielectric. His oral explanation and the paper as published in the conference proceedings were completely incomprehensible, even allowing for his terminology for a resistor as an amp consuming device or as an amp inhibitor. He inferred that some kind of cold fusion process was involved but it was evident he had no idea as to the true source of the excess energy that he was claiming. So, having explained the energy source, and guided by what others have discovered, I feel vindicated in asserting that a concentric capacitor system can perform as the magic capacitor of our dream world and I just hope that I may live long enough to see the technology applied on the grand scale. IV. The Energy of Creation As to the grand scale of things, what can be grander than the creation of stars such as our sun and their satellites such as our Earth? I see a beginning where matter, essentially protons and electrons, is dispersed throughout space, along with the electrical charges that come together to form the aether. Once the aether condenses from a state of chaos into the ordered state of its quantum form, as by shedding a little more of the energy which created that matter, then the phenomenon of gravitation would be born. There is analogy here with the state of ferromagnetism which appears in iron only when it cools into a state of order that we see as magnetic domains in the iron crystals. I simply mention this because it was my Ph.D. research interest in ferromagnetism that caused me to think in depth about the aether. Once gravity appeared then those protons, being of greater mass than the electrons, would cluster together in each space domain to form a spherical body of matter having a positive
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
220
electrical charge, pending the eventual arrival of all the electrons. That would set up a radial electric field and, as I have explained, that means aether energy inflow and aether spin. The star so formed will acquire angular momentum and, as that builds up, the star will seek to shed much of that angular momentum as matter, and so we have the planets. My message here is that the prospect of free energy and our future on a non-polluted Earth is related to the very creation of this our Earth and the scientific community that seeks to explain everything as a Big Bang scenario in an expanding universe is wandering astray and neglecting the real issue common with the phenomenon of Creation, our concern with aether energy as a free energy source that can power our future.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
221
CHAPTER 10
The Epilogue
Having concluded this account of The Physics of Creation, I can but let the reader judge and form his or her own opinions on the subject. Defining God as the Creator, the better our understanding of the creative forces at work in our universe, the more likely we are to find the ground on which to build a common religion conducive to a peaceful existence. However, as indicated in the INTRODUCTION on page 1, those who lead in this quest will have to be conversant in the language of physics, as otherwise they will be basing their beliefs on fictional notions, historical hearsay or mere hope and intuition. Awareness of the Science of Creation plus a will to embrace the discipline of a common and universal moral code of behaviour should surely suffice as the intellectual basis for ones religious horizons, without the promise of life after death. The scientific approach reveals how the universe was created as a system of order developed from chaos and so established an aether in which events governed by statistical factors created the forms of matter we see evolving around us. We are part of that system of matter and though subject to a game of chance we can, as thinking beings, optimise our prospects of survival in a secure and happy environment, albeit having, as do all particles of matter, a limited lifespan. Education founded too heavily on religious indoctrination in ignorance of the physics that rules the universe can but lead to unnecessary strife given that there will always be those who challenge the word of those who say they speak for a God of their own making.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
222
Concerning the physics, however, there are lessons from history that we must learn. Though the language of physics is universal, the stories told in that language can be conflicting and the truths of Nature have yet to be presented in their ultimate form. This work on The Physics of Creation is a major step in that direction. As to history, in recent centuries it has been important for scholars to build their scientific convictions on religious foundations, rather than build their religion on the evidence emerging from scientific discovery. Admission to the scholarly fraternity and the funding of institutions of learning depended upon religious disposition. Rivalry and prejudice combined with dogmatism have been dominant factors amongst scholars and there is no reason to think that what has been presented in this work will emerge unscathed from the debate which it will hopefully foster. With this in mind, it is interesting to compare the physical picture of the aether as now envisaged with what is implied in the following words, quoted from a book NEWTON: The Making of a Genius (MacMillan, 2002) by Patricia Fara. On pages 82-89, under the heading DISCIPLES, she refers to the physician George Cheyne (1672-1743) concerning Newtons conjectures about gravity, with this as a statement on page 87: Cheyne was one of the first of Newtons successors to explore aether models, which became increasingly prevalent from around 1740. Interpretations varied enormously, largely because as the mediators between matter, motion and spirit, aetherial fluids carried huge theological implications. Relying on arguments that ranged from the ineffably vague to the extraordinarily convoluted, natural philosophers described weightless invisible fluids of subtle particles seeping through the pores of solids, forcing gases to expand, and cushioning the sun in a great repellent cloud whose graduating density maintained the planets in their appropriate orbits.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
223
Often authenticated by the adjective Newtonian, aethers proliferated and diversified as authors with very different religious commitments summoned them up to explain mysterious phenomena like electric charge, magnetic repulsion, or human memory. Our modern generation as a result has been brain-washed, as it were, into believing that the aether is non-existent, merely an oldfashioned idea that has been disposed of by scientific evidence. It was seen as a medium which provides an absolute frame of reference in which the speed of light is constant, but experiment based on reflecting light back on itself in different directions in the laboratory on Earth which moves at very high speed relative to the cosmic background, failed to provide a measure of speed through the aether. As the aether did not live up to mans expectations it had to be discarded in favour of a philosophy based on Einsteins doctrines on space-time and relativity which makes the observer the frame of reference. Yet, surely, we must bear in mind that the existence of the aether is not a question of whether Newton was right or wrong in that belief, or whether, in modern physics, Einsteins authority is the governing factor. The experimental facts in the discipline of physics, if interpreted correctly, tell us what we need to know about the aether and neither Newton nor Einstein has shown us how Mother Nature determines G, the constant of gravitation in terms of a unified theory. As to scholarly debate and challenge of ones ideas, in a chapter entitled ENEMIES, Patricia Faras study of Newton shows how God features in the aether discussion. On page 113 of her book one reads: Protagonists on both sides often used the metaphor of a clock to portray the conflicting accounts presented by Leibniz and Newton of how God superintends the universe. On Newtons model, God is constantly active throughout the cosmos, and intermittently exerts His
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
224
supreme power to intervene and alter the laws of nature. Leibniz was scathing about this view: Nay, the machine of Gods making is so imperfect, that he is obliged to clean it now and then .... and even mend it, as a clockmaker mends his work. Surely, he protested, God is no sloppy mechanic, but a skilled craftsman who could initially wind up His clock to run perfectly throughout eternity. According to Newton, God created independent, individual particles that, as they travelled through empty space, constantly interacted with each other and formed new associations. In contrast, Leibniz maintained that God has established a harmonious universe completely filled by inherently active entities called monads. Although they operated independently, and no longer needed Gods direct control, Leibnizs nomads had been in a sense pre-programmed so that they worked together to fulfil His plans. It is no wonder that, by invoking God, these ideas about the aether should attract comment and, indeed, ridicule by the nonscientifically minded men of religion. National rivalry also contributed to the criticism directed at Newton, as we see from some words on page 139 in Patricia Faras book in the chapter entitled FRANCE. Nor does great NEWTONS famous system stand, On one compact foundation, simply plannd Reflect how vainly is that Art employed, Which founds a stately fabrick on a Void Confess the fair result of sober thought, Who builds on vacuum, merely builds on nought.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
225
This was attributed as a quotation from a poem Anti-Lucretius by Cardinal de Polignac (1747), dedicated to promoting Religion and Virtue and said to be resolutely Cartesian. In presenting an account of the aether in this year 2003 it seems unlikely that the religious opinion will intrude in such a way, given the state of science and technology of our modern day. However, one has to consider the climate of opinion prevailing amongst the scientific community. I therefore introduce what I have to say on this by making one final quotation from Patricia Faras book which appears on page 254 in a chapter entitled INHERITORS: Newton may have regarded himself as a giant who stood on others shoulders, but new contenders for the position of outstanding genius would, in their turn, come to surmount him. During the twentieth century, the main competitors for Newtons place were Einstein and Hawking. I find this a curious assertion as it is hard to belief that, in the pursuit of scientific truths, one should be contending for the position of outstanding genius. In this modern world of communication with its all pervading media activity one would surely need to have a publicity agent to engage in such a contest and the winner claiming the title could but feel somewhat foolish. One need not question Einsteins genius, as such, given the impact he has had on those who teach physics. However, whereas the physics of Newton will survive in the teaching curriculum it seems improbable that Einsteins space-time notions can survive for long, given that physics students emerging from their school education may have heard of Einstein but know next to nothing about his theories. Already in this work we have seen how aether theory can so easily explain the phenomena on which Einstein has built his claims. Certainly, I see no case for saying that Einstein could ever displace Newton as a figure head in the world of physics.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
226
Einstein made his contribution in the earlier years of the twentieth century and the contender for Newtons place at the end of the twentieth century is, according to Patricia Fara, Stephen Hawking, a professor at Cambridge University in England. Hawking bases his claim to fame on Black Holes and their effects on leptons in nearby vacuum, but one must wonder how anything meaningful can emerge from a study of effects in remote space, given that the study is based on insufficient knowledge as to the nature of gravitation. There seem to be some stellar objects in galaxies that exhibit enormous mass compared with our sun, if that estimate of mass is based on the value of G that we associate with Newtons observations of our solar system. However, G depends upon those gravitons discussed in chapter 2 and therefore one could say that a star which finds itself in a region of aether subject to intense energy activity might have its quantum dynamic motion balanced by gravitons that are leptons of the heavy electron variety, muons, rather that tau-leptons that are superheavy electrons. The mass of the stellar object need not be too different from that of the sun, but the volume of the associated graviton system in the vicinity of that object could be greater by tens of thousands, meaning that G as applied to that object could even be many millions of times greater than applies in our solar system. Stephen Hawking may have been born 300 years after the death of Galileo (1642), as we are told by his books, just as Isaac Newton (1642-1727) was born 100 years after the death of Galileo, but that is hardly a qualification adding authority to their respective contributions. If it were, then I too, being born in 1927, two hundred years after the death of Newton, would hope that this could add a little weight to what I have offered in this work. It is on this light-hearted note that I now close this account, whilst noting that more information concerning my theory and its onward development can be found by inspecting my website www.aspden.org which I maintain in my retirement as my voluntary contribution to the scientific community.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
227
APPENDIX I
The Exclusion Zone of Interaction Energy

When two particles interact owing to the interaction of their mutual electrostatic or gravitational fields, the fact that field energy density is proportional to field intensity squared means that there is a cross-product component of energy density separate from the selfenergy components of either particle. This cross-product component is what is meant here by interaction energy. Our task now is to prove the following theorem: Given two particles separated by a distance r and subject to an inverse square of distance law of force, prove that their interaction energy sums to zero within a sphere of radius r centred on either charge. Why is this important? It is important because in physics we face the problem of working out how fast that energy can transfer from its distribution over the whole of the field enveloping the particles to satisfy the Principle of Conservation of Energy by moving to or from the kinetic energy state which is seated with and shares the motion at the particle location. For the electrostatic case, consider a charge Q in the figure above as developing a radial electric field VQ at radius x. Imagine then a charge q distant r from Q developing a radial electric field Vq at the radius x from Q. Let y denote the distance from q and a point P under consideration at radius x from Q. Then, with as the angle between VQ and Vq, we know that the interaction energy density component at P is: (VQVq cos)/4
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
228
Fig. I.1 Also, VQ is Q/x2 and Vq is q/y2. Now consider the volume of an elemental section of a spherical shell of thickness dx at the radius x, as subtended at P by a small solid angle from q. The elemental volume is y2/cos times this angle per unit thickness of the shell. If this is multiplied by the above expression after replacing VQ and Vq by the above terms in x and y, we find that the cos term is eliminated as is the y2 term, to leave us with an expression for the energy attributable to that elemental section dx of shell is Qq(dx)/4x2 times the solid angle mentioned. Since this does not depend upon y, we can evaluate the total energy component dE for the full solid angle of 4 to obtain: dE = (Qq/x2)dx Provided x is greater than r, the fields VQ and Vq are in the same direction. With x less than r the two regions of the spherical shell intercepted by the same solid angle have opposite and cancelling interaction energies owing to the change of direction of VQ relative to Vq. Thus within the radius r the interaction field energy sums to zero and so the proposition is proved.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
229
Now we could have replaced Q and q by masses M and m and, by introducing G, the constant of gravitation, as a coefficient, reached exactly the same conclusion, namely that there is no net interaction energy within a sphere centred on M or, by the logic of symmetry, centred on m. Accordingly, whether we have in mind the electrostatic interaction or the gravitational interaction, the energy transfer for change of separation distance involves energy having to traverse the distance r in going to or from the kinetic energy state in the process of transfer with field energy. A separate mathematical analysis based on the use of MacClaurins Theorem can show that the interaction field energy distribution at radii beyond r is inversely proportional to the square of x. From that one concludes that the precise distance energy travels in its transfer between field and kinetic energy is the distance r. The latter analysis is of record in chapter 1 of my book: Physics Unified and also in a paper of mine published by the U.K. Institute of Physics [The Inverse Square Law of Force, J. Phys. A: Math Gen., 13, 36493655 (1980)]. The importance of the theorem here presented is evident from the analysis in chapter (9) where we derived the equation (9.6) which led us to a physical foundation for the Neumann potential in terms of the Coulomb interaction. An equally important result, however, is that afforded by the clear analogy with the gravitational interaction, because equation (9.6) has a gravitational counterpart that is the basis of the point made in chapter 5 by reference to the expression (5.1). Physicists whose minds are entrenched in relativistic doctrine would do well to take stock of what has just been stated here, because one can see, from the argument that follows expression (5.1) in chapter 5, that the perihelion motion of planet Mercury can be explained by the simple classical logic of classical field theory, once the theorem presented in this Appendix I is given due attention.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
230
APPENDIX II
Inertia and E = Mc2

The physical basis of inertia and so of the well-known formula E = Mc2 resides in the Principle of Conservation of Energy and, contrary to what many physicists believe, the unwillingness of an electron to radiate and so shed the only attribute that accounts for its existence, its electric charge and the energy intrinsic to that charge. Electron acceleration in company with other electrons accelerated by the same electric field will engender a collective action by which energy can be said to be dispersed by setting up electromagnetic wave propagation. If N electrons are involved then the rate of energy radiation is, by Larmor theory, said to be proportional to N2. Physicists who see this as applying to radio transmission from antenna in which numerous electrons are caused to oscillate in synchronism with one another must, however, ask themselves whether the radiation might be proportional, not to N2 but to (N2 - N), whereby we exclude radiation of the very energy that keeps the electrons alive. Why, I ask, should physicists just declare that an electron is accelerated without, as they do, factoring into their analysis the external electric field that causes that acceleration? Now I could write many, many pages in support of my concern, but see no reason for replicating and developing what I have already published elsewhere. My book: Physics Unified includes a discussion in chapter 4 where I refer to 17 authors who seem to be troubled by this problem. These authors include Dirac and Einstein. If you think Einsteins theory is rigorous, ask yourself how we measure relativistic mass increase of a fast-moving electron unless it
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
231
is rapidly accelerated. Then note Einsteins words in a famous paper of his entitled: On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies : As the electron is to be slowly accelerated , and consequently may not give off any energy in the form of radiation, the energy withdrawn from the electrostatic field must be put down as equal to the energy of motion of the electron. The reference is Annalen der Physik, 17, 891 (1905). If you respect the work of Nobel Laureate Paul Dirac, just look up the paper in which, in discussing the classical theory of energy radiation by accelerated charge to accommodate relativistic principles, he stated: It would appear that we have a contradiction with elementary ideas of causality Here the reference is Proc. Roy. Soc., A167, 148 (1938). So my case is simple. Just go back to see how the formula for electron energy radiation was derived in the first place. I will not repeat the analysis here but will present the mathematical integral on which it is based: 2 [ (1/8)(efsin/c3t)22(ct)2sin cdt] d = 2e2f2/3c3
0
This is derived at p. 81 in my book: Physics Unified. There are two important points to notice about this formulation. Firstly, it contains no symbol which represents the intensity of the electric field which must be present in order to set up the acceleration f. Secondly, that factor of 2 before the integral sign is put there because it is assumed that the electric field disturbance that is propagated must, by virtue of our understanding of Maxwells theory of wave propagation, be matched by the propagation of an equal magnetic field disturbance.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
232
Now I can declare quite categorically that once the accelerating electric field of strength V is included that integral above becomes zero, provided we have: Ve/f = e2/2c2(ct) and since e2/2(ct) is a measure of the electric field energy outside the radius ct, t being time, that remains to be accelerated as the disturbance progresses at speed c, it is evident that here we have a formula that tells us that an electron will accelerate in just such a way as to avoid shedding its electric energy, the condition being that the inertial mass is the electric field energy involved divided by c2. So we have E = Mc2 derived by classical electron theory and a physical insight into the nature of inertia. The reason I am delving into this subject here is my concern about the theory of the Hubble constant in relation to the classical formula for the Thomson scattering cross-section of the electron. The theory for this depends upon the above formula for the rate of energy radiation by the electron deemed to be accelerated by the passage of an electromagnetic wave intercepted by the electron. If there can be no radiation of electric field energy by the isolated electron accelerated by such a wave then, in that respect, the scattering crosssection of the electron must be zero. However, I can see the case for the magnetic disturbance, or rather the kinetic energy disturbance implied, to still ripple through as part of the resulting wave propagation. To that extent, and bearing in mind that there is a measure of qualitative evidence supporting the Thomson scattering attributed to electrons, I tend to the opinion that an electromagnetic wave encountering isolated electrons in space does confront an obstructing cross-section that is half that indicated by the classical Thomson formula. In this case there is logic in looking to the transient creation of electrons by the aethers failed attempts to create protons as a reason accounting for the attenuation of intensity and frequency of waves coming from distant stars. It is just that the theoretical determination
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
233
(chapter 8) of the magnitude of the Hubble constant is affected, but surely we do have here a profound insight into some fascinating aspects of the physics that underpin our universe and I just hope that physicists will see enough reason to revise their opinions in the light of these comments. As to revising ones opinions, readers may find it of interest to read what I have recorded ahead in Appendix VI concerning Einsteins notion of time dilation and also concerning the significance of what I have said in Chapter 9 about Fechners hypothesis and its bearing upon electrodynamic interaction. Our understanding of the physics of Creation is, to be sure, an evolving theme, but one can be equally sure that what is reported here in this work is closer to the truth than a physics based on Einsteins theory.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
234
APPENDIX III
The Electrons Anomalous Magnetic Moment

This Appendix is a slightly edited version of a chapter entitled An Excursion in Quantum Electrodynamics which appears in my book: Aether Science Papers published in 1996. The starting point in the whole of my research has been the subject of electrodynamics and its energy anomalies, by which I mean the experimental anomalies and not the paradoxical notions that beset the theory of the subject. I have found repeatedly, from my attempts to write about such matters, that referees of physics journals delight in pointing to the success of quantum electrodynamics in explaining the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron. They claim such precision in their calculations that is so overwhelming that surely only a fool would dare to think that, by contemplating an aether, there may be a better and easier way of going about that task. So, having discovered the easy alternative, I delved into that wonderful world of QED to see how its magic derived a theoretical value for the g/2 factor of the electron which measurement shows as being 1.001159652193(10). This is the value adopted in consultation with the CODATA Task Group in 1986 and as made available to scientists in U.K. by a pocket chart published by The Royal Society jointly with other learned bodies. The numerical value just quoted is stated to be the magnetic moment of the electron in terms of the Bohr magneton.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
235
I saw that a book entitled Introduction to Gauge Field Theory had been authored by Bailin and Love and published in 1986 under the auspices of the Institute of Physics in U.K. and that the promotion literature specifically declared that it provided 'a detailed treatment of quantum electrodynamics'. I bought that book with the express purpose of seeing exactly how those who really understand QED actually obtain the wonderfully precise number that one understands fits so well with the value measured. In a browsing mood, I first opened the book on page 214 and was pleased to see that chapter 14 began with the words: "The spectacular success of quantum electrodynamics (QED) in calculating the Lamb shift and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron and the muon ...". Yes, that statement meant that what I was looking for would be found in the earlier chapters of the book. After all, here was a book on that very subject. I found the relevant section heading on page 140: 'The electron anomalous magnetic moment'. The opening words were: "In this section, we specialise to the case of QED (Abelion gauge theory) and derive the electron anomalous magnetic moment. For convenience we shall work in the Feynman gauge..." I was expecting then to see the analysis develop to the derivation of something very close to that 1.001159652193(10) number recited above, but, to my horror, the derivation ended on page 142 with the words: "Thus the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron AMM is: AMM = (/2)(e/2m)." Alpha, , is a fundamental constant in atomic physics, the fine-structure constant. I knew that this was only the first-order determination, being the reciprocal of /2(137.036), which is 0.0011614. Evidently the 'spectacular success' was not something I could verify by guidance from that book. I was expected to accept that QED was a 'spectacular success' but it was something I had to take on trust without knowing what assumptions were made in the onward iterations of the calculation.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
236
The book was, of course, full of equations, each one following the other and so conveying the impression of being 'a tight logical structure' but when the crunch came and a numerical result should have emerged I had to be satisfied with the above first-order approximation formula. From my academic background in engineering I had always judged the result of a 'tight logical structure' on the end result, by comparing the numerical value derived with that observed as an actual experimental result. I am now going to make the outrageous statement that QED is so powerful a technique that it is like taking a power-driven sledgehammer to crack a nut. There just has to be an easier way to explain how Nature determines that anomalous magnetic moment! A back-of-an-envelope type of calculation can do better than that QED result presented in the book by Bailin and Love. All that is meant by the anomaly of the electron magnetic moment is that the antics of an electron in motion cannot bring to bear the electric energy in the far field zone fast enough to affect its inertia when in orbit having a very restricted radius. There is a cut-off range connected with the electron's Compton wavelength and only the electric field energy within that range contributes to the electron's inertia in its state of minor orbital motion. This may be an engineer's way of looking at the problem, but it is a realistic approach. If what I have said above about the moving atom and its problems in collecting energy spread over its electromagnetic field is 'phantasy', then so the world of QED is phantasy of an extreme kind, because that goes even further by involving us in the problems of photon-electron interactions and something called 'normalization' to avoid infinities but which amounts to the 'cut-off' range just mentioned. So, I sit, in my aging years, watching the world of physics evolve its 'tight logical structure' and wonder if that world will ever look up my paper, 'Fundamental Constants derived from
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
237
Two-Dimensional Harmonic Oscillations in an Electrically-Structured Vacuum', Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 9, 315-323 (1986). That paper shows, in a few pages, how the electron's g/2-factor, can be explained with at least the same precision that is claimed for QED. The formula is: g/2 = 1 + /[2 (1+31/2/) ] Here, N is determined as the nearest prime number to the value 3/2. Since -1 is just a little above 137, N is 647. The table below is reproduced from that referenced paper to show how g/2 depends upon the value of -1.
(alpha)-1 137.03597 137.03598 137.03599
(g/2) factor 1.001159652365 1.001159652280 1.001159652195
Now, that paper of mine was received by the publishing journal in November 1985 and at that time I, the author, was completely unaware of the prospect that the CODATA values to be adopted later in 1986 would establish 1.001159652193(10) as the g/2-factor of the electron. Nor did I imagine that the -1 value adopted would be 137.0359895(61). What must then be absolutely clear to anyone reading this is the fact that if QED is a 'spectacularly successful' theory because it provides something very close to this relationship between the fine-structure constant and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, then it cannot be any closer than the value derived above using my very simple formula with N as 647.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
238
What I offer, however, is a 'back-of-the-envelope' type of analysis for deducing that formula, whereas the eighth-order calculation based on numerous, indeed thousands of, Feynman diagrams as well as arbitrary hadronic involvements, as needed to get a close QED value, is a task that could well keep the reader fully occupied for several years. That assumes the reader has very advanced skills in the relevant mathematics, skills far in excess of the school-level training which suffices to understand my method. As is well known, the electron exhibits a characteristic wave frequency, c, which is the Compton electron frequency. This is the frequency of the photon corresponding to the mass-energy of an electron at rest. Now, although Einstein may have said that the idea that something can be at 'rest' is meaningless, I do not accept that. You see, it is a question of deciding whether each electron in the universe is a law unto itself so far as external governing influences are concerned, or whether it is regulated by external influence. I can assure you that that Compton electron frequency is a universal regulating rhythm that beats the time and all electrons have to dance to that time. They are not free to wander, each having its own proper time, much as Einstein might have wished that to be the case! If you have read in books about 'time' that there is no such thing as 'universal time' then you have exposed yourself to a 'brainwashing' exercise conducted by devil authors who preach the Einstein doctrine but contribute nothing to the science which sustains technological progress. My method involves an energy cut-off range determined by a wave resonance in the near-field zone of the electron as shown in the figure below. The length of the radial lines in the outer cavity is half the Compton wavelength of the electron, because the field oscillations are phase-locked by the charge polarity condition. The length of the radial lines in the inner core of the electron charge is approximately the electron charge radius a and represents a standing wave condition of much higher frequency.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
239
Pattern of electron field cavity wave resonance Now, the electron itself is a form of energy compressed into a field and we can calculate how that energy is distributed. J. J. Thomson did that calculation in the 19th century to find that, in electrostatic units, the energy e2/2 was seated outside the charge radius . However, he discovered from the study of how electron mass increased with speed, even tending to become infinite as the speed of light was approached, that the effective rest mass of the electron was 2e2/3c2. This meant that, if the electron were hollow within the radius a, then we could write the energy E as being 3Mc2/4. However, even before Einstein came into the picture in 1905, the Cambridge cosmologist, Sir James Jeans had, in his early years before being knighted, explained that mass and energy are equivalent and had
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
240
argued that matter could be annihilated to produce radiant energy. He saw this as being the energy source feeding the sun and all other stars. It is a simple exercise to work out that if the pressure of the electron field at the radius a is the same within the body of the electron, meaning that the charge e has an appropriate distribution conforming with this condition, then the speed of propagation of wave disturbances in the electron charge itself has the value c and that the electric energy inside that radius is e2/6a. So, you see, the net result is an electron of energy 2e2/3a giving a relationship between energy and mass that we can write as E=Mc2. Much of this was accepted physics before Einstein appeared on the scene and was known as 'electron theory', so it is very hard to understand how modern physicists can write that history off as if it never happened! For our immediate purpose, we have now the basis for studying the coordinated wave interaction as between that external influence at the Compton electron frequency and the wavelengths associated with that radius parameter a of the electron. Looking now at the figure showing the pattern of the electrons field cavity resonance, ask yourself how the world outside the electron might interface with the world inside the core charge of the electron. If you think of pressure from the viewpoint of a gas then the interface is just a pressure interface and there is not much to say. However, a gas comprises numerous particles all moving in different directions. There are three degrees of freedom. However, inside that electron it may be that there are not numerous component particles behaving as a gas and moving with those three degrees of freedom. There could be an oscillation that has only one degree of freedom, amounting in its overall effect to a radial oscillation within the radius a. I emphasize here that I have no special insight into what goes on inside an electron. I can only make tentative assumptions and reason on that basis to see how what develops compares with what we see and measure in our experiments. So, I trust you are following the gist of my argument,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
241
because I am coming to the point that between the sphere of radius a and the sphere interfacing with those Compton frequency oscillations there is an adjustment at constant pressure in going from one degree of freedom to three degrees of freedom. What this amounts to is that the surface area of that intermediate interface will be three times the surface area of the inner interface. In short, the outer interface radius will be 31/2a, subject, however, to a little 'tuning'. Now, if this seems a little speculative, there is an alternative approach giving the equivalent result. Look again at the figure and imagine both the radial oscillations within the core charge of the electron and in the cavity excited at the Compton electron frequency as setting up standing wave antinodes needing to balance those of travelling waves progressing by reflection around a circuit within the middle cavity. You will see that the three-wave interface at the charge surface requires a 120o angular separation. The geometry of this system also requires the outer radius to be 31/2a. A vital consideration is what it is that tells an electron that it is a negative charge or a positive charge. I do not want to dwell too long on this point so I will simply explain that it is all a question of how those the two frequency modes of oscillation beat together. Undoubtedly, as those who may study the history of aether theory may discover, the answer lies in developing the concepts of C. A. Bjerknes of the period 1877 to 1910. Positive and negative are states involving oscillations in antiphase, all positive charges sharing a common phase and all negative charges sharing a common phase, but I leave that research to others. Suffice it here to say that the phase of oscillation is important. The Compton electron wavelength has to blend with the wavelength 2a, as the reader can work out from that pattern shown in the figure. The ratio of these wavelengths has to be an odd integer that cannot be factorized as that would allow the phase of the electron oscillations to have optional values in relation to the regulating
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
242
universal rhythm of the Compton frequency oscillations. All positive electron charges have the same phase and all negative electron charges have the same phase but positive and negative charges are different because they are in antiphase. This is the secret of the meaning of electrical charge polarity. It is just a question of phase, but there is phase-lock ensuring that there are no maverick charges in the electron family. There are only electrons or their positive versions, the positrons. It is on this basis that there is a constraint on the adoption of the distance parameter a as a wavelength. The wavelength (c) assumed by the resonant oscillation within the electron has to ensure that: (c)/2 = Na where N is a prime number. Now, from what has been said above, it can be seen that, since a without this constraint is given by 2e2/3hc, hc being the rest-mass energy of the electron and the Compton wavelength c being c/c, we can write as an approximation: a = (2e2/hc)c/3 From these two equations we find that N becomes the nearest prime integer to 3(137)/2, bearing in mind that , which is 2e2/hc, is approximately 1/137. This gives N, uniquely, as 647. The formula for g/2 is then easily explained because the field energy of the electron disposed outside the cut-off radius R is simply e2/2R and R is simply (c/2)(1+31/2/647). Using the formula: (g/2)(mc2 - e2/2R) = mc2 where m is the normal rest mass of the electron, and also the fact that c is h/mc, it then needs a little algebra to find the residual electron energy thereby effective in confined orbital states of motion. This allows us to determine its ratio to the normal energy applicable for translational motion but one then arrives at the result presented in table above.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
243
APPENDIX IV
Hydrogen as a Star
Stars are ionized. They comprise hydrogen atoms. They have sufficient mass for the force of gravity to squeeze those atoms close together. Their K-level electrons then crash into the electrons of adjacent atoms and so sustain the ionization. As a result the nucleus of the hydrogen atom, the proton, the seat of most of the mass present, can come free and be pulled inwards towards the centre of the star owing to gravity. The result is equilibrium when the electrostatic repulsion of the many protons involved balances the mutual gravitational attraction, not of those protons, but of the full atomic composition of the star that lies within the pressure threshold set by the critical contact between those electrons in the K-level of the atomic structure. The radius of the K-level electron orbits in hydrogen is known to be 5.292x10-9 cm and so, once the pressure reduces the distance between the nuclei of the adjacent hydrogen atoms to 1.0584x10-9 cm, then one can expect the ionization state, as produced by gravitational action and so the dynamic activity of the aether which accounts for that action, to develop in such a way as to give basis for the following formula relating charge density s and mass density m in the star: s = m (G) This is equation (8.12) in chapter 8. Our object here in this Appendix IV is to determine that mass density for hydrogen atoms having contact between their K-level electron orbits. For a simple cubic array of such atoms there is one hydrogen atom in every unit volume defined by the cube of that distance 1.0584x10-9 cm and, since a hydrogen atom has a mass of 1.67x10-24 gm, this corresponds
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
244
to a mass density of 1.41 gm/cc. This happens to be the mean mass density of the Sun. However, we need to justify that simple cubic structure, because most physicists will suggest that some close packing of the kind known to crystallographers will be more likely. To answer this I draw attention to the fact that our analysis of aether structure has already relied on a simple cubic structure of those quons that form the E frame of the aether. The reason there was that the quons repelled one another and sought to be as far apart as possible. The same could apply to hydrogen atoms squeezed close together, because each of those protons sitting at the atoms centre is screened by a single electron. This means that the protons, though 100% screened electrostatically, on average, will sporadically be exposed in the sense that they will, as it were, see the charge of the adjacent protons. In finding the optimum crystal structure they will, like the quons in the aether, then opt for the simple cubic array. That is my case in support of the argument that hydrogen stars will have a mean mass density of 1.41 gm/cc and the one star we can be sure about in determining its mass density is our sun, which has exactly that mass density of 1.41 gm/cc.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
245
APPENDIX V
The Angular Momentum of the Solar System

In the following table the parameters from which the angular momenta of the planets can be estimated are listed. To simplify the data the planetary orbits are deemed to be circular. The data are in Earth units, the mass, orbital radius and annual rate of revolution in orbit being taken as reference. The sun, with an estimated angular momentum, is included to facilitate summation. All the angular momenta are in the same direction as all planets rotate on the same sense as the sun rotates about its axis. Body Mass Orbit radius -----0.387 0.723 1.00 1.52 5.20 9.54 19.18 30.07 39.44 Years per revolution ----0.24 0.62 1.00 1.88 11.86 29.46 84.01 165 248 Angular momentum 20 approx. 0.03 0.69 1.00 0.135 724.6 294.1 63.5 94.3 0.69
Sun Mercury Venus Earth Mars Jupiter Saturn Uranus Neptune Pluto
332800 0.05 0.82 1.00 0.11 317.8 95.2 14.5 17.2 0.11
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
246
The total angular momentum of the solar system may be estimated by summing the last column. It is found to be about 1200 Earth units. The Earth mass is approximately 6.0x1027 gm and the Earths orbital radius is approximately 1.5x1013 cm. The Earth rotates in orbit through 2 radians in a year comprising 3.15x107 seconds. Thus one Earth unit of angular momentum is 2.7x1047 gm cm2/s. 1200 such units makes the total angular momentum (AM) of the solar system some 3.2x1050 gm cm2/s. If denotes the angular velocity of the sun at creation when its mass M was no doubt very much the same as its present value of 1.989x1033 gm and its radius R little different from its present value of 6.96x1010 cm, then based on its mass density being uniform, as has been deduced by reference to Appendix IV, then: (AM) = 2MR2/5 and: = 8.3x10-5 rad/s This is an empirical value based on data found by observation and measurement of our solar system. The fascinating achievement of the theory discussed in this work by reference to aether spin and Appendix IV is the value of indicated by equation (8.13) in chapter 8: = m (4G/o) which, since the term in brackets is known to be 5.39x10-5 rad/sec per gm/cc and since the mass density of the sun is 1.41 gm/cc, tells us, by theory alone, that the angular velocity of the suns aether at creation was 7.6x10-5 rad/s. This differs by less than 10% as a comparison between theory as applied to an event billions of years ago when the sun was created and the evidence before us today from the data we have about the solar system. A little speculation might then suggest that, since we have shown in chapter 8 why the suns aether has to have a greater radius than the sun itself, the suns aether at creation was locked into sharing the angular spin velocity of the sun itself, but
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
247
this came about before the sun had acquired its full inflow of mass and angular momentum. In then spinning faster than the G1/2 factor times 1.41 gm/cc allowed, the sun ceased to share its aether spin angular velocity and, lost all chance of recovering that spin-lock, once it traversed a space domain boundary and shed its planets. I am, of course, in these final words indulging here in speculation, but my object is to tempt readers to find better answers, all in the onward pursuit for truth in our research into Mother Natures realm of Creation. Aspiring students of cosmology might be interested in working out how stars cluster over time so that there can be several sharing a space domain, whereas over large expanses of space between galaxies there will be many space domains unoccupied by stars. One could conceive of two stars created with much the same mass as the sun, but yet are not created as a binary pair, moving under gravity in a common space domain and so being drawn together, either to form a new star of double the suns mass or settling into a stable dynamic system and forming such a binary star combination. With that and the fact that the above equation for does not depend upon stellar mass in mind, such a student might have his or her curiosity aroused upon reading the passage I now quote from P. M. S. Blacketts article in Nature, 159, 658-688 (1947): From statistical evidence on stars of similar type the probable values of these quantities (stellar mass, radius and angular velocity of rotation) in terms of the values for the sun are found to be: M = 2.3 R = 2.0 = 25. The message I read in that factor 25 is that most stars have escaped the experience of giving birth to planets. Maybe at creation they acquired more linear motion than did our sun and so they traversed their first and subsequent space boundary encounters at a
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
248
much higher speed, so that gravitational upheaval during transit had insufficient effect. That figure of 25, as referenced on our sun, clearly says that most stars of the same type as our sun exhibit a rotational speed of approximately once per day, given that the sun rotates once every 25 days. Our Earths once per day rate of rotation corresponds to an angular velocity of 7.27x10-5 rad/s. Is it not then quite fascinating to find that our theory for the creation of a star, as based only on our analysis of aether structure plus what we know about the hydrogen atom, tells us that stars at creation spin at 7.6x10-5 rad/s? Such analysis does not depend upon space domain size, though the latter, given that speed of rotation, does determine the mass of the star.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
249
APPENDIX VI The Hypotheses of Fechner and Einstein Readers will not be surprised to hear that upon reading through what I have written in this book about Creation, there are a couple of after-thoughts that warrant mention. Those who believe Einstein's theory will, no doubt, assume that my theory cannot explain the evidence of record deemed to support Einstein's hypothesis concerning 'time dilation'. Then there will be those who are a little bewildered by my reliance on Fechner's hypothesis to explain the electrodynamic action of electric current flow as arising from pairs of oppositely charged particles created in spaced relationship and then annihilating one another upon coming together by moving in opposite directions. Surprising though it may seem, there is scope for challenging Fechner's hypothesis constructively and thereby overcoming a problem that it poses, but in so doing one finds that the experimental evidence relied upon as proving 'time dilation' may become instead proof that supports the theory presented in this work. There is only one reported type of experiment which purports to support Einstein's 'time dilation' hypothesis. This is that indicating the enhanced lifetime of the muon as a function of its speed. I discount the idea that time dilation is inherent in Einstein's conception of distorted space as a valid means for explaining the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment as already discussed in chapter 9. Also one can dismiss the evidence arising from an experiment which involves transporting an atomic clock in an aircraft flying around the world to see if it loses time or gains time relative to an atomic clock sitting at the base location. Here the question one faces is whether speed or acceleration or both, being different for the flying clock and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
250
that at rest on body Earth, will affect the clock rate. You see, we are not here discussing time as such but are discussing an atom, meaning the change of energy states of electrons in motion around the atomic nucleus and this involves photons, the frequency of which depends upon energy, not time. The atomic clock rate is affected by change of gravitational potential and so altitude. It confuses the issue to imagine atomic clock rates as changing owing to so-called 'time dilation'. See the Section IV, 'Times Rates of Moving Clocks' of my paper: 'Synchronous Lattice Electrodynamics as an Alternative to Time Dilation, (Hadronic Journal, 10, 185-192; 1987). It is included as the fifth paper of the Appendix in my book Aether Science Papers. Now I must digress just a little before coming to the detail of the theory of dilated muon lifetime, as I now perceive it in the light of the derivation of the muon rest-mass lifetime, as presented in chapter 3 of this work. Imagine a lamp that runs on electricity from an electrically charged cell, a battery. It has a certain illumination lifetime, its light going out once the electric charge from that battery is all shed. Now imagine that the lamp is taken on a long journey accompanied by lots of charged cells. The lamp will glow for a longer period proportional to the number of cells and their total electric charge. Now, if you assembled such a device and observed the enhanced illumination lifetime of that travelling lamp, I believe you would think it a joke if someone said to you: "Ah yes, here is the evidence I have been seeking concerning Einstein's theory. You have proved that Einstein was right when he conceived the notion of 'time dilation'. Time itself really does alter its rhythm and extend itself, the faster the speed of the object under observation." However, the comment may not seem quite so ridiculous if what you were observing was something rather elusive as seen in the microcosmic world within a high energy particle accelerator at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland. Physicists probing the darkness of the unknown by getting fundamental particles to move at very high speeds
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
251
are more closely tuned to think in terms of Einstein's theory than theory at the basic electrician level, and so, upon seeing something that lives longer, as its speed approaches that of light, Einstein's time dilation formula comes immediately to mind. What they saw in that accelerator was a system comprising many muons, a muon being a charged electric particle that, apart from its much greater mass, has features resembling the electron, but those physicists had no idea why those muons had a fleeting existence as, once created, they survive for a brief period only and then all that is left is electrons, albeit moving at high speed owing to the energy shed by the parent muon. It is a great mystery as to how the muon comes into existence and the best reason I can offer is that it already exists everywhere in space and reveals itself as matter only when it (a) takes up position in the dynamic aether lattice and shares the rhythmic motion of that lattice rather than having the random motion in the aether underworld and (b) somehow attracts and becomes attached to two electrons or positrons and adjusts its resonant state in the manner I have described in my paper: The Muon g-Factor by Cavity Resonance Theory, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, v. 39, 271 (1984). In saying it exists everywhere I am merely echoing the message of chapter 3 entitled 'The Ubiquitous Muon'. However, as to the electron itself, you may wonder how that is created. We have seen in chapter 4 the theory explaining how the proton is created from muons and we know from experiment that muons in matter form can decay into electrons or positrons, but surely that might only mean that the muon has shed its hangers-on. We are left with the puzzle of how, in theory, electrons are created. Well, I cannot answer that, except for noting that our theory in chapter 6 has explained how the photon is created in a space medium that has a characteristic frequency, that universal rhythm of space that leads us to the dynamics of gravitation by connecting the mass of matter with the gravitons. Surely the fact that a photon having that characteristic frequency defines an energy quantum which is precisely that of the electron rest-mass, is the clue
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
252
by which to solve the puzzle. One is merely left with a chicken-and egg type of problem, as to whether the electrons are created ab initio and somehow then regulate the oscillations of the underworld of space or whether the universal oscillations and ordered structure of space set in first and so determine the form of the electron. Here we will confine our attention to the question of the muon and its extended lifetime at speed as determined by those experiments at CERN. Yes, indeed, particle physicists could measure the lifetime of the muon just as an electrician can time the illumination of that lamp mentioned above, and they even found that, the faster the muon travelled, the greater its lifetime in proportion to its overall energy, including its rest-mass energy. Yet somehow they missed seeing how, just as for that lamp, the muon in motion needs an entourage of energy cells which is greater in number, the greater that speed. They were well aware that Einstein had, some 65 years earlier, supposed that the dimension of time is woven into the fabric of space, a fabric which can be stretched and twisted, with the result that space can be curved (whatever that means in non-mathematical terms) and time can be dilated (whatever that means in non-mathematical terms). So, when the muon at speed was found by experiment to have a longer lifetime, one proportional to its increase in energy, that was said to be 'proof' that Einstein's theory was right. Quoting the very words used at page 62 in the paper by Bailey and Picasso (Progress in Nuclear Physics, v. 12, Part 1, pp. 43-75; 1970): 'To conclude, the CERN Muon Storage Ring group has proved that the "clock paradox" is established as an experimental fact (at the level of approximately 1.2%).' Well, enough of this, the task here, after some further 33 years from the publication of that paper, is to explain the extension of muon lifetime to those of you who prefer to live in the same three-space dimensional world as those of pre-Einstein times.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
253
Firstly, you must understand what governs the lifetime of the muon at rest. As we saw in the latter part of chapter 3 it was determined by the simultaneous hit of the two electrons or positrons (those hangers-on to the muon in its matter form) by two virtual muons from the aether background medium. Secondly, you must understand that when that muon moves it acquires kinetic energy which takes the form of an accompaniment of muon charge pairs borrowed as needed from that aether background medium. Their presence is transient and regulated by statistical factors subject to the overriding control parameter, the energy momentum of the system. In a sense the muon, being a lepton can be part of a charge system in which pairs of opposite charges are constantly being created in the forward field followed by their decay, but ever subject to the need to preserve energy. Inevitably, however, the ultimate decay event occurs and the muon suffers demise as its energy disperses with the creation of a residual electron or positron. A point of importance here is that the muon that we see as matter has somehow been conditioned to have a core mass that is an odd integer multiple, 207, times that of the electron, whereas by its coupling with two electrons or positrons it adds a mass of two electron units as offset by approximately 2.25 such units owing to the negative electrostatic interaction energy of this combination. [See the author's paper: The Nature of the Muon, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, v. 37, 210 (1983)]. In contrast the virtual muons that become associated in pairs and add kinetic energy to the muon when it moves at speed have a mass-energy that is 206.3329 units of electron rest-mass energy. So, there are two kinds of core muons present, the primary 207 form and the virtual -206.33 form. The muon lifetime is determined by virtual muon hits arising from the quantum electrodynamic fluctuations of the energy represented by the 'ubiquitous' muon field. A single virtual muon hit of a target electron or positron, which occurs some 107 more often than a dual muon hit, will merely rupture the composite three-charge
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
254
muon in a transient sense and cause the electron or positron pair to resettle with a muon. However, there can be charge inversion in this process, by which it is meant that a positive muon and an electron in contact can exchange energy to become a negative muon and a positron. In any event there is an equal chance of the resettling electrons or positrons adopting any one of the residual muons as the core muon, whether it be a muon of the 207 form or one of the 206.33 form. The result of this is that when the eventual dual hit occurs, if that event is for a composite muon form having the 207 muon as a core then that means muon decay, but, if that dual hit has as target the composite muon with a 206.33 muon core, then that merely frees a virtual muon which can find a partner in the virtual muon field and recycle its existence as part of the quantum-electrodynamic activity. The 207 muon is the misfit and it cannot survive this event and so combines with one of its associated electrons or positrons to decay and shed energy to the aether, the neutrino process, whilst freeing the other electron or positron which takes with it its substantial share of the energy released as the decay product of the muon. One can then understand why it is that the chance of muon decay in relation to the decay lifetime of its rest-mass state is diminished in inverse proportion to the ratio of overall energy to muon rest-mass energy. This latter ratio is the total statistical number of those muons, virtual plus primary, to the primary muon component. This is why the CERN experiment involving many thousands of muons moving at speeds which increased their mass more than twenty fold did reveal evidence of the so-called time dilation of the muon. All that the experiment proved was that the 'genie in the lamp' was spreading its influence equal amongst all the energy components of the system, thereby sustaining their energy state for a longer period in proportion to the energy present. The above discussion has concerned the muon and attributed its kinetic energy to its accompaniment in motion by the statistical
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
255
presence of virtual muon pairs. The so-called relativistic mass increase of the muon arises from the mass added by the presence of those virtual muons. The electron, therefore, ought to conform in the same way, by having an induced electron-positron accompaniment and one can assume that it too would have an extended lifetime at high speed, matching its increased energy, if such a lifetime were to be recognized as something we can measure. Apart from the inference to be drawn from electron tunnelling through potential barriers, however, the electron's lifetime is elusive, because the decay does nothing other than recreate the lowest form of matter, the electron. The question of interest then is whether the electron moving as a carrier of electric current is accompanied solely by other electrons or whether they share the task of conveying current with a flow of positrons moving in the opposite direction. This brings us to that problem posed by Fechner's hypothesis. I know it is easy to say that the electrons will annihilate the positrons but it is equally easy to say that, if the current circuit element they represent is suddenly switched off, so electromagnetic inductance will respond to set up a pulse of EMF which creates another such current element by a quantumelectrodynamic process involving electron-positron creation. Such a debate can lead nowhere, but there is an interesting history pertaining to this problem, albeit going back many years before the electron was discovered by J. J. Thomson. One may refer to pages 201 to 208 of volume 1 of a book written by Sir Edmund Whittaker entitled: History of the Theories of aether and Electricity, published by Thomas Nelson and Son Ltd in 1951. After referring to Fechner (1845) and a similar hypothesis posed by Weber (1846) and then discussing these in some depth, Whittaker on page 206 states: "It has been shown (reference to H. Lorberg, Journal f. Math. lxxiv, p. 305; 1878), indeed, that the assumption of opposite electricities moving with equal and opposite velocities in a circuit is almost inevitable in any theory of
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
256
the type of Weber's, so long as the mutual action of two charges is assumed to depend only upon their relative (as opposed to their absolute) motion." Now, here I must confess that, even up to the stage where I had written chapter 9 of this book, being well satisfied at having derived the relative velocity formula from first principle analysby starting from time differentiation of energy according to Coulomb's law [equation (9.2)], I was content to move on by relying on the assumption just mentioned (Fechner's hypothesis) to come to the derivation of the Neumann Potential. This was a logical step given my knowledge of what Sir Edmund Whittaker had written. Also I can see that I may have brushed over an important issue by talking about electron-positron pairs or muon pairs having a 'statistical' presence in accounting for kinetic energy. For some reason, however, while relaxing on vacation after having compiled the first draft of this book The Physics of Creation, I began to wonder about the Fechner hypothesis and what the analysis would reveal if those two 'opposite electricities' moved with opposite velocities at different speeds. To my great surprise, the analysis now to be presented at the end of this Appendix proved that the same result would be obtained whatever the difference in speed magnitude of the two oppositelycharged electric particles. Indeed, one of those particles could be at rest. The essential point, however, is that, for every unit charge of one polarity in motion there has to be another unit charge of opposite polarity at rest, which assures us that the flow of electrons in a conductor can suffice to set up the Neumann Potential, provided there is an atom somewhere in that conductor that is left positively ionized by having shed that electron. Such a result challenges that conclusion above quoted by Whittaker. However, it puts in issue the very basis on which I have just explained the enhanced lifetime of the muon, given the well-known analogy between of the physical properties of muons and electrons. My theory seems to require kinetic energy to be
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
257
that of a neutral presence of a statistical population of leptons which share the motion of a particle. Subject to statistical constraint, a moving electron must then have its kinetic energy linked to the presence of electrons and positrons. The electrodynamic action arising from an electron discharge across a gap between an anode and an earthed cathode cannot have kinetic energy solely represented by the rest-mass energy of induced electrons as that would mean kinetic energy itself has electric charge separate from the primary charge. Enlightenment on this issue comes, however, from that derivation of the formula E = Mc2 in Appendix II. In conserving energy as it is accelerated the primary charge will necessarily contract in radius because the Thomson formula for the electron requires energy to be inversely proportional to charge radius. Collectively with the presence of numerous other such moving electrons this contraction will make space available for occupancy by electron-positron pairs created by absorbing some of that energy. However, when the energy of the electron reaches the threshold value of three times the rest-mass value, the electron can revert to its original form by creation of an electron-positron pair. Such a transition does not involve a major energy fluctuation and the notion of a 'statistical' presence of such charge pairs merely implies that energy is used, as it were, in climbing a staircase, two units at a time with the energy intermediate the steps being stored by contraction of the primary electron. For energy to increase with speed with net electric charge constant, such a scenario apportioning energy as between the contracted state of the primary electron and the transient presence of induced lepton charge pairs, seems essential if the muon analogy is to hold up and muon lifetime enhancement at speed is to conform with the theory already presented. This will, however, pose a question as to whether that lifetime might exhibit a pattern of change in steps corresponding to each stage of charge pair creation or decay. On the other hand one can be confident that electrons carrying current in wire conductors and having kinetic energies far below those needed to trigger electron-positron pair
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
258
creation will perform as required by the Neumann Potential but the equal presence of their counterpart opposite charges, albeit nonmoving, is essential. In any ongoing debate of this subject one needs to keep in mind is that experimental data concerning lepton mass increase at high speed invariably concerns numerous such particles all moving together at the same speed. Under such conditions the lepton-pair created in measure related to kinetic energy can share that function amongst many primary particles, thereby reducing overall energy fluctuation to a minimum. The essential point I do wish to stress is that, if muon lifetimes exhibit what has been assumed to be 'time dilation' and conform with the mass-increase formula, as by my theory based on the kinetic energy being vested in the existence of muon charges paired by opposite polarity, then the analogy between electrons and muons suggests that electron-positron charge pairs must feature in electron current activity. Accordingly, notwithstanding Fechner's hypothesis having been put in doubt, I see that in exploring that problem I have strengthened my case for the derivation of the Neumann Potential based on Coulomb's Law, not to mention the other consequence, the dismissal of Einstein's notion of 'time dilation' as being irrelevant to the physics governing muon lifetime. The analysis mentioned above now follows. The Fechner hypothesis requires electrodynamically-interacting charges Q and q moving at velocities V and v, respectively, to be that of charges + Q and - Q, moving at velocities V/2 and - V/2, respectively, interacting with charges + q and - q, moving at velocities v/2 and - v/2, respectively. We now adopt the more general hypothesis that the interaction is between such opposite pairs of charges, moving respectively at +V1 and - V2 and at +v1 and - v2 , where: and: V = V1 + V2 v = v1 + v2
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
259
The four components, based on the energy potential formula (9.6), now have a U2 term which has the value: (V1 - v1)2 - (V1 + v2)2 - (-V2 - v1)2 + (-V2 + v1)2 which reduces, in magnitude, to: 2[(V1.v1) + (V1.v2) + (V2.v1) + (V2.v1)] which, in turn, contracts to: 2(V1 + V2).(v1 + v2) = 2(V.v) This is precisely the expression obtained by analysis based on the Fechner hypothesis, leading to the force term (9.8): 2Qq(V.v)/R2c2 which, as a negative quantity, becomes a positive energy potential when integrated with respect to R from R to infinity. This energy potential is: 2Qq(V.v)/Rc2 which, as before, is double the Neumann Potential, again bringing into focus the need to accept that the field medium of the aether reacts diamagnetically to halve magnetic action, thereby giving physical foundation for the gyromagnetic anomaly factor of 2.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
260
APPENDIX VII Einstein and 100 Years of Wisdom Physicists will soon be celebrating the centenary of the birth of Einsteins Special Theory of Relativity and as news of such an event reaches the general public via the media, there may be those who ask what is meant by its underlying principle of relativity. In Einsteins own words it is: A generalisation when we express the tenet thus: If, relative to one Galilean co-ordinate reference system, another Galilean co-ordinate reference system is a uniformly moving co-ordinate system devoid of rotation, then natural phenomena run their course with respect to the second co-ordinate system according to exactly the same general laws as with respect to the first co-ordinate system. This statement is called the principle of relativity. I think I know what this means but I doubt if there are many, even of the physics community, who really care as to its meaning. After all, it adds up to saying that whatever happens in the scientific and technological arena today will, if we repeat whatever we did to make that happen, have the same result tomorrow, even though we and our Earth have moved on through the cosmic background. However, I know that there will be those of you who question this because our frame of reference, Earth, is itself rotating. So it really is impossible here on Earth to test what Einstein claims as a principle unless we can stop the Earth from rotating. Alternatively, we could go off in a spacecraft equipped with sensors and controls that preclude any
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
261
rotation. However, Einstein did not do that, nor could he 100 years ago. There is also scope for misunderstanding because, in a sense, Einsteins wording is somewhat ambiguous. He refers to two frames of reference and natural phenomena, but there is doubt here as to whether the principle refers to a specific phenomenon or, rather, physical event or whether what is implied is physical phenomena in general. As an example of what I mean, consider the mechanics of a ball bouncing from a surface. The principles of motion governing that bouncing ball are, by one interpretation, the same if studied from the perspective of either reference frame. But if we think of two observers one in each of those two frames are we to understand that from their individual perspectives, looking at the same ball, their assessment of the physics governing the motion will be exactly the same? On this latter interpretation the principle of relativity would fail because, should the ball bounce from a surface in that second reference frame with a certain velocity relative to that surface and that frame be moving at the same velocity relative to the first reference frame, one observer would see the ball bounce and the other would see it stop on impact. On the first interpretation Einstein was on safe ground in postulating the so-called principle, subject to limiting conditions, because, relying on the teachings of classical mechanics and Isaac Newton, it is a direct consequence of the physical laws governing what happens in the mechanical world. Einstein was aware of this limitation, but claimed his notoriety by venturing beyond that boundary and asking us to accept the principle without such a restriction. On this he declared, after saying that in regard to classical mechanics there was no need to doubt the validity of this principle of relativity,: in view of the more recent development of electrodynamics and optics it became more evident that
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
262
classical mechanics affords an insufficient foundation for the physical interpretation of all natural phenomena. At this juncture the question of the validity of the principle of relativity became ripe for discussion, and it did not appear impossible that the answer to this question might be in the negative. So, you see, here was Einstein himself weighing the validity of his principle as a matter of probability, another word for uncertainty, owing to the physical phenomena that we encounter in electrodynamics, the motion and interaction of electric charges, rather than the physical phenomena that pertain to electrically neutral matter. A point of interest here is that electrodynamics and electromagnetic waves (light) require an electromagnetic frame of reference, whereas mechanics requires an inertial frame of reference and there is an implicit distinction between these akin to the distinction between v and dv/dt, velocity and acceleration. Indeed, one might ask what Einstein had in mind as a basis for that qualifying remark in the last sentence of the above quotation. He does not reveal that. Instead he moves on by declaring that there are two general facts which favour the validity of the principle of relativity. Here that word favour has its implication, given that, in physics, one is expected to prove a proposition rather than judge its merits by speculating on chance. As to the first of these facts, judge for yourself whether what he declares can be regarded as fact: The principle of relativity must apply with great accuracy in the domain of mechanics. But that a principle of such broad generality should hold with such exactness in one domain of phenomena, and yet should be invalid for another, is a priori not very probable.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
263
That is a factual statement in a semantic sense but far from logical in a scientific context. As to his other fact, this is one he develops by reference to observations made from railway carriages moving relative to an embankment, a mechanical scenario, but one he sums up by saying that: In virtue of its motion round the sun, our Earth is comparable with a railway carriage travelling with a velocity of about 30 kilometres per second. If the principle of relativity were not valid we should therefore expect that the direction of motion of the Earth at any moment would enter into the laws of nature. Even though the theme so far was based essentially on what one could describe as mechanics, Einstein then rests his case by declaring that our observations on body Earth have never revealed such anisotropic properties of terrestrial physical space and that This is a very powerful argument in favour of the principle of relativity. Now, of course, if aware of the famous experiment performed by Michelson and Morley one cannot fail to see that Einstein invented his principle of relativity expressly as a way of justifying the observation that the speed of light reflected by mirrors is the same as the speed of light incident upon those mirrors, notwithstanding our Earths motion through space. However, there are amongst us those, including myself, who cannot accept the way in which Einstein brushes aside that reference to electrodynamics. The reason is very simple. It amounts to saying that we do not belong to a non-rotating world to which that principle enunciated by Einstein applies but recognizing that, as with that space craft or even in an Earth laboratory for the brief period needed for the test, we could create a non-rotating test laboratory in which to prove or disprove Einsteins principle of relativity.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
264
On such a basis, that of electrodynamic interaction between electric charge in motion, one surely needs to challenge Einsteins doctrine. I tried some 50 years ago, half a century after the birth of Einsteins theory, only to be ignored but yet emerge from the fray with the knowledge on which this work is based. The physics community is not open to persuasion on this issue, possibly because no one is willing to pass judgement on a subject that they do not understand but assume is understood by their peers and so they stay aloof in their ignorance. That said, I will now explain why I have been motivated to write this Appendix to The Physics of Creation. Its first draft edition was completed in April 2003. It was shortly thereafter that I received a letter dated 15 May 2003 from a stranger to me, a person named S. I. Wells having an address in California, who explained that he had referenced a paper of mine in his own paper entitled Magnetic Interaction Reconsidered, that he had submitted to the American Journal of Physics for publication. It was rejected but the referee comments had implied that the latter portion of the paper posed a puzzle that warranted publication and so resubmission was encouraged. In the event this latter submission was then rejected without consideration on the grounds that we no longer have a Questions & Answers section and thus will not be accepting your manuscript for publication. Now, to me, this is, as they say, par for the course - thou shalt not challenge Einstein! So, what was it that Wells had offered for publication? It was brief but concise. After pointing out that special relativity was developed to preserve the equations of electrodynamics in all inertial frames, which makes it imperative that the principle of relativity applies in all possible situations, Wells draws attention to a seeming paradox. He refers to two equal and like polarity electric charges separated by a straight, rigid and insulated rod, when viewed (a) in the rest frame of the rod and (b) in and relative to a laboratory frame which is in uniform relative motion in any direction neither
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
265
parallel nor perpendicular to the rod. Every physicist should be sufficiently familiar with standard theory governing how charge in motion produces a magnetic field and how that field exerts force on another moving charge, which means that he or she can easily verify that an observer in that rest frame will see that rod at rest, whereas an observer in that moving laboratory frame will see the same rod as subject to a torque which will cause it to turn to alter its orientation in space. So, Einstein says that the rod cannot turn, but standard physics as taught universally says it will turn. Yet the American Journal of Physics, the major U.S. periodical for those who teach physics, decline to publish this observation. One does not have to be a genius to stumble across this crack in the theory of relativity, a system which some refer to as The Einstein Myth, but one must wonder about the integrity of our scientific world, given this situation. I was well aware of this paradox during my university research years over half a century ago, but my research discipline was the electrodynamics that govern the magnetic properties and energy anomalies found in steel as used in electrical power transformers. Challenging Einsteins philosophy was not on my career agenda as a research student. Philosophy is for those who are already established and secure in their way of life. Yet I was intrigued in 1965 when I saw and purchased a newly published book by R. A. R. Tricker entitled Early Electrodynamics (Published by Pergamon Press). A topic similar to that raised by Wells is mentioned in the chapter entitled The Critics by reference to the opinions of H. G. Grassmann (1809-1877). The debate concerned Amperes electrodynamic force law, a law which is never used today but which, curiously enough would still not survive the test imposed by Einsteins principle of relativity. Grassmann pointed out that Amperes law would require the force acting between the two charges to be zero when their motion as
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
266
shared by the rod was inclined at a certain angle to the rod but change from an attraction to a repulsion as the rod turns around whilst having the same translational motion in the electromagnetic frame of reference. Concerning this Tricker states: For Grassmann this is too improbable to be acceptable. Grassmann can bring no experimental evidence whatever to support his view and there is not the slightest reason to suppose that nature was designed to satisfy the particular tastes of anybody. So you see, here is an author who expects proof by experiment, rather than argument based on taste and probability, but somehow Einsteins principle of relativity, which I see as unproven and as a mere philosophical notion, a matter of taste in the sense used above, has governed the progress of energy science (retarding it!) for a century. How can we emerge from this dilemma? The answer amounts to saying that all verifiable and proven electrodynamic technology as harnessed in our power industry is founded on electrodynamic action by electric charges flowing around closed circuits. The electrodynamic law used involves integration of action around such closed paths. Any differences in assumptions concerning those laws can only be tested by experiments involving interaction of electric charges that exhibit properties characteristic of an isolated state that is not smeared into the action of a uniform current flow around a closed circuit. The dipole rod experiment implicit in the argument posed by Wells, if performed, would be such a test, but other such tests are those based on plasma discharges where the charge carriers have different charge/mass ratios and opposite charge polarity. This is the realm of energy anomalies that promise to tap energy from the space environment, as touched upon at the end of chapter 9 of this work.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
267
Einsteins theory has obstructed progress in this field of technology by making it appear that all was well with our understanding of electrodynamics, whereas there are unanswered questions such as that posed by the paradox raised by Wells here in this 21st century, by me in the 20th century, as chapter 9 has shown, and by Grassmann in the 19th century. If only Einstein had conceived his principle in more general physical terms, as opposed to its restricted form! After all, a Galilean system of co-ordinates is an inertial system and one is thereby locked into the physical constraints that accompany inertia. By general here I do not mean the extension adopted by Einstein in moving from his Special Theory of Relativity to his General Theory of Relativity. I will reword Einsteins statement as to the principle of relativity to show you what I mean: Space is a co-ordinate reference system having the electrical properties of a fluid medium in which a kind of crystal structure can form to define such a frame of reference. That crystal structure adapts to the presence of material bodies, locking onto atomic structure, and so shares the motion of such bodies but can dissolve as necessary to merge with the fluid before re-emerging as new structure. If, relative to one such co-ordinate reference system, another such co-ordinate reference system is a uniformly moving co-ordinate system devoid of rotation, then natural phenomena run their course with respect to the second co-ordinate system according to exactly the same general laws as with respect to the first co-ordinate system, but such phenomena are governed only by the local co-ordinate system, a constraint particularly evident in electromagnetic action which takes the local co-ordinate system as its sole frame of reference.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
268
My message here is that Einstein relied on the Galilean coordinate reference system as an inertial frame of reference but should have based his theory on a system of reference that itself had the necessary physical properties to adapt to the local presence of matter. The notion of a universal aether medium gave a physical foundation but provided only one frame of reference, whereas an aether that provides multiple frames of reference nucleated locally by the presence of matter but not overlapping is what is needed. After a century of stubborn adherence to Einsteins doctrine it is unlikely that I shall, in my lifetime, see the physics community changing direction. I can but hope that what I now see as an ongoing quest to tap energy from the aether itself will trigger the reversal of opinion. As it is, however, I can but repeat the quotation that I presented on page 1 of my first publication on this subject, The Theory Gravitation , 1960. It was from pages 387-388 of a 1913 book by N. R. Campbell entitled: Modern Electrical Theory, (Cambridge University Press): If we speak of aethers and not the aether all our experiments prove is that the particular aether with which we are concerned in any case is that which is at rest relatively to the source and may be regarded as forming part of it. This is the simple way out of the difficulties posed by the Michelson-Morley experiment. If from the beginning we had used a plural instead of a singular word to denote the (aether) system .... those difficulties would never have appeared. There has never been a better example of the danger of being deceived by an arbitrary choice of terminology. However, physicists, not recognizing the gratuitous assumptions made in the use of the words the aether, adopted the second alternative; they introduced new assumptions.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
269
Having read these words, back in the year 1945, as a young university student, I was in no mood to be persuaded in Einsteins favour and, from then on could but study Einsteins theory with a critical eye and a desire to search for the truth as there to be found in the omnipresent aether. I was lucky to see a picture of the aether emerge as secondary spin-off from my theoretical efforts to understand the ferromagnetic properties of the atomic structure of iron. This book and its forerunners duly emerged and now, save for the point I make below, there is little more I can add. I hope a few readers will share my thoughts as we live through the Einstein centenary. That point is a reference to Einsteins technique of transformation, his theory not being one involving a simple and direct logical interpretation of his so-called principle of relativity. It seems that when looking at physical phenomena occurring in one Galilean co-ordinate frame whilst sitting in another such frame, albeit moving uniformly and without rotation relative to the first, one must put on a pair of spectacles having a special prescription. This is necessary in order to distort what one sees to make it conform by looking the same as it would in that first frame whereas in fact it is actually different. That prescription is expressed in mathematical four-dimensional terms, obliging one to perceive the time dimension as a fourth space dimension, a curious notion and best avoided, given that we seek the truths of the real world and not a fantasy world that is mere illusion. Reverting to that problem posed by Wells, as mentioned above, it could well be that a relativist wearing those spectacles formulated according to the mathematics of the Lorentz transformation might be able to avoid thinking there is any torque effect upon that electric dipole, but after close to 100 years one can but gasp and ask: Oh Lord, why have we allowed Einstein to distort our vision of the aether of your Creation?
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
270
INDEX
Aether 10 Aether cooling 126 Aether drift 133 Aether, mass density 73 Aether, plural forms 268 Aether, r/d factor 100 Aether, solid or fluid? 85 Aether spin 90, 139 Aether structure 96 Antimatter 90 Antiproton 51 Babcock 128 Bailey 38, 252 Bailin 235 Betelgeuse 157 Big bang 115 Black holes 115 Blackett 128 Buick 106 Bullard 154 Burton 25, 105 Campbell 268 Cardinal de Polignac 225 Carroll 171 Cavendish 3 Chadwick 172 Chandrasekhar 171 Charge continuum 15 Cheyne 222 Compton electron frequency 79 Continuum 15 Cook 207 Correa 217 Cosmic temperature 75, 133 Coulomb 3 Coulomb interaction 75 Creation, stars and planets 114 Curie temperature 126 Curvature of space 71 Cyclotron resonance 216 Deuteron 164 Dimuon 48 Dirac 79, 125, 230 Doppler effect 121 2 6, 230 E = Mc E-frame of aether 72 Eagles 25, 105, 155 Earnshaw 10 Earnshaw's theorem 10, 11 Earth, creation 145 Earth's magnetism, reversals 159 Eddington 24, 59, 84 Edison 208 Einstein 6, 59, 61, 80, 230, 249 Einstein, centenary 260 Einstein's law of gravitation 66 Electrodyamics, law 188 Electron, magnetic moment 234 Electron, half spin property 187 Electron theory 87
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
271
Electron lifetime 44 Electrron, cavity resoance 239 Energy exclusion zone 227 Expanding universe 121 Fara 222 Fechner 249 Fechner hypothesis 182 Feynman 36 Fine structure constant 24 Fluid crystal 11 Fock 71 Fomalont 59 Four-dimensional space 71 Franklin 3 Free energy 215 G-frame of aether 72 Galileo 226 Gauss 175 Gauss' theorem 81 General theory of relativity 59 Geomagnetism 150 Gerber 61 Grassmann 265 Gravitation constant 15 Gravitation, light deflection 63 Graviton 17 Graviton decay 199 Gyromagnetic ratio 124 Gyromagnetic reaction 183 H-quantum 20, 198 Hawking 226 Heaviside 7 Heisenberg 89, 210 Henderson 58 Hubble constant 26, 116 Hydrogen creation 199
Hydrogen star 243 Hyperon creation 54 Inertia 230 Interaction energy 227 Ionospheric aether 147 Japanese H-quantum 20, 198 Jeans 157 Jupiter 60, 74 Kaufmann 7 Kopeikin 59 Larmor 230 Lattice particles 100 Lattice particles 18 Law of gravity 57 Lifetime dilation 38 Lorberg 255 Lorentz 188 Love 36, 235 Mach's principle 134 Magnetic domains 125 Maxwell 91, 120, 210 McNeall 105 Mercury 61 Meson creation 53 Methernitha 209 Meyer 218 Michell 3 Michelson-Morley 86, 192 Millikan 4 Moon, creation 145 Moon, David 201 Moray 208 Mu-meson 20 Muon, lifetime dilation 252 Muon g-factor 39 Muon/electron mass ratio 37
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
272
Muon lifetime 35 Muon 20, 23, 30 N factor 23 N evaluation 106 Nanjo 198 Narlikar 134 Neumann potential 180 Neutron 163 Neutron lifetime 44 Neutron stars 116, 163 Neutron star, magnetic field 173 Newton 3, 125 Oppenheim 62 Ostlie 171 PAGD technology 216 Perihelion motion 63, 68 Petley 25, 105 Photon 64 Photon unit 94 Photon theory 89 Picasso 38, 252 Pion lifetime 44 Planck 97 Planck's law 87 Planets, creation 144 Pledge 6 Prentice 202 Priestley 3 Proton creation 46 Proton/electron mass ratio 23 Quantum theory 59 Quantum electrodynamics 234 Quasar 60 Quon 34 Quon mass 98 Refractive index of space 71
Relativity, principle 260 Rowe 199 Schrodinger 26, 80 Schuster-Wilson hypothesis 127 Sciama 134 Scott 12 Searle 7 Seelinger 62 Solar system 245 Space domains 90, 126, 132 Speed of light 64 Speed of gravity 57 Spence 216 Star, mass density 141 Star's angular momentum 137 Steiner 160 Sun, gravitational potential 133 Sun, bending of light 68 Sun's energy 124 Superconductivity 198 Supergraviton 166 Supernova 162 Takana 198 Taon 48 Taon mass 53 Tarling 158 Tau lepton 20, 24 Tau particle, lifetime 202 Tesla 208 Thesta-Distatica 209 Thomson 4, 125 Thomson electron 5 Time dilation 250 Tricker 265 Triton 164 Tutt 209
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
273
Uncertainty Principle Units Vacuum spin Van Leeuven Veronnet Water fuel cell Watson
89 2 203 185 210 218 67
Weber Wells Whetham Whittaker Will Wilson Yates
255 264 6 255 77 67, 127 208
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
THE PHYSICS OF PERPETUAL MOTION

HAROLD ASPDEN, 2004
HAROLD ASPDEN Energy Science Ltd P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB England INTRODUCTION Although scientists in general regard the notion of perpetual motion as being too absurd to contemplate, if we exercise a little common sense based on what those same scientists teach, then perpetual motion is a reality. Once the science student learns that atoms consist of an electrically charged nucleus about which electrons are kept in sustained motion thanks to their interplay with the quantum underworld, that which determines their orbital distance from the nucleus and the angular momentum of their motion, he or she has been introduced to perpetual motion. Every atom whether in us or in surrounding matter embodies the proof that perpetual motion is a reality and stands as evidence showing that if those electrons shed energy as by radiation then somehow that enveloping quantum underworld that we used to call the aether has a way of feeding in energy as needed to sustain that motion. The aether is therefore an energy source and the challenge we face is how to tap into that source before we become wholly dependent upon rain and wind, the sources that provide hydroelectric power and power from windmills. AN INVENTION An historical feature of patent law denies the grant of patents for what are seen by the Patent Examiner to be perpetual motion machines. Wheels that turn for no apparent reason are outlawed. Thus I was not surprised upon reading a short account of the Borman Permanent Magnet Motor that appeared at pp. 22-23 of the December 2003 issue of Space Energy Journal. It explains how, in 1954, an Electrical Engineer named Carl C. Lienau on a visit to California witnessed Lee Bormans motor in operation and was duly impressed. No electric power was supplied to drive the assembly, a set of 8 Alnico magnets mounted on a central rotor disc coupled by a non-slip pulley drive to two smaller rotor discs, each carrying four Alnico magnets, rotating at twice the speed in the opposite direction. The axes of the cylindrical magnets were parallel to the rotor axes and the arrangement was such that, at diametrically opposite positions near the rim of the central rotor disc, pairs of magnets would have a passing face-to-face encounter 8 times per revolution. This means that the powerful magnetic flux of the overlapping magnets would experience a substantial pulsation and, Alnico being a metal alloy that has the high conductivity property of metal, the spin of the magnets at their rotor frequency means that a radial EMF is induced in each magnet, thereby, owing to conduction, displacing a substantial measure of electric charge from the core of the magnet to its cylindrical surface. Then, because that flux pulsation implies pulsating charge deployment, this can be seen as a recipe for importing energy steadily from the aether, as I will explain below after quoting a few words from that account in Space Energy Journal: The machine continued to rotate for 15 minutes before Bowman terminated the operation and inspection by Mr. Lienau, who was much impressed and unable to account for the phenomenon. It is understood that Bowman had applied to patent the device, but was refused because the Patent Office considered it an unpatentable perpetual motion machine. ..... At the time of the demonstration Bowman was 75 years old. He decided, according to one report to have his
device taken apart and after his death to have the parts buried in different locations in California. This was a sad ending, bearing in mind that the Patent Office exists to aid the advance of technology for the benefit of mankind. AN OBSERVATION On the question of energy being fed to us from the aether, one must wonder why scientists have missed something that is so obvious once it is pointed out. Again it is thanks to our discovering that the hydrogen atom has a heavy positively charged nucleus around which a negatively charged electron has motion sustained by a quantum interplay with something hidden in space that we have insight into one of the great mysteries of Nature - the Suns energy source. Just because we discovered that the fusion of hydrogen atoms triggered, one assumes, by temperatures in excess of 100,000,000 degrees can release vast amounts of energy in forming heavier atoms, that does not mean that the Sun is a nuclear furnace. Surely, we should learn something from the teachings of quantum theory dating back some 97 years when Neils Bohr led us to accept that those electrons in hydrogen move in orbit at a radius of 5.29x10-11 cm about the proton nucleus. From this we know for sure that when gravity compacts hydrogen atoms tightly together to reach a mass density of 1.41 gm/cc, based on one atom per cube of side distance equal to the diameter of those orbits, then electrons of adjacent atoms will collide and there will be ionization and so energy radiation. That happens to be the average mass density of the Sun, a telling point! What it really tells us is that, because two free protons are pulled together by gravity at an acceleration rate that is 1836 (the proton/electron mass ratio) times the corresponding action between two electrons then so there will be more protons than electrons inside the body of the Sun, enough to set up a positive core charge and assure equilibrium and uniformity by balance of gravitation attraction and electrostatic repulsion within the body of the Sun. So you see, we look at a Sun that radiates energy owing to those electrons colliding and sustaining its capacity to radiate thanks to the quantum underworld of space, the aether, replenishing the energy to get those electrons back into their Bohr quantized state of motion once they are recaptured by a free proton to reform the hydrogen atom. Really, before we pretend that the Sun owes its energy source to it being a fusion reactor, somehow controlled and not being an unstable hydrogen bomb, we should explain why it does not conform, as explained above in the introduction, with the same physics that governs the atoms that make up our body form. Also, and bearing in mind that the Sun exhibits a magnetic moment as if it were itself a magnet, and further, owing to its ionization, is an electrically conductive medium, do we not see something in common as between the Borman perpetual motion machine and the Sun itself, namely the mystery of their sustained source of energy? ANOTHER INVENTION This brings me to the main message of this contribution. Being professionally skilled in securing the grant of patents in the electro-technological field, I well know how to navigate a patent application to avoid confrontation such as posed by the perpetual motion machine objection. One merely describes what one builds or aims to build and avoid assertion as to how it performs. Even with the Borman machine, set running by an initial manually applied torque, if given enough push to overcome the cogging action of the magnets, plus some, it can be
expected to run under its own inertia for a few moments. It could be argued that it demonstrates something useful, if only as an education tool in the realm of magnetism, and, being a machine and something one can manufacture, it is, if new and not obvious, proper subject matter for a patent. Once the patent is granted it surely could not then be invalidated on the basis that what it covers really is a machine that surprises us by running without power input. At least it would be a fascinating law case for an infringer who sells a workable perpetual motion machine to then challenge the validity of the patent on the basis that it should never have been granted because the law says perpetual motion is impossible. Meanwhile, however, one must avoid the words perpetual motion in making patent applications, but I have to admit failure in dealing with the U.S. Patent Office in a patent application of my own, one concerned with cold fusion. I can but say that I erred in not realizing that the Patent Examiner involved would, in a sense, adopt his own version of the relevant law in regarding cold fusion as synonymous with perpetual motion and so unpatentable. I should not have used the expression cold fusion at a time when so much publicity and vested interest was involved in that realm of invention or, as I later found in securing grant of U.S. Patent No. .... , I should have avoided the problem by writing the specification as if it were directed at a applying technology concerned with thermoelectric power, rather than nuclear power so as to guide it into a different examining sector of the Patent Office. In spite of all this I am currently seeking the grant of a patent in U.K. which is more open in declaring its technical foundation in spite of its objective aimed at tapping energy from the aether and, as the specification has now been published prior to it being subjected to what in U.K. we call substantive examination, I present below the relevant sections of its text. I refer to Patent Application GB 2390941 A as published on January 21st 2004, its initial filing date being March 9th 2002, some three months before I was due to speak on the subject at an Energy Symposium held in Berlin in June of that year. As to the details of the invention claimed they can be inspected on the public record via ........... , my purpose here being to present the case by which I hope to justify the prospects for tapping energy from the aether as a matter of physics. Essentially, the apparatus involved is a combination of two capacitors having concentric cylindrical electrodes such as one finds in Leyden jars. The two inner electrodes are connected together and to a high voltage d.c. source, whereas the two outer electrodes are connected through a primary winding of a high frequency transformer, the winding being earthed at its centre and the secondary winding of the transformer delivering power output. The aim of the circuit design is to set up oscillations of electric charge as between the two capacitors so as to exploit the effect of the aether in enhancing capacitance upon capacitor discharge in comparison with the regular capacitance that applies during the charging stage, whereby excess energy tapped from the aether is delivered as output. The underlying physical principle involved is the same as that exploited, unknowingly one assumes, by the above-mentioned Lee Borman but, knowingly of course, by Mother Nature in creating the Sun and other stars. You must judge for yourself how likely this is, but after reading the remainder of this section which is now quoted verbatim from the Patent Specification: This invention relates to a new and non-conventional means for the generation of electrical power. The energy source is the quantum underworld of space, the aether medium of the vacuum state, long recognized for its ability to allow the storage of electric field energy by reacting as its intrinsic charge is displaced, a process understood by physicists by reference to the research findings of Clerk Maxwell. The current state of the art of electrical power generation does not recognize the possibility of ultimately tapping energy from the aether. Physics is taught on the basis that energy cannot be created or destroyed, inasmuch as it is conserved in all physical processes,
though it can be degraded in its usefulness, as by burning of hydrocarbons and conversion into heat which dissipates as by radiation into outer space. The aether as a source or as an absorber of energy is not deemed to serve any specific role in the physics of energy deployment, it having been dismissed from consideration by invoking the notion of field energy without admitting the specific physical reality of something in space that accounts for the properties involved. Theoretical physicists have, however, come to suspect that space devoid of matter is nevertheless a seething sea of activity subject to sporadic energy fluctuations which can create electron-positron pairs that exist momentarily before decaying back into their quantum underworld. Yet those same physicists deny all possibility that this energy resource of space itself can be exploited to provide useful power on a scale large enough to rival the role played by atomic power plants and fossil fuel generating installations. Curiously, they do subscribe to the belief that one day they may be able to generate power on a viable commercial scale from fusion reactors by processes replicating what they believe sustains the Suns heat output as hydrogen is transmuted into different atomic forms. In contrast with this rather elusive objective, it having proved beyond reach even after half a century of effort, this invention is based on success in generating power by replicating, not the Suns onward energy decay, but rather a process akin to that by which the Sun itself was created from energy drawn from the enveloping aether medium. The invention to be described below has emerged from an in-depth theoretical investigation into the properties of the aether and quite independently of any of the well known claims of published record which feature at the fringe of mainstream scientific literature. A recent and very well presented account of what amounts to a century of relevant energy history is the book The Search for Free Energy by Keith Tutt, published in 2001 by Simon & Schuster (ISBN 0-684-86660-9). Here in this book is a comprehensive background of information concerning the energy devices of several researchers but the references to Nikola Tesla and T. Henry Moray are particularly pertinent to the subject of this invention and, though imposing a limitation on what can be legitimately claimed by this patent application, they serve also as a basis for a very important lesson to those engaging in this field of invention. The lesson is that it is not sufficient to build and demonstrate something that works, if you do not fully understand why what you have devised actually does work. This is especially the case here where one is claiming a source of energy hitherto unknown. The invention to be described below will, in its broadest sense, appear to be quite similar to what Henry Moray is said to have demonstrated in showing that substantial electrical power could seemingly be drawn from the aether using a simple wire antenna strung between two poles. However, as will be seen, the antenna is not needed and the reason is that the energy source is not the radiant emission by some process involving radio wave propagation through the aether, but rather what can best be described as a phase-lock that couples the apparatus with the quantized motion of electric aether charge. There is a technique, to be described below, by which it is possible to exploit this phaselock condition by setting up an energy oscillation involving an apparatus component and its enveloping aether, the result being that energy in an immediately useful electrical form is imported into the apparatus from that aether. The invention draws energy from the aether. To understand why the invention works one needs to understand the process by which the aether stores energy when an electric field is set up across the dielectric separating two capacitor plates. Moreover, one needs to understand the means by which the aether determines the quantum of action, specifically in the form of the Bohr magneton and the unit of angular momentum linked to Plancks constant. It is not sufficient to imagine that electric charge in the aether is displaced from a rest position in a background continuum of opposite charge polarity to which it is attracted by a restoring force. Indeed, one must consider such action to be superimposed on a system of charge
that has an underlying jitter motion, a quantum theory theme associated with the German physicist Heisenberg (Zitter-bewegung, which has the dictionary meaning Circular fluctuation movement, of spin). When these two factors are combined, and the constraint added of there being a phase-lock which keeps that jitter motion in synchronism as between the charges, one finds that the physical theory involved has some very interesting consequences. One of these consequences is that a spherical or cylindrical volume of aether, if spinning bodily about a central axis, will acquire a magnetic moment and set up an electric field inside that sphere or cylinder that is directed radially with respect to the spin axis. A summary analysis is presented in the Appendix to this specification, being in part a quotation from pages 31-33 of a booklet entitled The Theory of Gravitation which the Applicant of this invention, Dr. Harold Aspden, authored in 1959 and duly published early in 1960. The induction of electric charge by aether spin was there shown to give a physical basis, both qualitative and quantitative, for the geomagnetic moment, the property of body Earth of setting up a magnetic field which created magnetic North and South poles at latitudes offset from the geographic poles, with the geomagnetic polar axis precessing slowly around the Earths spin axis at a rate of several hundred years per revolution. By identifying its source as a rotation of a sphere of aether coextensive with body Earth, a volume of aether relative to which the Earth could have a component of motion even though the aether spin frequency is equal to that of the Earth, this axial tilt of some 17 degrees has a physical explanation. However, that aspect of the aethers role was not seen at the time as offering anything of promise technologically. The physics involved is nevertheless very relevant and directly pertinent to the experiments on which this invention is based, the findings of which would otherwise be quite baffling scientifically. The applicant has, over the 40 or so years since the theory was first published, given a great deal of consideration to the theoretical implication that, just as aether spin can set up electric charge displacement inside coextensive matter, so the setting up of an electric field directed radially with respect to an axis can induce aether spin about that axis and with it develop angular momentum. Indeed, in the authors onward publications on this subject, as, for example, Physics Unified published in 1980 by Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton, England (ISBN 0 85056 0098), it is shown how the onset of the force of gravitation when a disordered aether consolidated into an orderly structured form caused protons to accrete more rapidly that electrons, owing to their higher mutual rate of gravitational acceleration. This created stars with an initial positive charge and the associated aether spin resulted in the stars acquiring their spin states and shedding matter which consolidated into planets which share the angular momentum so generated. The aether with its property of spin as related by its electric charge density according to the formula presented in the Appendix is therefore the key factor if we attempt to account for the creation of the stars which populate our universe. That same formula, however, is equally valid if applied to the circumstance where a radial electric field is set up between the concentric cylindrical electrodes of a capacitor formed around a hollow dielectric cylinder. It tells us how fast the aether within that dielectric will spin. The related theoretical analysis shows that the quantum phase-lock feature of the aether imports from the external aether world an amount of energy equal to that supplied in setting up aether charge displacement, this imported energy being the dynamic energy corresponding to the acquired aether angular momentum. Guided by the argument concerning stellar creation one can see that this aether angular momentum can be transferred to matter and this process also has its energy transfer implications. However, one can wonder what happens if, after setting up a radial electric field in that capacitor having concentric electrodes, the applied voltage is reduced, thereby withdrawing electric field energy from the capacitor. The imported energy present in kinetic energy form as a cylindrical shell of aether spins about the central axis of the capacitor will tend to sustain
electric charge displacement. To conserve energy, since the aether phase-lock cannot force the expulsion of energy by obliging the enveloping aether universe to keep in step, this energy can only be shed by augmenting that released electrostatically. In other words the net result is that an up and down fluctuation of the electric charge condition of the capacitor must give rise to an electric energy output that is, for the lowest dielectric constant (the permittivity of the vacuum), double the input in each cycle of change. One can then envisage an oscillation escalating in energy content powered almost wholly by aether input before one taps into that source of power to draw off energy at a rate consistent with stable operation. This is, of course, a bewildering prediction that no physicist could imagine as being at all possible and yet, given the relevance of the theoretical argument involved, as applied to the phenomenon of geomagnetism and stellar creation, which are supported by strong evidence in that book Physics Unified, once such a notion is conceived it surely has to be put to the test by experiment. This then, after decades of effort before this realization has dawned, is the basis on which the Applicant has only now come to appreciate the amazing technological possibilities that lie before us and is asserting by this patent specification that energy can in fact be tapped from the aether on a commercially viable scale. Given that aether theory indicates that the special form of capacitor described above will, if subject to an oscillatory charge condition, generate an excess of energy, a question to consider is why such a phenomenon has not manifested itself in bench-type experiments performed in numerous electrical laboratories over the past one hundred years. Ostensibly the implication is that the capacitor will exhibit a negative resistance if used with an inductor as a component in what would become a self-resonating circuit. The answer to this may be that if such a phenomenon has occurred it has passed unnoticed or been regarded as spurious or noise-related, being something connected with radio interference etc. Alternatively, and as a function of the size and scale of the apparatus, the effect may have lacked an exciting trigger needed to overcome an energy threshold set by such factors as circuit contact resistance or contact potentials as well as the basic resistance of the inductors which, with the capacitors, form the resonant circuit. Note that, even for a capacitor of quite large physical dimensions, having regard to its accommodation on top of a laboratory bench, the actual capacitance is necessarily quite small, being of the order of a billionth of a farad. This means that a capacitor charge fluctuation of the order of a volt would only imply energy fluctuations that are of the order of a billionth of a joule per cycle. The situation is quite different if, perchance a d.c. bias voltage of, say, 5,000 volts is applied to the capacitor. Then a small superimposed voltage fluctuation makes the related energy fluctuations very much larger with much greater prospect of an escalating self-resonance being triggered. With this in mind the applicant perceived a possible prior art link with the experimental claims reported by Dr. Moray who, in 1929 is said (see pages 46-50 of the above-referenced recently-published book by Keith Tutt) to have powered six 100 watt light bulbs plus a standard 575 watt electric flat iron, merely by providing an earth connection and coupling an input lead to an overhead wire antenna. The apparatus involved had no other source of input power but included a special arrangement of capacitors and presumably some kind of high frequency inductor/transformer unit. In spite of the attention given to the Moray demonstrations it seems that the secrets involved in the design and construction of the apparatus remain unknown and so cannot feature in the prior art of published record. Nor, indeed, can the anecdotal evidence of Morays efforts serve to show that the subject invention has been put to prior use. The technology as to how to replicate the Moray device, always assuming it did perform as claimed, has therefore to be
rediscovered and, indeed, given that there is reference to his detectors incorporating some special substance which was referred to as Swedish stone, possibly the dielectric he used in his capacitor construction, there is a considerable mystery to unravel. More to the point, however, one is led to believe that Moray was implying that the energy he was tapping was radiant energy drawn from the aether, with that antenna featuring prominently because, without it being connected, the energy output fell to zero. However, as he surely may well himself have known, one just cannot draw power on such a scale from a simple overhead wire strung between two poles and so, without know how, he would have suspected that the energy inflow was coming into his capacitors via the action of that mystery substance he called Swedish Stone. The applicant here suggests that, based on an insight into the quantum workings of the aether medium as outlined above, the curious discovery demonstrated decades ago by Dr. Moray may have been attributable to setting up an oscillation in a resonant circuit including a concentric cylindrical electrode capacitor which had a voltage bias of the order of a thousand and more volts fed from a connection to that overhead antenna but drawing no significant current from that antenna other than enough to prime his capacitor with charge and stimulate a high frequency fluctuation which could initiate an escalating circuit oscillation tapping aether energy from the aether spin induced in the capacitor dielectric. This is speculation, but it is sufficient to justify the Applicants interest in constructing a capacitor and seeking to verify the assumptions just made. Notwithstanding the reference above to Dr. Moray and the note below concerning Nikola Tesla, what it leads to is new invention by virtue of full disclosure of details of operation and manufacture of something hitherto unknown, the actual means by which to harness a source of energy latent in the aether medium and deemed by those familiar with state of the art knowledge to be beyond mans reach. Furthermore, there are supplementary inventive features of a special nature because of the way the subject invention exchanges energy between two capacitors and also because the optimization of aether power output from the capacitors is found to be a function of the orientation of the capacitor axes relative to the cosmic background owing to the Earths rotation. It seems here appropriate to mention something described by Nikola Tesla in his U.S. Patent No. 685,958. This was filed on 21 March 1901 and granted on 5 November 1901. It was entitled: Apparatus for the Utilization of Radiant Energy. By installing two metal plates, one high above the ground and the other at ground level, with wires connecting the plates to separate electrodes of a capacitor, it was stated that the capacitor became charged to a very high potential, the energy input being that radiated to Earth from outer space. This may well have motivated the efforts of Henry Moray, but, so far as this Applicants invention is concerned, no such input from overhead components is necessary as a quite different energy source is at work, namely the zero-point vacuum energy activity of our quantum underworld. APPENDIX Extract from pp. 30-31 of The Theory of Gravitation, 1960 printed publication by the Applicant. Note that the earlier pages explained that the aether comprises a system of electric particles in a cubic crystal-like distribution set in a uniform background continuum of opposite charge polarity, the particle system and the continuum both sharing a common circular orbital motion of radius r and the relative velocity between the particles and continuum being the speed of light. The Effect of Aether Rotation Consider what happens when a large volume of the aether is rotating bodily. The continuum and particle system rotate together. There will be no resultant magnetic moment
unless the particle distribution is disturbed. An evident disturbance is the centrifugal effect arising from aether rotation, but for the angular velocities of magnitude found in the solar system this effect is of negligible consequence. A much more important effect arises from the synchronizing interaction between particles in the rotating volume. This requires that the particles shall move about their neutral points at the same angular velocity. Thus if a particle is to have a velocity component V directed in the plane of its orbit, whilst retaining a mean velocity c/2, its speed along its orbit must be of the form c/2+Vcos, where is the angle subtended by a line joining the particle and the centre of its orbit relative to a fixed reference datum in the inertial frame. To satisfy the above requirement the cntre of the orbit cannot be the neutral point. Evidently the particle is distant from this neutral point by r+(2Vr/c)cos. As V is much less than c the effect of this is that the particle is moving around a circular orbit whose centre has been displaced a distance 2Vr/c perpendicular to V in the plane of the orbit. If V is much less than jxcosA, where j is the angular velocity at which the aether rotates, x is the distance of the aether particle from the axis of rotation, and A is the angle of tilt of the axis to the common axial direction of the aether particle system, this displacement distance is 2(jxr/c)cosA. Consider a disc-like section of the rotating aether of radius x and unit thickness. Then, the effective charge displacement arising from the effective physical displacement of the particles is 2x(2xr/c)cosA. The disc has acquired a uniform charge density of 4(r/c)cosA esu/cc. The polarity of this charge depends upon the direction of rotation of the aether. When evaluated from the aether data already presented the charge density is found to be: 4.781 cosA esu/cc. This charge density represents a charge component which rotates with the aether. Calculation of the Geomagnetic Moment For Earth, is 7.26 10-5 rad/sec and A is 23.5o. Thus the earths charge density is, from the above expression, 0.000319 esu/cc. The rotation of this charge gives rise to a magnetic moment of: (0.000319)(4/15)R5/c where R is here the radius of the earths aether. If R is greater than the earth radius (6.378 108 cm) by a small factor k, the earths theoretical magnetic moment becomes (1 + 5k)6.8 1025 emu. This may be compared with the measured value of the earths magnetic moment of 8.06 1025 emu. An upper limit of 0.035 is imposed on k, suggesting the earths aether terminates at a mean height of about 140 miles above the earths surface. This suggests that the ionosphere may be a phenomenon arising at the aether boundary. [End of quotation] Footnote: The term used in the above Appendix denotes charge density of the positive charge continuum which provides the background medium of the aether, this being neutralized overall by the discrete charge forms which define the structure assuring the synchronized state of motion that characterizes the aethers role as a regulator in quantum physics. FIFTY YEARS ON Fifty years on from now it seems possible, as I see it, for the capacitor technology discussed above to be the worlds primary source of electrical power. Each cubic foot of space in what I may describe as the Capacitor Power House could account for the generation of 10 kw of power delivered as 50,000 V d.c. output, based a charge oscillation frequency of the order of 100,000 Hz.
This, however, assumes that history will not repeat itself, bearing in mind that the year 2004 is fifty years on from that 1954 demonstration of Lee Bormans machine, which is now dead and buried and virtually forgotten, not to mention the ghost stories, for such they may seem, that keep our interest in Tesla and Moray alive. For my part, I can only speak from my experience, based on the fifty years I have lived since being awarded my Ph.D. in that year 1954 for research on magnetism in connection with an energy loss anomaly that affects power transformers. By my research I discovered that I could trace factors affecting the anomaly and enhancing it so that as much as a factor of 6 represented the ratio of the actual loss to the value which electrical theory predicted as eddycurrent loss. I could not really fathom the true cause at the time, because, in proper scientific spirit I had been well educated into believing that perpetual motion is impossible and accepting the laws of thermodynamics. It did not occur to me that much of the heat I was generating in the iron cores I was using could actually be regenerating electricity in a way which defied the Carnot criterion. I now know that heat in its passage outwards through the magnetic field in a transformer core lamination was inducing an EMF which caused current to flow that was effective in augmenting the applied magnetizing field. In effect, under the specific control conditions I was using, this elevated the effective magnetic permeability of the core almost to the point of instability, making it so large that the eddy-currents induced were governed by an enormous amount of so-called skin effect, the flux density being greatly distorted across the core cross-section. This means excess loss - all because heat energy has a way of converting back into electricity, in defiance of the second law of thermodynamics. 30 years on from my early university research years I retired from my professional vocation in industry and resumed my academic research, having in those years been ever active on my hobby interest in theoretical physics, though lacking enlightenment as to what has now come to be known as free energy. However, I then engaged on certain experimental projects and found, with time, that I was drawn into the free energy fray, magnetism being the route I was exploring, but by initial contact with others I was diverted into a thermodynamic project and distracted by the advent of cold fusion all about the same time 1988-1989, not to mention warm superconductivity, which I saw as another story of heat energy regenerating electricity and reaching a breakthrough threshold in enhancing current flow. It was that thermodynamic diversion that gave me the answer I needed to satisfy the hangover problem from my Ph.D. research, whereas the magnetic theme led me on to motor research, including a homopolar type of motor, the latter revealing an anomaly that has bearing upon something I wish to tell you that bears upon the capacitor power generation theme. Now, much but not all of these efforts have been reported in a series of Energy Science Reports that I published. They all may be read by accessing my website www.aspden.org in which I plan to concentrate records of my work. There is even one such Report, No. 10 in the series, that may seem a misfit in the collection. It is entitled Cyclotron Resonance in Human Body Cells. It bears upon the claims that overhead power lines can affect the health of those who live nearby, a theme which has now diverted into concern about the use of mobile phones. I mention it here because scientists find it hard to accept that 50Hz or 60 Hz electromagnetic radiation can be harmful, whereas they are open minded on high frequency radiation. The overhead power line concern can be met by increasing the use of d.c. transmission, seen anyway as more economic for high voltage transmission. So if, as I believe, the ultimate in power generation is the capacitor technology discussed above, then power houses operating with wellspaced power lines at a 100,000 Hz frequency might arouse concern for those who live nearby, whereas its d.c. conversion for transmission would overcome the more general concern.
In summary, therefore, there is much that I have to relate in my onward account of the topic raised here, essentially the details of two experiments that help to confirm what I have proposed, and I shall report on these in the near future. *********
Aether Science Papers (Contents)
AETHER SCIENCE PAPERS

Preliminary Note
The book 'Aether Science Papers' was published in 1996. For order information see Aether Science Papers. The 14 papers, reproduced in A4 page size from the scientific periodicals in which they were first published, constitute the main section of the book. The front section of the book is a 68 page commentary entitled 'The Creative Vacuum'. In view of the importance of making scientists aware of this work, it has now been decided to publish these opening 68 pages here in these Web pages and to include the full text of the 14 papers in files having pdf format which can be inspected by Adobe Acrobat reader.
CONTENTS
Announcement Gravitation - A New Riddle About the Title The Aetherial Role of Fermat's Last Theorem Eddington's Unification of the Constants The Challenge Introducing the Creative Vacuum Aether Power Generation Unification - The Time Factor Physical Reason Atomic Spectra and the Moving Atom An Excursion into Quantum Electrodynamics Some Critical Remarks Epilogue Bibliography
The back cover of the book presents the background to the work. Back Cover
file:///C|/mp3/a/0000.htm25.4.2005 22:31:41
Aether Science Papers (Announcement)
Aether Science Papers: Part I: The Creative Vacuum

Copyright 1996 Harold Aspden
ANNOUNCEMENT
Very soon now the world at large will need to face up to the discovery of new ways in which we can generate energy that has no pollution risk. The source of that energy is so abundant that future generations will only need to fear the hangover risks inherited from the passing of the nuclear age and our era of hydrocarbon combustion. The source of the energy that will power our future is not a new source. It is as old as Creation, because we will tap the energy that fills space. It was the shedding of some of that energy that gave birth to the particles of matter, protons and electrons, which combined to form the stellar universe. The secret giving us access to this sea of energy is connected with the problem that Einstein could never solve, the link between gravitation and magnetism. He could not solve it because he took the wrong direction in 'time'. He obliterated 'universal time' by saying that the rate of time varies according to our own individual viewpoints and so deprived us of our direct vision of the common 'clock' which regulates everything, including gravitation. In fact, in space, there is electricity which we perceive, in its overall picture, as neutral and electrically balanced, but which is charged with life and motion. All that electricity is moving in a rhythmic dance, in unison, as if it were part of an enormous all-pervading clock mechanism which keeps perfect time on a universal scale. Using a term familiar to scientists the electric charge in motion in what we see as the vacuum is 'phase-locked'. This is what gives basis to quantum theory and wave mechanics and what assures order, rather than chaos, order which involves a dynamic mass balancing act resulting in gravity and a regenerative process which can package energy spread throughout all space and deliver it to us on demand. It is this regenerative property which allows spent energy, energy wasted as heat by radiation dissipated into space, to be put into an orderly state out there, whether in near or outer space, and this sets up the mechanisms by which protons and electrons can be created. Those 'mechanisms' are those that we describe in physics in terms of quantum electrodynamics, but the essential point I wish to make in this 'announcement' is that the 'phase-lock' property of space is something we can exploit. When we contrive to set up an electric field within, and radial from, the axis of a cylindrical or spherical form, we find that the energy we supply is matched by an equal contribution from the aether filling that vacuum in space. We can use that energy! Part 1 of this work is a commentary and, when read by reference to Part 2, the collection of fourteen scientific papers appended, it introduces this story from the viewpoint of fundamental physics. Separately, by a series of 'Energy Science Reports', backed by a collection of patents, the story will be told from the practical viewpoint of the engineer and it will be the latter work which describes the technology which we now know can deliver power
file:///C|/mp3/a/00an.htm (1 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:42
from that vacuum.
Aether Science Papers 0101
Aether Science Papers: Part I: The Creative Vacuum Page 1

GRAVITATION - A NEW RIDDLE

The fourteen scientific papers just mentioned are presented unamended and in the form in which they were published in the periodicals, Hadronic Journal and Physics Essays. They provide a theoretical account which will show that the 20th century did yield a definitive answer to the riddle of gravitation, together with the long-sought Unified Field Theory. However we will enter the 21st century confronting a new riddle, that of devising a way in which to use this knowledge to build a machine able to control gravity in some way. That is a real challenge. The author may not live long enough to see the arrival of that technology, but wishes to go on record here for pointing researchers in one possible direction. The task is to devise a composite metal structure which, under appropriate field control, develops resonant gravitational interactions between its innermost atomic electrons and the gravity field. The resonance frequency is the Compton electron frequency and the technology will need to exploit a resonance, probably with the fifth harmonic frequency of electrons in the K shell of the atoms. As a clue take note that, if a metal were to have a propensity to be active in the supergravitational or antigravitational sense, it might have a smaller latent heat of fusion in relation to its melting point temperature than applies to normal metals. Then make a selection from known metal elements to determine which have a melting point above 1,000oC combined with a latent heat of fusion below 80 J/gm. You will find that there are four such elements, neodymium, samarium, gold and uranium. Neodymium and samarium sit either side of promethium in the periodic table, promethium being completely 'missing' from natural Earth crust abundance data, possibly owing to its abnormal supergravitational properties. I observe that an electron of atomic number 137 would have a first harmonic resonance with the gravity frequency, if it were to exist, but an atomic number Z of 61 (promethium) applies to the fifth harmonic and Z=79 (gold) applies to the third harmonic. The electrons in gold atoms, however, do not interact with the underlying quantum medium so as to produce a dominant harmonic perturbation, whereas those in promethium are strongly affected. The right combination of neodymium (Z=60) and samarium (Z=62), which form, incidentally, the most powerful magnets known, could, given a special field control, well develop powerful anomalous gravitational forces according to that governing control. Anyone interested in the prospect of such a technology should pay special attention to the theory
file:///C|/mp3/a/0101.htm (1 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:42
disclosed in the fourth of the fourteen papers. Do not overlook the Epilogue added at the end of this commentary on page 60.
file:///C|/mp3/a/0101.htm (2 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:42
Aether Science Papers (p. 2)

ABOUT THE TITLE

The 'aether' is a word which says that there is no such thing as empty space. To say there is no aether is therefore to assert that space can be truly empty, meaning it contains nothing of an electrical character, it now being a well established fact that there is nothing having a physical existence that lacks electrical properties. If a scientist expresses doubt by reference to the 'neutron', I say that the neutron has magnetic properties which are seated in the motion of electric charge. Otherwise, you need to explain why it has a magnetic moment. If that scientist then mentions the 'neutrino', then I say that the 'neutrino' was only a notion, a figment of imagination invented as a devious way of declaring that the aether could absorb or shed energy and momentum without admitting that the aether exists. If that scientist says that the consensus opinion of professors of physics who deny the reality of the aether can surely not be discarded, then I ask "Why not?" and can but point to a report on page 12, 6 May 1996 issue, of The Times newspaper in U.K. Science correspondent Nigel Hawkes wrote under a heading 'The possibility of getting something for nothing': "A physicist at Cambridge University has produced a new and daring explanation for an old puzzle. If she is right, it could be the first convincing evidence that it is possible to get something from nothing. The question Claudia Eberlein addresses in a forthcoming issue of Physical Review Letters is that of sonoluminescence. If you expose water to a blast of ultrasound, you get a flash of light. This is deeply puzzling, because visible light has so much more energy than sound that the energy of the sound has somehow to be boosted by a trillionfold. The wavelength of the light emitted implies that the source is at a temperature of tens of thousands of degrees C. Ms Eberlein suggests that the emission of light is a quantum vacuum effect - energy given off by the vacuum. Quantum theory says that there is in reality no such thing as a vacuum and that empty space teems with 'virtual partices' including photons which flit in and out of existence. The theory is open to test. If it turns out to be right, her explanation will be a major coup, the first observable manifestation of quantum vacuum radiaton."
The energetic vacuum is, therefore, a live issue. The 'aether' is a reality and I believe that it can, like a fluid crystal, form structure and dissolve that structure, as it latches onto material substance, but if that substance vibrates excessively then even the aether is confounded and, in its confusion, it sheds
file:///C|/mp3/a/0202.htm (1 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:42
energy! I have, accordingly, chosen the title Aether Science Papers with deliberation, knowing that, in the end, the 'aether', per se, will have to be recognized, even though that will confound the nonbelievers who constitute the modern generation of physicists.
file:///C|/mp3/a/0202.htm (2 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:42
Aether Science Papers (pp. 3-9)
Aether Science Papers: Part I: The Creative Vacuum Pages 3-9

THE AETHEREAL ROLE OF FERMAT'S LAST THEOREM

As we approach the end of the 20th century we should pause to examine our achievements in science and technology in the past 100 years. They are indeed remarkable and there is reason to wonder whether there is much left to conquer as we enter the 21st century. After all, the discovery of new territory in a geographic sense came to an end once exploration had completed the survey of the Earth's surface, so one day soon science, at least physical science, should reach its zenith. We will then still have to ponder on our incomplete knowledge of space that we cannot easily explore and still need to confront the few never-to-be solved mysteries that science has bequeathed to us even from centuries past. To be sure there is much for us yet to discover in the medical and biochemical field, but physics should by now have yielded the answers to all the secrets that Nature is willing to reveal. We will never understand what lies beyond our comprehension, such as why the universe exists and what there is beyond its bounds in the context of time and space. Indeed, whatever we might foresee in the long range future of the universe, is not really relevant to mankind, because it seems probable that, on a more limited time scale, our planet is destined to encounter catastrophy sufficient to terminate human and animal life on Earth. So let us take stock and reflect a little on what the transition to a new millenium can mean for physical science. Yes, indeed, there are very few challenges now left to tax the mind of a true physicist. However, in saying this, I, as author, am speaking from my own knowledge as a physicist and each of us has our own different and limited perception. I am all too conscious of the fact that, if the scientific community on Earth were to be eradicated and all the books on science were to be destroyed, then, even though the human race might survive, so science as we know it would have to evolve again from nothing. It would then take several more centuries, perhaps another millenium, to bring us back to where we are today. However, would it really matter and would science develop in the same way as our history indicates? Would we have another Newton and another Einstein? Surely, there would be another Pythagoras! The Pythagoras theorem has a unique quality. It is a survivor, a fact of science on which one can build and, though taught as mathematics, one can even wonder whether it is a statement in physics. Once a surviving remnant of mankind can reason sufficiently to rediscover and find interest in the
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (1 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
theorem of Pythagoras then science, including physical science, has been reborn. Thinking along such lines might seem to be pure fantasy, but let me make my point a little differently. Suppose that I were to say that I know how to formulate the Unified Field Theory and how to explain the true nature of gravitation and certain other still unsolved fundametal issues in physics. Suppose I were to die, as is inevitable, and my writings on these subjects were to be ignored, as seems not unlikely. Then how would that impact the world at large? It would not even be noticed. Nor, I submit, would the loss of much of the knowledge that takes up space on our university library bookshelves. The simple truth is that mankind in general is not concerned with the understanding of the kind of physics or mathematics that fills the minds of many of our university professors. However, technology has become important to our daily lives and there are certain basic teachings that physics in its applied form does contribute to that spectrum of activity, so I must not decry what physics at its applied level does offer to our well being. The major problem ahead of us in the 21st century is the need to discover a new and abundant non-polluting source of energy. I am convinced that this is a problem that could easily have been avoided if some aspects of the 20th century could be erased from our memories. We have ventured into the realm of nuclear power whereas we should have been 'burning the midnight oil' in studious endeavour and probing the energy secrets of the aether. We erred because Einstein outlawed the aether, closing off access to the power source which created the universe. We erred by adopting Einstein's belief in a mathematically abstruse philosophy of so-called four-space, a four dimensional distortion of reality, a virtual world that has become a drug to which theoretical physicists have now become addicted. Einstein took us into a mental world which had no Pythagoras. The two space dimensions of a flat surface on which one can draw a triangle with two sides and a hypotenuse were replaced, not by the three-dimensional space of the curved surface of the Earth we inhabit, but by an illusory scheme we cannot picture in our mind's eye. We are even being told today that, thanks to Einstein, we can look forward to 'time travel' as we exit through 'worm holes' in a 'time warp' to leap into the past and perhaps into the future. That surely tells us that Einstein's theory is a drug we can best do without! Yet, in their hearts, all of those Einstein-drug-addicted theoreticians must know that they have draped the universe in a web so fine that it cannot be seen or felt or serve any useful purpose. Does it really need a child to cry out: "The Emperor wears no clothes?" Does it not suffice, after 80 years since Einstein enunciated his General Theory of Relativity, for us to ask what it does for mankind? Why would God create four-dimensional space and give us a perception of it in three dimensions? Why, even, in applying General Relativity, do we always need to transform its results back into three dimensions to give them meaning? So, as I say above, if we could erase all this from science as we know it, the world would be unaffected and a new generation of physicists could begin anew in developing a theory which says
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (2 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
that the universe was created from energy shed by the aether. After all, if something is created there has to be something serving as a source for what is created. In saying this I am reminded that Sir Edmund Whittaker, author of 'A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity', quoted Spinoza to introduce his work as 'The intellectual love of God'. This was a way of saying that to understand the aether is to understand the Creator. The purpose of this work is to show that the 20th century did, in fact, provide most of the answers to the primary unsolved problems of fundamental physics, including discovering that Holy Grail we call the 'Unified Field Theory'. Sadly, however, that drug-addicted community of relativists which regards such theory as their private province has refused to listen to those not sharing their addiction and so I am seeking to interest those outside that community who have retained their senses and their sanity. It is the author's intention to show elsewhere, under the title of 'Energy Science Reports', that the 20th century has also delivered a solution to the impending energy crisis by the discovery of ways of extracting energy from the aether. This touches upon the beliefs of a more practical scientific community, but one responsive to what can be demonstrated, whereas this work is strictly concerned with reason and theory, something far more difficult to project into the minds of others than is the reality of the new energy scene. This work describes that aether and its creative role. It may be that if this account is ignored by the scientific community then it may take several centuries before some future scientist rediscovers what is here presented. Take note that even knowing that someone once did prove something in scientific history does not make the task of rediscovery any easier. Witness the centuries of effort in trying to solve the problem of Fermat's Last Theorem. This was Pythagoras converted to a power higher than 2, with integer sides to a notional 'triangle', the impossible dream! Fermat assured us that he could actually prove it was impossible but his secret was somehow lost. Modern opinion, today, is that Fermat may have been deceived in thinking he had proved his theorem. Very probably that is valid opinion, because if there were a simple proof it would, undoubtedly, have been discovered by now. As will be seen below I do have reason for connecting an aspect of the aether problem with Fermat's Last Theorem, but first note that in 1995 it was announced that, after centuries of effort, a Professor of Mathematics, Andrew Wiles, at Princeton had at long last discovered a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. It was this reference to Princeton, the university where Einstein had spent many years as a professor, that aroused my interest. I knew how to connect Fermat's Last Theorem with the nature of electricity and thereby introduce the aether in a way that could be a challenge to Einstein's theory. With my Cambridge background and my anti-Einstein disposition, I then thought of introducing this theme in this work. It was also the memory I had from 1981 when my wife and I passed through Princeton on our way south for a weekend in colonial Williamsburg. This was before going back north to attend a
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (3 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
conference on fundamental physical constants at the Bureau of Standards at Gaithersburg near Washington D.C. My wife popped into the university bookstore at Princeton and persuaded them to stock my book 'Physics Unified', published just a few months earlier. How long, I wondered, would the book be reordered, once the relativistic community on the teaching staff woke up to what their students might see in my book. Indeed, it took a while before the inevitable happened and orders stopped, but a similar venture at the university bookstore at Stanford in California has led to a sustained inflow of orders for stock, even to this day. I had, incidentally, already seen a brief mention of Andrew Wiles for his achievement in solving Fermat's Last Theorem in the pages of the Michaelmas Term 1995 issue of CAM, the University of Cambridge Alumni Magazine. There it was explained how, according to John Coates, Sadleirian Professor of Mathematics, "Cambridge has always produced some of the most original and gifted mathematical minds in the world." The report declared that 'notable amongst them is number theorist Andrew Wiles who sparked worldwide press interest when he cracked one of the great conundrums in all mathematics: Fermat's Last Theorem'. It went on to quote Fermat as noting on a Greek mathematical text found after his death in 1665: "I have a truly marvellous demonstration of this proposition which the margin is too narrow to contain." Then the report further declared "Today's scholars doubt that he had. But, says Coates, over the centuries pure mathematicians have developed deep mathematical ideas trying to resolve the problem", followed by "I did not expect to see it happen in my lifetime".
It was later reported by Marcus du Sautoy in the British newspaper THE TIMES on Monday April 8th 1996 that Andrew Wiles, 'for his solution of Fermat's Last Theorem was rewarded in the Knesset (Israel's parliament) with one of mathematics' highest accolades, the Wolf prize worth $100,000, which he shares with his colleague at Princeton, Robert Langlands.' The headline caption of that report read: 'The solving of a famous condundrum will lead to new challenges. Is this solution the end of maths?' Well, Marcus du Sautoy, it may not be the end of mathematics but it might well become the beginning of a new age in physics as we see its scope for uprooting Einstein's theories. The event described is a reminder that Albert Einstein was offered the Presidency of the State of Israel, whilst scientists at large still seek that Holy Grail, their Unified Field Theory which eluded Einstein. Curiously, there was something in Marcus du Sautoy's report that reveals an extrasensory perception because I had already written the text which appears ahead on pages 12 and 49. He suggested that the next challenge would concern the 'Riemann Hypothesis' concerning prime numbers. "Those numbers are in some sense the harmonics of the 'Riemann zeta function'. It is these harmonics which tell you all about prime numbers. Riemann conjectured what these harmonics look like. If true, it could imply that the music of the primes is far from being just noise." Well, true or false, the harmonics of the primes do feature in this author's theory as outlined ahead,
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (4 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
but I did not know I was treading the holy ground of the mathematician when I confronted the electrodynamic resonances in my study of the subject. I still think that the discipline of mathematics is a tool designed to help us to understand Nature, rather than to fashion it by shaping it to fit what we want to believe. The challenge ahead is not one to be classified as mathematics. Curiously, one senses history beginning to repeat itself, because it was the Riemann tensor which was applied to underpin the mathematics of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. My attack using 'the music of the primes' will be aimed at proving the aether exists and that the concert hall in which Nature plays that music is one having three space dimensions. To migrate from the numerology of Fermat's Last Theorem to the physics of electrical phenomena we need now to consider physical dimensions and how we incorporate electrical phenomena in this system of dimensions. The standard physical dimensions used when expressing measured values are mass M, length L and time T plus something that has an electrical connection, the dielectric constant k. To bridge the gap between inertia and electricity it is not mass that has primary significance, but energy E, inasmuch as the inertia of any electric charge is the property by which it conserves its energy to avoid continuous (non-quantum) loss by radiation when accelerated. See my paper in International Journal of Theoretical Physics, v. 15, p. 631, 1976 or see section 7 of the last of the fourteen appended papers. This introduces us to the problem of understanding the true nature of electricity and in particular why it comes in positive and negative forms. The answer is similar to there being odd and even numbers. They represent alternate states in a sequence. In the binary number system we see the last digit as either 1 or 0, this being the odd or even condition. In electricity we have (+) or (-) as the polarity of electric charge which I envisage as having spherical form. There is no zero charge state at the truly fundamental level because that only arises where electric particles combine into a neutral aggregation. It is, however, possible for two charges, a particle and its antiparticle, to annihilate one another and shed energy, a quantum event leaving no electrical form or normal electromagnetic wave that we can trace, which is why physicists invented the 'neutrino', but the root question we face is 'what attribute determines whether a charge is positive or negative?' Mass M has dimensions EL-2T2 and it is appropriate to seek to explain all phenomena in terms of E, L and T as the primary physical dimensions and, as we are probing fundamental physics rather than applied physics, to use the esu system in which the dielectric constant k of the vacuum medium is unity. Thinking in terms of energy E, length L and time T, the way forward is to regard an electric charge as a package of energy E which occupies a volume of space L3 but oscillates at a frequency 1/ T by exchanging some of that volume with a similar package of energy, albeit also with energy transfer to and fro between them. This means that there will be two types of charge, or rather states, which differ in character only according to the instant at which we observe them. One will be expanding and the other will be contracting. One, the positive charge, will be in 'phase' with whatever charge form we take as our positive reference and the other at the same moment will be in anti-phase and so be a negative charge. Do note here that Einstein's declaration that space and time were intermeshed precluded him from
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (5 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
ever accepting the concept of instantaneous action at a distance, thereby excluding the synchrony and phase-locked oscillations which we shall use as the key to understanding electric charge polarity. Einstein lost his way with the first step he took on his path of relativity. We, following a different path, can now, if we wish to go to really fundamental levels, explore how electric particles develop into different families, the conservation of energy and the space they occupy being key features of the transmutation process. That will lead us automatically to the point where we see how to solve the problem of linking gravitation and electrical action. The task in sight is no less than that of meeting the challenge posed by Unified Field Theory, but from there we can move even further ahead and come to terms with the very nature of electricity. Fermat's Last Theorem can play a role in this pursuit. When an electric charge is compressed into a sphere of radius a the charge occupies a volume of space 4(pi)a3/3 and it has, if under uniform pressure within the sphere, an energy E inversely proportional to a. Now, given the hypothesis that charge polarity depends upon the phase of an oscillation under conditions where volume of space occupied by charge is conserved, we see that a group of particles in close proximity can only change form subject to the combined volume (pi)a3 being constant. In energy terms this means that the summation of (1/E)3 is constant, so if two fundamental particles could merge to become one single particle, which adopts one or other charge polarity then, using x,y z as their energy parameters: x-3 + y-3 = z-3 If this had an integer solution then, by multiplying throughout by x3y3z3, we could use the numbers yz,xz and xy of that solution as an integer solution to a Fermat equation for which n=3. This is impossible and so, if we were to assume that the energy quantities really do comprise integer multiples of a basic energy quantum and the space taken up by the particles is conserved, the merger of two such electrical forms vibrating in anti-phase can never result in the creation of a single particle of unitary charge. We know this without appeal to empirical fact concerning how charges of different polarities are seen to interact. In effect, we have given meaning to the polarity of electrical charge by logical argument based on the physical dimensions E, L and T and the use of Fermat's Last Theorem. So far as this author is aware this is the only application of Fermat's Last Theorem to a truly physical problem. It does, however, open the question of whether, if one searches to find integer solutions to equations such as: xn + yn = zn + wn or: xn + yn + zn = wn for n equal to -3, such solutions will be found which bear upon the issue of the hypothetical fundamental quantum of energy.
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (6 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
To satisfy simple equations of the above form, such an energy quantum would, of course, be extremely small in relation to the mass energy of the electron and we would then need to see the neutrino as comprising large quantities of such quanta. However, since the neutrino is surely a figment of imagination, just something invented as a `bookkeeping' exercise to keep the energy and momentum balance as between matter and aether, the aether itself becomes the storehouse for energy which, in its ultimate form, may well be quantized in units of the notional energy quantum. Unless we pursue this possibility we cannot but wonder whether an avenue of science remains unexplored, and it may well be that there is no integer solution to these equations which has any special significance. It is to be noted that two of the appended papers use the following equation: x-3 + y-3 = Nz-3 with N=5 expressing the merger of 5 muons to form a kaon, but that did not extend to a search for the fundamental energy quantum. [Hadronic Journal, v.9, p.137, 1986] and [Hadronic Journal, v.12, p.101, 1989]. These are the second and eighth of the appended papers. Note that the equation as used in those papers has a special meaning in that the kaon was portrayed as a particle oscillating constantly between two states, spending half of the time in each state, one being that of a particle of unitary composition (x) and the other being that of a three-particle form, (x) plus two (y), so that on average it comprised simply a single (x) and a single (y) form. With N=6 the latter equation does have integer solutions, as one sees reported by Mike Mudge in Personal Computer World, p. 614, April 1995. Values x=357, y=777 and z=629, satisfy the equality, but these do not relate in any way helpful in our search for the fundamental energy quantum. Solutions, if any, for N=2 are of primary interest. The idea that conservation of three-dimensional space is the determining factor governing the properties of a fundamental electric charge, whereas the phase of the pulsating state of this space volume determines the charge polarity, may seem quite revolutionary. Physicists have, it seems, spent less time pondering the question of why electric charge comes in negative and positive forms than they have in hypothesizing about the imaginary notions of negative mass, negative energy and negative time. Concern about the nature of electric charge proper, rather than worrying about the speed of light, is important because it provides a more appropriate line of demarcation between the features of aether theory and relativity. Historically, the investigations of C. A. Bjerknes (c. 1877) on spheres pulsating in antiphase in an enveloping medium to set up mutually attractive or repulsive forces give us a lead. See references on p. 284 of Sir Edmund Whittaker's 'A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity: The Classical Theories' (Nelson, 1951). This, therefore, is this author's justification for arguing that Fermat's Last Theorem has real relevance to physics. It concerns the physics of three space dimensions and three physical dimensions, such as energy, length and time. The three dimensional world is the real world which the true scientist should be exploring, not the imaginary mathematical jungle which followers of Einstein have adopted.
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (7 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (8 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
Aether Science Papers (pages 10-13)

EDDINGTON'S UNIFICATION OF THE CONSTANTS

One cannot build on Einstein's foundations but one can at least take stock of Eddington's efforts and proceed from there. Eddington had the good sense to see that the clues which Nature provided to guide us forward in our search for the truth were those coded in the dimensionless numbers which link the truly fundamental constants. We will, very briefly, review that theme as it provides the platform on which much of the work here described was structured. Sir Arthur Eddington in New Pathways in Science (see p. 232), published in 1935 by Cambridge University Press, declared that the seven primitive constants of physics, e, m, M, h, c, G and , could be reduced to three (cf. the three dimensions E, L, T) by discovering what determines the value of four purely numerical ratios: (i) M/m .. (ii) hc/2e2 .. (iii) e2/GMm (iv) .. (2c/h) (Mm/) Eddington's own thoughts on how to derive these ratios theoretically have not stood the test of time. He relied too much on what were apparently numerical coincidences and his theory could not adapt to later data found as precision measurement techniques improved. In contrast the theory which I present in the appended papers stands up extremely well, as can be expected for a theory that has really hit upon the truths of Nature's creative mechanisms. As summarized below, the appended papers cover the first three of Eddington's ratios, but the cosmical constant has a curious definition and may prove to have no real significance owing to the vagueness of the natural radius of curvature of space-time'. I would substitute the Hubble constant as the seventh primitive constant and I point out that this also can be deduced theoretically by developing the particle creation theme leading to the M/m evaluation. [Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252, 1984]. The Hubble constant arises owing to an action occurring throughout space as the aether attempts to create matter in the form of protons and electrons, but succeeds sporadically and then usually only transiently as the particles have a momentary existence. What amounts to 'missing matter' results in that this quasi-matter exists fleetingly thoughout all space and its very presence attenuates the frequency of electromagnetic waves in transit from the stars. The aether has a non-dispersive property in this connection, because it really has two dynamic systems which keep in balance in a rather special way, as discussed in the paper just referenced. My objective in this work is not to be drawn into contention with Big Bang theory. I prefer here to
file:///C|/mp3/a/1013.htm (1 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:44
avoid the field which cosmologists find so delightful, as they harness Einstein's philosophy to describe events they can only imagine. Enough is said on that subject on page 30 ahead and in the papers at the end of this work. Instead I intend here to concentrate attention more upon the first three of Eddington's ratios. The way in which protons can be created from activity involving muons is the subject of three papers, two of which are appended. [Nuovo Cimento, 30A, 235, 1975, Hadronic Journal, 11, 169, 1988 and Physics Essays, 1, 72, 1988]. The very close value 1836.152 of M/m, the proton/electron mass ratio, is derived theoretically but its 'fine-tuning' to even greater precision in terms of a fundamental energy quantum can become an interesting possibility in the light of our introduction. The theoretical derivation of the dimensionless fine-structure constant giving hc/2e2 as 137.0359 is also of published record, as based on the same theoretical principles, which involve an adaptive 'fluid crystal' interpretation of the structured form of the aether. [Physics Letters, 41A, 423, 1972]. However, the summary derivation of this ratio also features in the papers appended. This author's unification of gravitational and electrical action implicit in the third of Eddington's ratios is already of published record and affords the formulae: G = (4e/m)g4(108)3 (g/)3 - 3(/g) = 1 = (3)7/12(M/m) M/m is the proton/electron mass ratio. is the mass of the tau lepton in relation to the electron. [Hadronic Journal, 9, 153, 1986]. The reader is invited to substitute the measured values of the electron charge to mass ratio e/m and the measured value of the proton-electron mass ratio in these equations to deduce and then g, the graviton-electron mass ratio, to then discover that the equations really do give the correct value of G, the constant of gravitation. Clearly, the numerical ratio e2/GMm has therefore been deduced theoretically, meeting fully the objective set by Sir Arthur Eddington. However, there is a spin-off discovery here, because this theory has yielded a measure of the mass of the tau lepton, otherwise known as the taon. Inspection of the tables of data applicable to physical constants will show that this super-heavy electron, the taon, is the big brother in the electron family, the muon being the middle brother, otherwise known as the heavy electron. Now, I cannot, in the limited extent of this work, discuss all my published papers, but I know that there will be those who are ready to criticize what I am saying and they may pounce on the fact that the taon-electron mass ratio calculated from the above equations, using M/m as 1836.152, is 3485.21, which is a taon mass-energy of 1780.94 MeV. As can be seen from that 1986 paper of mine, just referenced (the third in the papers appended), I was, at the time that paper was written, confronting the prospect of this taon mass-energy quantity being higher than my theory indicated. In the event, referring to Physical Review D50 (August 1994), I find that the taon is now stated to have a massenergy of 1777.1 MeV with an uncertainty of approximately 0.5 MeV. So I am in error somewhat on this question of the mass of the super-heavy electron. However, as can
file:///C|/mp3/a/1013.htm (2 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:44
be seen from the papers ahead I had a similar situation with the muon, in that my theory said that the muon-electron mass ratio should be 206.3329, whereas the actual muon-electron mass ratio is somewhat greater as 206.7683. The reason for this was fully explained as attributable to the real muon having two electron-sized companions. It needs three particles cooperating in a conservative manner, in space volume terms and energy terms, to assure a quasi-stability. [Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 37, 210 (1983) and 38, 342 (1983)]. In the sub-quantum energy activity in the aether the primary role is played by the virtual muon family which comprises a mixture of energy quanta of 205 and 207 electron rest-mass units . We find that the real muon, the one which shows itself in cosmic radiation and in high energy particle decay, is nucleated by the higher 207 form. Now I have, above, mentioned the 'harmonics of the primes', having in mind the wave resonances and standing wave effects that can control the deployment of energy in particle groups. Such effects have been recognized in my researches in connection with the proton and neutral pion, as mentioned below. Also, in 1972, I had adopted the odd integer space volume quantization to derive the finestructure constant [Physics Letters, 41A, 423 (1972)]. Later, the evidence pointed to the wave resonance as well, so that in 1983 I did explain why the 'aether' muon or 'virtual' muon, being a bare muon, had a mass slightly below that of the real muon, the one having a electron retinue. Referenced on the integer mass ratio 207, the applicable formula, to a first approximation is: m/m = 207 + 2 - (9/4)(207)/(207+ 3) which is 206.7687. The second Lett. Nuovo Cimento paper referenced above gave reason for 'tuning' this to a slightly lower value, bringing it into perfect accord with the measured value of 206.7683. What I now declare as being extra proof and vindication of my research in arguing in support of the wave resonances just mentioned, is the fact that the real taon should replicate the muon situation by having a retinue of two virtual muons, whereas the muon had a retinue of two virtual leptons of electron size. The number 207 can be replaced by 17, at least to a first approximation, because the taon is that much more massive than the muon. Accordingly 17 can replace 207 in the above equation to give: m /m = 17 + 2 - (9/4)(17)/(17+ 3) which is 4.43 Mev below the value of m corresponding to the factor 17, if m /m is 205. So the 1780.94 MeV estimate of the virtual taon mass indicates a `real' taon mass of 1776.51 MeV, whereas the value, as now reported, is 1777.1 +/- 0.5 Mev. Whilst on this theme of wave resonance governing particle mass, I feel it appropriate to mention the harmonic resonance which determined the value of the neutral pion mass. As can be seen by reference to the eleventh appended paper [Physics Essays, 2, 360 (1989)], in determining the mass of the neutral pion in relation to that of the electron, a governing resonance involves the prime number 1619. [This is the ratio A:2C of Table II on p. 365 of that paper.] When I wrote that paper I did not know that the neutral pion had a measured mass-energy of 134.9764 +/- 0.0006 MeV. Yet, in presenting the paper I gave reason for this mass-energy being either 134.976 MeV or 134.960 Mev, according to whether the component charges involved are well spaced apart or are in contact. Evidently, experiment tells us that they are well-spaced, but here is a very good example of the power of my theory.
file:///C|/mp3/a/1013.htm (3 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:44
The neutral pion is not foremost in importance amongst the many fundamental particles, but it does present an awesome example of the wave resonance effect. As scrunity of Table II in the paper will show, it would really upset the resonance proposition if the mass indicated was not in agreement with experiment, but it is pleasing to see that my theory is supported in a truly remarkable way. I just hope that the reader can come to appreciate what I am saying and so share my enjoyment at having deciphered the physics of Nature's handiwork in this particular particle situation. As to the 'harmonics of the primes', the best example in the papers appended is the seventh appended paper [Hadronic Journal, 11, 169 (1988)]. The numbers 23, 41 and 1153 are all prime. They relate to the properties of the proton and I can but declare my delight at having deciphered the secrets of the proton as codified in the limited but highly precise numerical data which those highly skilled in precision measurement have afforded. Sir Arthur Eddington could not have imagined what would prove to be possible once the quantities in which he was interested had been measured to a precision below the part per million level. The numbers do not explain anything, but as they extend in their limits of precision they make the task of explanation all the more formidable. It is only if one has the right interpretation of them in physical terms that one can hope to derive theoretical values which match up to those observed. However, once on track, one knows one has discovered the governing truths and it certainly gives one confidence in spreading the theoretical investigation across the myriad of particle forms that Nature produces. How else can it be that the substance of the papers which are appended could have emerged so readily? One cannot sit down and ìnvent' realistic physical ways of deciphering the particle spectrum, just by willful determination. One can, however, if given one point of entry that is wellfounded, build on that and hope to find that it does, of itself, build a particle spectrum that fits the one observed. This has proved to be the case. It has not involved use of Einstein's theory, which tells us something we should not fail to heed, but that was not how I entered into these studies. In simple truth, I wanted to understand how energy was stored by magnetic induction and I did not believe that the route to that understanding could in any way ignore the reality of the presence of the aether. To me, mathematical symbols, though useful if one can picture something tangible that they represent, are meaningless if devoid of substantive reality. The aether is real and it deserves respect!
file:///C|/mp3/a/1013.htm (4 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:44

THE CHALLENGE
I propose next to turn my attention to a problem in physics, one well within the scope of the knowledge I gleaned from my school studies. This is a challenging question in Newtonian mechanics. One of the lessons of history is that one should not 'put the cart before the horse'. That lesson dates from the era before we discovered electricity. Electrical technology changed things around. We can now, if we wish, transport the horse using electrically powered vehicles. When Newton enuciated his laws of motion he had no way of predicting the way in which electrodynamic forces would affect his dynamical findings in mechanics. Seen in retrospect, it is now evident that, in prescribing his third law, Newton has put the cart before the horse. The 'cart' is the assertion that action and reaction between any two particles are always in balance. The 'horse' is the rule, Newton's rule, which declares that when two particles emerge from a collision then, if there is no loss of energy, the receding particles have a relative velocity that is equal but opposite to their relative velocity at the moment just before impact. Electrodynamics concerns electric charges in motion and the electric energy potential attributable to charge interaction is a function of the relative position of those electric charges. It is therefore a logical physical consequence that, to the extent that motion affects energy in a charge interaction, that energy must depend upon the square of the relative velocity. When we work out the square root of that energy at impact we find, as we know from simple mathematics, that there are two solutions, just as -1 or +1 is the square root of 1. Since all ponderable matter comprises nothing other than charged particles, this is really why two particles separate after collision with their relative velocities reversed. Newton derived his 'rule' by declaring that action and reaction are equal and that energy is conserved in the collision between two particles. He could equally have deduced that if two colliding particles separate with their relative velocities reversed, then, assuming that energy is conserved, action and reaction are equal and opposite. The fact that the masses of the particles may be different does not affect this argument and so one might think that, since the answer comes out the same, it matters not whether the cart or the horse has the forward position. However, imagine now that you, the reader, are sitting in a classroom, paying careful attention. The teacher aims to show why the principle of conservation of momentum applies to a body which is a conglomerate of numerous component particles, all in motion. The teacher explains that because the law of action and reaction governs how each and everyone of those particles interacts individually with each and every other such particle, then one can sum all the forces and their moments about any axis to prove that net momentum, whether angular or linear, is conserved and is independent of
file:///C|/mp3/a/1417.htm (1 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:45
internal interactions within that conglomerate body. As a student you do not question this, because the teacher has ensured that the syllabus followed introduces you to the basics of mechanics before you learn anything about electromagnetism. However, what would be the scenario if the teacher made a mistake and did put the cart before the horse by teaching electrical principles before teaching mechanics? You would have learnt that when an electrical charge is in motion in a magnetic field it experiences a force owing to that motion, a force directed at right angles to the motion. You would have learnt also that when an electric charge is in motion it sets up a circular magnetic field in a plane at right angles to its motion and centred on the axis of that motion. So, if two charges travel together at the same velocity, side-by-side, they will, by symmetry, set up a balanced action and reaction. However, what if these two charges are moving together but one is somewhat ahead of the other? Then those forces acting on the charges cannot be directed along the line drawn between them. They will be directed in opposite directions and have the same magnitude, but as they are not acting in a common line drawn between the charges they must cooperate to produce an out-of-balance couple. So, armed with what you have been taught about the forces between electric charges in motion, you now come to learn about Newton's laws. The teacher says that action and reaction are equal and opposite between each particle of a pair in the conglomerate body and is about to go on from there to justify the principle of conservation of momentum for the body as a whole. You put your hand up and ask the obvious question. "What if the particles forming that body are electric particles? Will not that affect the assumption we are making about action and reaction being equal and opposite?" Now, here, your teacher has a problem. If he or she is well read then what will come to mind is the rather complicated law of electrodynamics that was formulated by Ampere expressly to ensure that action and reaction are equal as between two electric charges in motion. However, the teacher knows that that force law is never used in practice. The Lorentz force law, which is supported by Einstein's theory, is the one we use, but what the teacher will most probably not know is that Lorentz's law has been disproved experimentally [122]. The question really at issue is whether that body could, owing to its internal electrodynamic interactions ever begin to rotate of its own accord or perhaps propel itself in a linear direction, without there being any applied external force. Your teacher will then, no doubt, insist that you must learn Newton's laws, which forbid that possibility. You, on the other hand, will still be asking yourself how Newton could command authority on the issue, even though he could not have taken account of the electrodynamic issue. Meanwhile, your teacher might later ponder the question of why Ampere bothered to formulate his law of electrodynamics if Newtonian law gave a sufficient explanation. I say, he or she might have such thoughts, but I know that, almost certainly, the thought will be that 'experience' shows that we can get by without worrying about such problems. Yet, I also know that we can, if we so choose, live through another century without understanding gravitation and its unifying link with electromagnetism. Teachers are supposed to know the answers to such questions but this is a subject they never mastered. In later life, after leaving school, one sees, if one bothers to look, that this same problem has remained an active issue without ever being resolved. It remains unresolved, but teachers, even those who lecture on physics at university, do not go out of their way to draw this scientific inconsistency to the attention of their students. Indeed, one sometimes sees evidence of an even
file:///C|/mp3/a/1417.htm (2 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:45
worse scenario, where the problem is recognized but the teacher assumes that it has all be solved by Einstein's theory, notwithstanding the fact that Einstein struggled to his dying day to forge that unifying link that could bring electrodynamics and gravitation together. Newton was concerned about the force of gravity and, to this day, scientists of the highest calibre still strive to find that connection between gravitation and electrodynamics. They occasionally hear of claims by individual 'crackpot' researchers who assert that they can build electrical or magnetic machines which deliver more power output that input. This is contrary to Newton's laws, because action and reaction are always said to be equal and opposite. Yet the Lorentz force law which was 'confirmed' by Einstein's theory is a law which, as applied between two electrical particles in motion, does not itself conform with that law of action and reaction. It is here that we see the farce that underlies all attempts to merge Einstein's gravitational theory and electromagnetism into a common unified field system. Indeed, there is something wrong deep down in the foundations of the problem. The true law of electrodynamics, one which does conform with gravitational theory, is the subject of reference [1], but see also the sixth of the appended papers. Scientists declare that when the forces predicted by the Lorentz force law are integrated for a complete system then the overall result is a balanced action and reaction. However, they are not then dealing with basic principles as applied to discrete interactions between elements of matter but are asserting overriding constraints of their own choosing and this amounts to insisting that Newtonian philosophy has the last word. One could say "So be it" if the hoped-for unification of the gravitational field and the electrodynamic field was already an established fact, but it is not. Also one cannot escape being left with that dominating problem of wondering about the attractive forces involved in the formation of the stars and how energy ever converged into matter to create it in the first place and set things in motion. If there were a force out-of-balance, a possible breach of the principle of conservation of linear momentum that could occur under certain very special and exceptional circumstances, then one could see a way forward and make some sense out of the current nonsense which is limiting our field of enquiry. Once the aether yields energy so it must assert force on matter. Newton would say that that is an èxternally applied' force, but yet it could be a force developed within matter, inasmuch as aether fills all space, even the space between the electrons in atoms. So here is another rather subtle point that gets glossed over in the teaching of physics. In this situation, the teachers close ranks and refuse to refer to the aether. It does not exist, because Einstein's theory does not require it! It does not exist because it was thought to regulate the finite speed of light but experiment shows that the speed of light in vacuo is referenced on something sharing the Earth's translational motion through space, though not the Earth's rotation. So, assuming that the aether moves through the Earth, there can be no aether! Well, that is hardly logical. Indeed, it is as illogical as an argument which says that we think there are green men on Earth, but we can find no green men, so there are no men on our green Earth! There is, indeed, an aether, if only defined as that which feeds energy to sustain the creation of matter, and one can be sure that much of what now remains unexplained in physics has its explanation rooted in that mysterious aether which physicists have turned away from. To say
file:///C|/mp3/a/1417.htm (3 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:45
otherwise and declare that the aether does not exist is like knowing that all the answers are in a textbook but refusing to open the book because to read such a book goes against one's principles. The aether is an energetic medium which reacts to actions set up by the flow of electric current in wires. It is like a bank that accepts money on deposit. It accepts and disperses the energy we label as that stored by magnetic induction. It disperses that energy just as a bank uses money on deposit by dispersing it to borrowers, but it has reserves of energy just as the bank has reserves of money, and the aether allows us to withdraw on demand the energy we have put on deposit. Take away the aether and you take away the whole basis of magnetic induction in electrical technology. It is like taking away the banking system and letting money float around freely in the community. Scientists have adopted a way of interpreting electrical phenomena by supposing that electric particles in matter, migrant photons and the mysterious neutrinos are all that one needs to consider. In that philosophy, however, there is no creative source yielding new charges and nowhere to give energy a resting place when the particles are eventually annihilated. Now, it may seem to the reader that, in challenging the foundations of Newtonian mechanics by bringing in my concerns about electrodynamic interactions, I am mischievously trying to shake the very foundations of physics. I am not, but I am intent on moving forward and solving the unification problem and to do this I must insist on the adoption of the correct formulation of the law of electrodynamics. To advance to that I will presently, in the pages ahead, make a quantum leap, a leap that takes me back to the physics of my last school year, some 51 years ago, when I heard about the Bohr model of the atom. The reader will see from such reminder of one's schooling and pre-university education that I am deliberately stressing how easy it is to see where science has gone off track. We need to be very sure of the basics of our subject and look very closely at the groundwork on which we later build. There is now ample evidence which confirms my own long standing conviction that if the mass ratio as between two interacting electric charges in motion is not unity, as it has been for all the chosen experiments giving us the basic empirical foundations of the subject, then the law of action and reaction can be breached [49].
file:///C|/mp3/a/1417.htm (4 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:45

INTRODUCING THE CREATIVE VACUUM

As the reader will now understand, this monograph provides a documentary record pertaining to Unified Field Theory. It summarizes research by the author spanning 40 years from the mid 1950s when the theory was first conceived. It has been ignored by the scientific community because it is seen as a contradiction of the Einstein four-space doctrine. Einstein died in 1955, having failed in his lifelong quest to discover how to unify gravitation and electromagnetism. Yet, Einstein's followers have not, in the 41 years thereafter, been able to succeed where Einstein failed and so the scientific community sits and waits, hoping that the Unified Field Theory will one day be discovered. It is the common belief of theoretical physicists that there has to be a way of understanding the force of gravitation in terms of electromagnetic action. The challenge is to discover the unifying link by which the electromagnetic field theory and gravitational field theory merge to have a causal physical connection that we can understand. This author, now 68 years of age, is acutely conscious of the fact that those scientists who do see it as their exclusive right to search for the Unified Field Theory will never abandon beliefs rooted in Einstein's theory. This monograph, therefore, is this author's final effort to present his theory as a formal collection of the key published papers, all of which have passed the test of referee scrutiny, but yet they are unlikely to be found in the standard periodical stock of a typical university library. The papers all fail the test of conformity with the Einstein model of four-space, but all offer a meritorious solution to problems which are far outside the scope of Einstein's theory. The author's papers that are of record in the mainstream periodicals are also listed for reference, but this collection of fourteen prior published papers suffices as a concise summary record which will allow physicists, who are so minded, to understand and appreciate what is here presented, most assuredly the ultimate theory of the unified field. It was in 1980 that the author did succeed in breaking through the referee barrier of the Institute of Physics in U.K. by styling a paper on the subject putting all the emphasis on its rigorous mathematical foundation. The Einstein gravitational field equation of his General Theory of Relativity was derived without using any of Einstein's arguments and solely from the consideration of how energy deploys in the field separating two interacting bodies. Analogous papers on the spatial deployment of energy in the electromagnetic interaction and the Coulomb electrostatic interaction were also published elsewhere in the mainstream literature and at about the same time. An adequate discussion of and reference to these three contributions appears in
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (1 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
the last of the fourteen papers appended in Part 2. That paper, entitled 'Retardation in the Coulomb Potential', though published in 1995, is really only a summary review paper of earlier work, but it offers the reader a cogent introduction and it is recommended that it should be read first. The author is gratified by the fact that the first reprint copy of the paper read by an academic colleague, whose contribution to electromagnetism earned him an Sc.D. degree from Cambridge, was acknowledged with a note saying that it was "brilliant". This has encouraged the author to make this final bid to interest the scientific community in what is a very comprehensive unification of field theory. It is a theory which should not be ignored because, though, to be sure, critics will inevitably feel uncomfortable about accepting much that is proposed, that discomfort will stem primarily from the irritation of having to revise what they have come to believe. The merit of the theory offered lies in the powerful cohesion of its foundations and the ultimate test that it affords precise quantitative values for the fundamental dimensionless constants of physics. Science cannot stay forever in a stalemate condition, where Einstein's General Theory of Relativity stands apart from quantum theory and wave mechanics, never to be united but always living in hope. Unified field theory should not be seen as the quest to link these two disciplines, but rather as the quest to discover the causal physical connection between magnetism as rooted in quantum activity and gravitation as also rooted in the same activity! The title 'The Creative Vacuum' for this introductory text has been chosen because it aptly describes the function of the vacuum medium. It is an orderly composition of electrical charge, neutral overall, but active as a sea of energy. It constantly strives to create matter in the form of protons and electrons, but is subject to equilibrium and the latter is only upset when matter already created decays to lose its mass and so its energy. That energy is then subjected to regenerative effects, owing to the jitter motion which prevails throughout that vacuum medium. The theory is founded on the understanding of magnetic induction and how the vacuum medium stores and returns the energy associated with the magnetic field. This is rooted in quantum mechanics, the mechanics of the vacuum itself. The aether has a jitter, a so-called Zitterbewegung. The need for its dynamic jitter to be balanced leads to the gravitational feature. The theory offers a full qualitative account backed by quantitative evidence, because, as already indicated, it gives precise values for the relevant dimensionless constants which incorporate the constant of gravitation, Planck's constant and the proton-electron mass ratio. If you, the reader, wonder why a theory having such scope and importance is not already well known and copiously referenced in the standard scientific literature, then in that you begin to share this author's own thoughts. There is something wrong with a system that encourages scientific endeavour and encapsulates it in numerous scientific papers which are then well and truly buried, not always on the shelves of university library archives. I will here indulge in a little digression on this subject, but I shall eventually come back to the main theme. The problem just mentioned is, of course, the escalation of the university system with the need for academic staff, also escalating in numbers, to add the weight of their own contributions to the growing piles of information, with the result that, as with the proverbial 'black hole', the system has
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (2 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
collapsed and now offers very little enlightenment. There is so much incentive academically urging academics to contribute papers to conferences and to periodicals that there is little of real merit being added. For example, if Einstein's theory really did explain gravitation, why are so many thousands of papers still being written, all trying to develop the theory of gravitation? Much the same applies to magnetism, where the concept of 'spin' has some special meaning, but one wonders precisely what it can be. It seems to me that the fundamentals of a subject are not understood but yet scientists persist in probing the periphery of their subject whilst repelling intruders who offer something of fundamental significance. Not long ago, I had wanted to look up one of my own papers in the bound periodical collection of my local university. I found that the librarians had cleared the shelves of journals published before 1970. Upon enquiry I was informed that I was not the only person to ask what had happened to the earlier works of reference. The librarian was surprised, especially as he had just had the same enquiry about the chemical journals from another staff member. He explained that in science and technology anything dated before 1970 was deemed to be outmoded and of little interest. To him, it seemed that the pace of development was such that only the work of the past twenty or so years was worth remembering. I would need to go to another repository where the old archives had been buried if I wished to trace what I had contributed to science before 1970. Now, it might not be appreciated by everyone, but when, as a scientist, you contribute to knowledge by securing publication of a peer-reviewed paper, and you are told that your work has been 'buried' along with other papers of the same vintage, it is as if you have become a ghost and are searching for your own grave in a cemetry. There is so much being published in science that we have reached a state of chaos, which puts us in a situation where we need to fight to be heard, and there are those amongst us who see no point in engaging in that struggle. I will now, for a moment, stand back from that ongoing contest to mention that 1996, the year in which I am now writing, is the fourth centenary of the birth of the person who introduced the aether into science, by postulating that it had mechanical properties. Since we are concerned with the 'creative vacuum' or the àether' it is appropriate to remember Rene Descartes. Descartes assumed that the aether comprises particles that are continually in motion, but as there is no empty space, he inferred that those particles are continually moving into places vacated by other aether particles which are themselves in motion. Overall, the motion was that of vortices as the particles were all part of a great machine, but one which we can now examine at a microscopic quantum level and see as a kind of universal clock mechanism. Sadly, however, towards the end of the 19th century, the mechanistic aether seems to have lost favour, because the aether came to be viewed, not as a clock which kept everything in the universe together in a rhythmic dance, but rather only as a 'sea' rippled by light waves. The luminiferous aether concept became the dominant consideration. The aether was not deemed to be the bonding agency which wedded all matter in the universe together in an energy machine. Electromagnetic waves and their finite speed were seen as the signature that proved the aether existed and, once that signature became blurred, there were those who broke away from the aether faith. It was in the early part of the 20th century that a French astronomer, Alexandre Veronnet [123], made
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (3 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
a bid to arouse interest in an 'etheron' particle picture of the aether, bringing the Bohr magneton into that 'clock mechanism', but wave mechanics had a different style of presentation and the aether began to sink into its own sea of oblivion. Einstein was the champion who led the aether dissenters. As philosopher Bertrand Russell explained: "Empty space, to Descartes, is as absurd as happiness without a sentient being who is happy. Leibnitz, on somewhat different grounds, also believed in the plenum, but he maintained that space is merely a system of relations. On this subject there was a famous controversy between him and Newton. The controversy remained undecided until the time of Einstein, whose theory gave the victory to Leibnitz." (Quoted from:) History of Western Philosophy, 1961 Edition, Published by Allen & Unwin, page 87.
Well, I now submit here that the controversy is far from over. Space is not merely a system of 'relations'. It is a real mechanism, albeit one that is, as is all matter, rooted in the electrical form of the constituent aether particles. The way forward from the Einstein diversion requires that we heed what another British philosopher had to say about Einstein's theory. "The effects of rotation are among the most widespread phenomena of the apparent world, exemplified in the most gigantic nebulae and in the minutest molecules. The most obvious fact about rotational effects is their apparent disconnection from outlying phenomena. Rotation is the stronghold of those who believe that in some sense there is an absolute space to provide a framework of dynamical axes. Newton cited it in support of this doctrine. The Einstein theory in explaining gravitation has made rotation an entire mystery." (Quoted from:)p.356 of The Principle of Relativity in the book Alfred North Whitehead: An Anthology, published by Cambridge University Press, 1953.
So I assert that we must look to 'rotation' to see how we can revive belief in the aether, and I note that vortices and rotation are complementary aspects of the universal mechanism that is tuned to the spirit of Descartes. Can the aether spin? If those 'vortices' or those aether particles describing minute circular orbital motion, as part of that universal clock we call the aether, can store energy, as by expanding their orbits so as to move faster, then we have territory to explore. If, further, those aether particles can, by analogy with matter, group together to form structure, but by keeping their mutual spacing, then we have the makings of a dimensionless physical constant connected with both energy quanta and that aether. That gives us a larger aether form that we can explore in terms of spin, a form which might set up pulsating ripples as surrounding aether is disturbed by that structural rotation. This suggests a route to the photon, linked to the theoretical
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (4 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
derivation of the fine-structure constant, the latter comprising Planck's constant, the fundamental unitary electric charge and the speed of light. On a larger scale, maybe large spherically formed expanses of aether can be set in rotation, as with body Earth or the Sun, all leading to interesting properties revealing the role of the aether. On an intermediate scale, there are other possible spin forms of aether. Remember that we can move through the aether, as if it does not exist, and so aether in spin can move through a solid wall to transport its action from one side of that wall to the other. Yes, there is evidence of that to be seen in the thunderball phenomenon, which becomes a candidate for research enquiry into the aether. There are the mysteries connected with atmospheric electrical phenomena and invariably there is something spinning, as in the funnel of a tornado. Indeed, observers have seen the tornado travel one way when the prevailing wind direction was in the opposite direction! Rotation, therefore, offers the logical entry point for a fascinating study of the aether. My main aim here is to interest the reader in my theory as a whole, but that can only be by individual study of my many published papers and other writings on the subject. The appended papers and bibliographic listing are, therefore, the main contribution I make in presenting this work, but I need to encourage you, the reader, to make that effort. So I will digress a little more. In 1977 I was invited to explain my aether theory to the students and staff of the Physics Department at Cardiff University in Wales. One simple diagram I presented at that Cardiff meeting and which appeared in the lecture paper [113] of that occasion is reproduced by the following dimensional expressions: charge density : .... M1/2L-3/2T-1k1/2 angular velocity : ........... T-1 mass density : .......... ML-3 (2/2): ........... k My argument was that the aether contains electric charge, as needed to sustain displacement according to Maxwell's theory. Charge has the dimensions of mass M, length L, and time T, taken together with the electrical dimension of the dielectric constant k. The question at issue was that of understanding how, if the aether could develop spherical pockets that could rotate inside enveloping aether, its angular rotation or spin would relate to electric charge. If I assumed that a uniform charge density would be induced in proportion to the angular velocity of vacuum spin I found that the aether would need to exhibit a uniform mass density to keep the dimensions in balance. In fact, I developed the relationship between vacuum spin, the radial electric field and the angular momentum of aether spin, together with their energy connection. I was aiming at the objective of showing that the energy added owing to that rotation would be both the electric field energy stored by charge displacement and an equal amount of kinetic energy. The easiest way in which to explain this vacuum spin' induction is to imagine that all space exhibits a quantum activity as if everywhere there is electric charge keeping in universal phase in minute orbital loop motion at the same frequency. Here we need to picture large spheres of aether as capable of spin at an angular frequency and see every charge in that aether as a quantum unit having a microcosmic orbital spin motion at a very high frequency compared with . This high frequency is the Compton
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (5 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
electron frequency (/2) and it corresponds to the photon energy needed to create an electron. Quantum mechanics involves linear harmonic oscillations and that tells us that the controlling medium has a linear restoring force rate when displaced. An electric charge e in the aether, as needed in Maxwell's displacement theory, complies with a force rate of 4Ne2, where there are N charges e in unit volume of space, all neutralized overall by a universally-constant density of background charge of opposite polarity. Here I use the c.g.s system of units, in which an electric field of strength E stores energy density E2/8 in vacuum of unit dielectric constant, owing to Ee being equal to 4Ne2x, where x is displacement distance. Energy density is N times (4Ne2x)(x/2), which is E2/8. This restoring force rate determines the jitter frequency of the vacuum state by the equation: 8N2e2 = ()2 where is the effective mass density of the e charges, which is proportional to N. In the equation 8 has replaced 4 because, to assure dynamic balance, the orbital radius of the motion is half of the displacement, which spans the orbit diameter. Now consider the superimposed effect in a sphere of aether which spins at the angular frequency . If the spin is in the same sense (parallel axes of spin) as the quantized orbital motion, then to keep the phase-lock as between enveloping aether and aether in spin, the above equation becomes: 8(N-N)e2 = (/N)(-)2 where /N is constant. From these two equations we can deduce the relationship: N/N = 2/ approximately This means that N charges e per unit volume of that aether sphere are displaced from it owing to spin . Conversely, if we can feed electrostatic energy into that sphere to displace that amount of charge, the phase-lock asserted by the external aether will promote the spin at &oemga;. Or, if we can get the aether sphere to spin by other means, the phase-lock asserted by the external aether will promote charge induction. Once the external aether has to assert itself to hold that phase-lock as between different regions of aether, it does work and that is our 'free energy' input! Suppose we can contain some positive ions into a small sphere. The aether will see this as producing a radial electric field from the centre of that sphere and it will develop a charge displacement to neutralize that core charge and effectively transfer the charge effect to the surface of the sphere. Now, this means that N has been changed in that sphere and so the natural frequency of quantum jitter will change. The aether charges lying outside that sphere will, however, not allow this loss of synchronism and very powerful electrostatic forces are asserted to ensure that the synchronism holds. The vast amount of energy sustaining the quantum jitter at the Compton electron frequency in the aether of enveloping space will be pooled with the rotating aether sphere to keep that state of synchronism. The relative frequency is what is held constant. Thus, if N increases in the sphere to cause the local value of to increase, then the offset of , will assure that synchronous condition. In other words, rotation at follows as a consequence of the phase-lock constraint. This imports energy from the aether. Owing to the linear harmonic motion properties of the quantum world, there is equipartition of energy in the sense that for every unit of electric field energy stored there is an equal unit of kinetic
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (6 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
energy stored. Therefore, by adding one joule of energy in one pulsation of the 'vacuum spin' state we receive 'gratis' one further unit of energy drawing on the universal energy priming of the aether activity at that jitter angular frequency . It has therefore become an interesting task, technologically, to reiterate this action at a rapid pulse rate, given that we can, in fact, set up that priming radial electric field or the spin in an effective way. This is what now takes this aether subject from the realm of oblivion and, without stopping in the arena of philosophical debate, progressing directly into the field of technology, where the aether can be seen to serve us as an energy source. As long ago as 1960 I published my first account of this 'vacuum spin' induction theory [107] and evaluated the spin charge density in relation to spin angular frequency . The formula gave the charge density as 4.781 esu/cc per rad/s of spin (page 32 of that reference). In terms of coulombs, one micro-coulomb per cc would correspond to aether spin at 6,000 rpm. I note that ten micro-coulombs per cc. squeezed into a sphere of 10 cm. diameter corresponds to an energy density of the order of 109 J/m3. In my 1977 lecture paper [113] I explained how the Sun was created by gravitational attraction between protons setting up a positive core charge which produced a radial electric field. That charge had the density of G times the 1.4 gm per cc mass density of the Sun. Put G as 6.67x10-8 in c.g.s units and one obtains 3.6x10-4 esu/cc, which develops a vacuum spin of 7.5x10-5 rad/s or one revolution every 23 hours. If the whole angular momentum of the solar system as it is today were to be put back into the Sun, then, as that paper [113] shows, the Sun would spin at 8.3x10-5 rad/s or one revolution every 21 hours. My 1980 book Physics Unified [112] put on record a more formal account. This is close enough to explain how the solar system got its angular momentum from the phaselocked aether and support the proposition that energy can be shed by this 'vacuum spin' activity of the aether and transferred to matter. Our experiments can tap the aether energy in the same way, simply by setting up a radial electric field inside a conductive medium that can sustain the build up of the charge displacement. In 1983 I presented the theory of 'vacuum spin' at a conference held by the U.K. Institute of Physics at Oxford University. See pages 179-184 of reference [29]. I explained how the known facts about the energy density of thunderballs pointed to an aether in which there could be energy storage by spin. I referred to Altschuler et al. of the High Altitude Lab. in Boulder, Colorado (1970) and their suggestion in Nature [114] that thunderballs might be nuclear powered because they all had an energy density in the range 2 to 5x109 J/m3. This is the same energy density as mentioned above! My 1983 paper went further because I knew that if the Earth shared its spin with the aether then that would involve two systems each neutralizing one another in electric charge terms but in a way which would still produce a magnetic field. The Earth's magnetic field is seated in the charge displaced in, and rotating with, the Earth, but the vacuum charge involved in that aether spin cannot develop a magnetic field because it is the reference against which magnetic action is measured. From knowledge of the strength of the Earth's magnetism I could calculate the Earth's vacuum spin
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (7 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
charge and it was found to have a value which would constrain vacuum spin, whether in thunderballs, tornadoes or in certain homopolar motor experiments, to have an energy density estimated as being 2.37x109 J/m3. See page 183 of reference [29]. To understand how it is that we can survive on Earth inside a sea of electricity packed by energy that can intrude upon us, just consider two microbes, one in the space between two parallel plates of a highly charged capacitor and the other sitting inside a sphere in which there is radial displacement of vacuum charge. The first microbe will die from electrification once the voltage between those capacitor plates is high enough. Its constituent positive and negative charges will be pulled in opposite directions and torn from its body. Whether the second microbe survives will depend upon which comes first, the vacuum spin with its radial displacement or the microbe. The electrification involves tearing electric charge from the constituent atoms in any matter within that sphere as charge of one polarity goes to the surface, the ionosphere in the case of body Earth, whereas the positive ions left behind simply move to positions intermediate the centre and the boundary surface of the sphere to cancel the electric field and allow the entering microbe to survive unharmed. We humans actually live in a powerful electrified environment which allows the Earth, by rotating, to set up a magnetic field that arises from an electric charge we cannot sense. Vacuum spin precession is why the magnetic N pole orbits the Earth's N pole.
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (8 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46

AETHER POWER GENERATION

If we can get energy from vacuous space, energy in excess of that we can store by setting up electric or magnetic fields, then that proves there is something in space that stands apart from matter. That 'something' is the aether. Anyone who has seen the television showing of the power of the tornado and the whirling funnel that provides a channel for a succession of lightning discharges must suspect that something abnormal is feeding energy into that funnel. Rotational wind speeds of 420km/hr are recorded in the cylindrical funnels which are said to be up to 180m in diameter. Of course, we do know that whirlwinds form by natural movement of air in the atmospheric activity, but something special happens when lightning occurs as it seems to add speed to the rotary motion and confine it into a narrow funnel, whereas increased rotational speed with diminished radius of motion should promote flow radially outwards by centrifugal action. Now, I pose a simple question. What can it be that determines the radius of that tornado funnel? Indeed, what can it be that determines the radius of the thunderball? Ignoring the problem of where the energy comes from and how there is a containment and a quasi-stable state, what is it that determines the radius of the cylindrical form we see in the tornado or the spherical form we see in the thunderball? I gave the answer in that 1983 lecture of mine at the Oxford conference mentioned above [29]. The limit is set by a 'virtual' electric field strength needing to be no greater than that prevailing at the Earth's surface owing to the Earth's rotation. By 'virtual' I mean the effective fields induced by aether spin. In the thunderball there are two aether spins, a spin of an aether sphere within the spin of a much larger aether sphere. These fields are cancelled by charge displacement in matter and we cannot sense them as fields unless the speed of rotation changes. Then we get ionization. Just as ionization was involved in setting up the spin state, so ionization occurs as the spin state decays. However, there is an energy gain in this cycle of events, as already indicated. When I gave my 1983 lecture I did not know that the tornado wind speed at the perimeter of the funnel was of the order of 420km/hr. I could have predicted a figure of the order of 500km/hr, for the simple reason that the wind speed at the funnel perimeter would be about half that of aether spin just inside the funnel, whereas the radial electric field at the surface of a cylinder of uniform electric charge density is 1.5 times that at the surface of a sphere of the same radius having the same uniform charge density. Given that the induced 'virtual' charge density is proportional to angular speed, the 'virtual' electric field intensity is the same for the aether cylinder and the aether sphere only if the actual speed at the cylinder surface is two-thirds that at the surface of the sphere. For the spherical Earth that speed is about three times 500km/hr and so is it really surprising that the tornado wind can
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (1 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
reach a value of 420 km/hr? All speculation, you might say! However, as I indicated in the 'Announcement' at the beginning of this work, we can build on that speculation to extract energy from the aether for our future source of power. I know of several ways in which this 'free energy' scenario can be demonstrated. Indeed, it is the subject of my primary research interest at this time. However, I will take up the theme that follows from my 1983 paper [29]. It refers in its penultimate paragraph to Nobel Laureate Kapitza's efforts to produce thunderballs for application in triggering fusion reactions [120]. Then, in the last sentence, I declared in my paper that: "It remains to devise and conduct experiments aimed at inducing this (vacuum) spin condition by using radial electric fields, so as to verify and perhaps apply the phenomenon to useful ends."
That was my outlook in 1983. I can now quote the research achievement of Dr. Kiril Chukanov. He reports [115]: "I first produced experimental proof that artificially created ball lightning could produce energy for practical needs in 1987 in Bulgaria."
After describing his experimental set-up, which involved an ionized gas discharge in a quartz tube, he wrote: "I experienced great difficulty in evaluating the amount of power produced by the quantum plasma macro-object, but my rough estimation was three to four times more power output than that being supplied by the (input of the high frequency signalgenerating) lamp."
By 1990 he had taken his research project into Sunnivale, California and his onward reporting on his production of excess energy showed that he had measured heat generated in a water jacket enclosing the evacuated glow discharge chamber used in his tests. In his 1994 book Final Quantum Revelation he reports a 900 watt rate of excess energy generation using electrodes of some 3 cm separation. A vacuum developing aether spin in a filamentary discharge region having a volume of, say, 0.3 cc, drawing on 'excess' energy of density 109 J/m3, would take about 3 seconds to regenerate each action cycle to give the 900 watt excess output. Chukanov mentions a 3 second duration of the burst discharge before the discharge, in writhing like a snake, spread to the sides and touched the walls of the containing tube and caused overheating. Professor Chernetskii and his team of researchers in Russia have also produced excess energy at power levels in a self-sustaining plasma discharge device, claiming 4 to 5 times electrical power
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (2 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
output compared with power input. This was reported in 1989 in a Novosti Press Agency Press Release [123]. Dr. Wingate Lambertson at a conference in 1994 in Denver, Colorado reported similar levels of power gain from a circuit including a discharge tube and a device formed as a specially-fabricated thyristor [121]. Recently reported Canadian research in 1995 by Dr. Paulo Correa and Alexandra Correa [116, 117, 118] has established a sustained excess power generation of 500 J per pulse in a cold-cathode discharge confined to an abnormal glow region, with a prospective 40 megawatt-hour electrode lifetime. The Correa technology delivers electrical d.c. output steadily at several hundred volts and a power gain that is also of the order of 5:1 over d.c. input at similar voltage level. The Correa technology will undoubtedly lead us forward on the quest to exploit energy sourced in the aether, especially as it is already well-patented in the USA. In the Correa apparatus successive pulses developed the 500 J in an abnormal glow discharge which is trapped between electrodes, close to the cathode, and probably confined to a volume of a fraction of 1 cc, which also corresponds to 109 J/m3 of energy density. Several other reports of excess energy production are now of record in the scientific and patent literature and one needs, therefore, to be prepared for the aether to reappear into our scientific philosophy, as being the only source that can supply that excess energy. Indeed it is appropriate to refer here to the excellent book The Secret of the Creative Vacuum by John Davidson [119]. This book had the sub-title 'Man and the Energy Dance' and, as readers might guess, it was this that inspired my choice of The Creative Vacuum as the title heading for Part 1 of this work. I refer readers to the chapter in Davidson's book which discusses 'Free Energy and the Real Space Age' and the correspondence between Thomas Townsend Brown and Rolf Schaffranke concerning apparatus involving a dome-shaped aluminium canopy which was part of an electrode structure (see pp. 194-195 in Davidson's book). Upon setting up a radial electric field inside that canopy it was found that the apparatus could lift itself into the air together with an attached load. Furthermore the apparatus was later shown to perform this lifting operation when tested within a high vacuum. Evidently, the reason for this breach of accepted scientific doctrine was not understood by the experimenters involved in those tests, but I see this as a manifestation of the vacuum spin action mentioned above. It taps energy from space to build a kind of aether whirlwind inside the canopy and the electric pressure set up inside that canopy by the energy in spin pushes obliquely against the underside of the canopy to drive it upwards. It becomes a material object powered against the gravity field by a thrust developed against the aether in spin and most of the energy in that spin is drawn from the free energy environment of enveloping space. How can it be that the scientific community of the world can stand aloof and pay no attention to such experimental anomalies which are only rarely discovered but which have such enormous implications for the future of mankind? How can it be that books such as that written by John Davidson have no direct impact on that scientific community by causing a redirection of research funding to probe the reported anomalies in a serious way?
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (3 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
When the consequences of these developments and onward research on this new energy theme become generally known and accepted, the aether will eventually reclaim its rightful place in physical science and then acquire a stature which will dwarf its early role in history. Meanwhile, we need to be a little patient and watch events as the interest grows and conferences on the subject, as well as new journals devoted to these matters, escalate in numbers. In the light of these findings, I am bound to submit that science has lost its methodology. Technology has needed science to point the way forward towards new sources of energy that are non-polluting, but science has faltered. Sensible methodology would have been tolerant of retention of the aether as the foundation on which to build the material world. Even though it is academically interesting to see how far we can go without using a word meaning the 'aether', it was not at all wise for science to reject the concept totally and without reservation. Now, in the present circumstances, too many of the scientists who build their hopes on physical theory are committed to the denial that there is a universal timing mechanism governing everything. They deny the possibility that energy can be delivered to us by an aether, which, if recognized at all, is deemed wholly passive in its role. As a result, instead of leading our thought processes and guiding us forward into a new technological era, building on knowledge of the aether, the scientific philosophers of today have crippled the mental agility of younger generations and made progress so much more difficult. For my part, in writing this text, my main objective is to draw attention to the papers I have written in connection with aether theory. I say there is an aether and I use it throughout my research to explain much in physics that has otherwise remained unexplained. I have been obstructed in my efforts by the prejudice of orthodox belief and have had many more papers rejected than have been accepted, especially in my earlier years of endeavour, from 1955 to 1975. The future ahead now rests, not with reason and philosophy, but with the forces of new technology, because pursuit of reason and logic is claimed as the exclusive province of those who insist on inventing descriptive language alien to Nature's own method of revelation. In physical science we are now destined to witness a slow reformation as technology leads the field and those amongst us who are wise enough to seek recovery of lost ground will hopefully do so by paying more respect to those who have pioneered a belief and not a disbelief in the aether. We need to pay homage to the memory of Ren Descartes and, again quoting the words of philosopher Alfred North Whitehead, words he used by reference to Albert Einstein: "The worst homage we can pay to genius is to accept uncritically formulations of truths which we owe to it."
In my book Modern Aether Science [110] published in 1972, I have developed my theory on the basis of Descartes' work, but as further advanced by that early-20th-century French astronomer, Alexandre Veronnet [123]. He quantized the aether particle motion in units of the Bohr magneton and partly anticipated what I was later to discover from my research as an analogy between aether and the ferromagnetic state. I go much further, however, even including the domain aspect of ferromagnetism. I came to picture each individual star nucleating within its own space domain as gravity appeared, akin to ferromagnetism appearing when a crystal inside iron cools through the Curie temperature. I came to picture each such star moving, in a sense driven by forces somewhat similar to those just suggested in connection with the anti-gravity aluminium canopy experiments, so
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (4 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
as to transit into other space domains at intervals of 100,000 years or so. Imagine Earth, carried along by the solar system, at the known cosmic speed of the order of some 400 km/s, moving through a domain boundary region. For about one minute the Earth would sit astride the boundary. If there is a polarity reversal of electric charge as between the two adjacent space domains, where antiprotons replace protons and positrons replace electrons, is it any wonder then that the Earth's magnetic field reverses in such events? Is it any wonder that gravity forces might become antigravity forces as between matter astride those two domains, for that brief period, to cause earthquakes on an unimaginable scale, sufficient to destroy whole species of life? May it not be, if we wish to worry about our future destruction, that we have a choice for our thoughts as between (a) our own self destruction by nuclear weapons and the like or (b) the random event of a comet or asteroid crashing into Earth or (c) the inevitable and possibly predictable event when our Earth next crosses a space domain boundary? Might it not be that the day will come when some potential survivors will need to climb into space vehicles propelled by future antigravity technology? They will board as we approach that space domain boundary so as to go through it ahead of the Earth but make the transit in a fraction of a millisecond, eventually returning to Earth only after the dust has settled. Believe it or not, our physics, when revised to take account of what is disclosed in the Aether Science Papers of this work, allows us to estimate the timing of the next space domain boundary transit, once we can be sure about the timing of the last one. Indeed, I have detailed the evidence for this quite extensively in chapter 16 of my 1972 book Modern Aether Science and in chapter 8 of my 1980 book Physics Unified and can hardly say more. All I can say is that the predictive power of my theory, as evidenced by the papers appended, seems now to be so far beyond dispute that the implied space domain structure cannot be cast aside as mere hypothesis. The planar boundaries are absolutely essential to assure the restoring force rate as universally applicable to displaced aether charge [34]. Those boundaries must exist and the pattern of geomagnetic reversal and catastrophic events over a range of cosmic time, when taken together with the speed measurements connected with anisotropy of cosmic background radiation, provide the data allowing us to chart our passage through the space domain boundaries. I will here remind the reader of my early comments concerning the 'Big Bang'. There are two papers in the appended bibliography which warrant special attention by the 'Big Bang' enthusiast. There was, of course, no 'Big Bang'. To escape from that dilemma one needs first to understand how the aether attenuates electromagnetic waves without suffering dispersion. The secret here is the same as that which explains gravity. It is 'dynamic balance'. The aether has a dual displacement feature, whereas Maxwell allowed unbalanced lateral displacements which meant that waves travelled without exhibiting lateral inertia. The formal analysis of this is in reference [26]. To complete the story one needs to explain the Hubble constant without appealing to the expanding universe hypothesis and I did that in my paper reference [42]. See also the special note on page 10 which refers to that paper. Unquestionably, we inhabit a universe that is 'steady-state' apart from its bubbling equilibrium. It is as if we were minute observers sitting inside a solid piece of iron, experiencing the thermal agitation whilst being firmly rooted inside that iron, but subject to drifting as we share the Earth's motion, just as if we were part of magnetic domain migrating through a crystal. Eventually, though we may suffer the `heat death' or something similar if gravity is switched off, and lose the attractive power of magnetism as that iron goes through its Curie temperature, the iron (as well as the aether) will still be obedient to a physical system that does not need the notion of an èxpanding universe' or 'dilating time'.
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (5 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
As I revise this section of text, I happen to have just read an article at page 20 of the April 1996 issue of 'Physics World'. It tells us that researchers are seeing more and more evidence of 'proton radioactivity'. Atomic nuclei are shedding protons! The first such discovery is said to date from 1970, but, as the article explains, "Theorists predicted proton radioactivity long before it was observed by experiment for the first time in 1970." Atomic nuclei are known to decay by shedding particles, particles and neutrons and atomic nuclei are said to comprise protons and neutrons, but not beta particles, otherwise known as electrons and positrons. What do you, the reader, believe? Before you reached your conclusion did you ask the 'obvious' question? How do physicists really know that there are neutrons inside an atomic nucleus and not just protons and electrons? Have they ever `seen' a neutron inside the nucleus or are they simply guessing that, because neutrons àppear' as a decay 'product', those neutrons were not 'produced' but had always existed inside the parent nucleus? If so, how is it that protons are durable, whereas neutrons decay with a mean lifetime of about one quarter of an hour? Maybe you have accepted what you were told and can see no reason for doubt. So, now you are being told that 'proton radioactivity' has been discovered, even for atoms with an atomic number greater than Z=82, a so-called 'magic number'. Might that not suggest that the atomic nucleus can shed protons and negative beta particles in a highly energetic paired relationship and we have studied this as an unstable neutral entity and given it the name 'neutron'? In 1929 there was a book published by Cambridge University Press under the title 'The Universe Around Us'. Its author was Sir James Jeans. On page 144 one can read the words 'the most abundant isotope of mercury, of atomic number 80 and atomic weight 200.016, is built up of 200 protons, 120 nuclear electrons and 80 orbital electrons'. I can see no reason to doubt this, it being well-accepted in 1929. How could it be that the phenomenon of the neutron as something observed outside an atomic nucleus could change opinion as to what was inside that nucleus? One curious reason I have been given dates back to the middle of the 19th century. It appears that the Reverend Samuel Earnshaw formulated a theory about the aether. He proved mathematically that charges of opposite polarity could not form collectively into a stable combination with each held in position solely by mutual electric field action. I was told that this destroyed any claim that there could be particles composed of protons and electrons closely bound together. Yet Earnshaw's theorem, though unknown to most physicists, was fully explained in the fifth edition of the book The Mathematical Theory of Electricity and Magnetism, also published by Cambridge University Press and also written by Sir James Jeans. Now, I wonder, why would Sir James Jeans be declaring in 1929 that there are protons and electrons in a stable atomic nucleus, if a theorem with which he was very familiar denied the possibility? The simple truth is that so many physicists today are ignorant on matters of such fundamental importance. Even Earnshaw's theorem, ostensibly rigorous mathematically, is flawed. It declares that: "A charged body placed in an electric field of force cannot rest in stable equilibrium under the influence of the electric force alone."
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (6 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
In fact, it can, because if a multitude of electric particles, all identical and all of the same polarity, are spinkled into a uniform sea of electric charge of uniform charge density and opposite polarity, then the mutual repulsion of those particles will cause them to take up lattice sites in an array, each such particle being located at a stable position. What Earnshaw and Jeans did not bargain for was that continuum of charge as an enivironmental background. They assumed as their premise that there was nothing in the space between the particles! Yet, in the aether, there is no empty space. It is a plenum! Jeans did say in his notes on Earnshaw's theorem that "if a molecule is to be regarded as a cluster of electrons and positive charges, then the law of force must be somewhat different from that of the inverse square." He was wrong on this, given that we have an aether that fills all space. I have raised this subject here for two reasons. You will understand one reason when you examine the first of the fourteen papers, where I discuss the constitution of the deuteron and also that of the neutron. Secondly, however, in following my interest in energy generation, I have become attentive to the claims made for what has come to be known as 'cold fusion'. The scientific community went beserk upon hearing in 1989 the claims made by Professor Martin Fleischmann and Professor Stanley Pons that there was evidence of excess heat generation from experiments in which a palladium cathode was immersed in heavy water. The absence of neutron production was seen as clear evidence that no nuclear transmutation could possibly have occurred. Where is that scientific spirit which yearns to learn something new? How is it that physicists always see the world in black and white and are ready to 'black' what shines through as appearing 'white', without being tolerant of alternative opinion? They banished the electron from the atomic nucleus and substituted the neutron. That was their doing and not an act of Nature. In science there is always the need to be critical as, so often, revision of one's ideas and formulations is necessary, but, progressively, so long as we keep the main uncertainties in science as our target, we will solve all problems. The need for the phase-lock on a universal scale has been my main target, because it brings together magnetism, gravitation and the quantum connection as encapsulated in the fine-structure constant and from that flows the photon and the problem of duality with electromagnetic wave theory. I leave it to my papers, as listed in the bibliography, to tell their own story and to prove that many of the secrets of the aether are now exposed.
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (7 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47

UNIFICATION - THE TIME FACTOR

Physicists versed in the theory of relativity use the expression 'proper time' to refer to what they see as the time rate in their own moving frames of reference. In relativity, time is something that moves ever onwards at different rates according to the perceptions of different observers having different states of uniform motion. By implication there is what we may term 'improper time' which one could say is that prevailing on a universal scale if we were to hold on to our intuitive sense of time as once accepted and relied upon by most scientists including Sir Isaac Newton. Now, there is no scope for unifying anything in physical theory unless one has common ground on which to build and the question of 'time' is intimately involved in the actions of gravitation and electromagnetism because these are both dynamic in nature. The equality of inertial and gravitational mass is not something to be described as a 'principle'. If we do that we need to ask "Whose principle?" You reply: "Einstein, it is his 'Principle of Equivalence'!" Well, really, are we supposed to believe that we experience gravitation because we are being accelerated in an expanding universe? If so, then that acceleration has to be at a different rate for different observers wherever they are in the universe, just as our 'proper time' has to be peculiar to each of us as individuals. Is it not better to examine the cause of that equivalence and see gravitation as evidencing the dynamic connection between two mass systems in a state of balance, one being the normal matter form and one being a `ghost-like' something that belongs to the aether but is the gravity-producing agency? The proposition advanced here by the author is that the mass property of an element of matter as such is seated in its electric charge and that such charge is obliged by an 'aetherial' influence to conform to a jitter motion which puts it out-of-balance dynamically. That 'aetherial' ghost world, which we cannot see and which we only barely detect in its quantum interplay with matter, contrives to provide what we here term 'gravitons' which collectively have a local mass equal to that of matter present and which move in dynamic juxtaposition with the jitter so as to provide a balance. The electromagnetic reference frame is that in which the charge is seen to be at rest as far as the jitter motion is concerned, but yet there is always motion in the inertial frame. This essentially is the causal basis of the phenomenon underlying Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty. So, you see, we can dispose of both Einstein's Principle of Equivalence and Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty by the simple analogy of a school child on a see-saw. The child goes up and down and one can never be sure
file:///C|/mp3/a/3335.htm (1 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:47
exactly how far that child is above the ground, but we know that the body mass must be balanced by something on the other side of that see-saw. We may not believe in ghosts, but that something is not another child! It is an apparition in the aether, a reaction to the presence of that child's action. The gravitons are created as needed. They are what may be termed 'virtual leptons' and, as already implied on page 11, one can show that tau particles play a role here. But they exist in measure related to the inertial mass and they share a synchronized motion in the electromagnetic reference frame solely associated with the jitter that we know features in quantum mechanics. Such effects therefore bring together quantum physics, gravitation and electrodynamics in a very direct way, but the action demands the dynamic balance of a quantum jitter motion, a feature which somehow, quite incredibly, eludes Einstein's theory. The seat of that jitter and the dynamic reaction has to involve energy and action in something that exists in an environmental association with matter but is physically distinct and so we need that aetherial medium. Here again we are reminded that Einstein deliberately chose to reject the need for an aether and thereby failed to grasp its dynamic reality. In that he paid the heavy price of having to wander in a philosophical wilderness searching for his unified field theory. He was searching for a connection between the electrical and gravitational mass properties of matter after actually discarding the missing link, the aether itself. Einstein came close at one point during the early years of wave mechanics to seeing the connection with the Heisenberg jitter activity but he lacked the foresight to interpret his mathematics as representing a real aether and so missed seeing the need for dynamic balance. The acceptance of a coordinated state of jitter motion, which could not occur unless there is an instantaneous action-at-a-distance in the Coulomb sense, is essential to the understanding of the causal factors governing gravitation. It is this that gives the charges their rest mode in the electromagnetic frame, notwithstanding the jitter motion in the inertial frame. This leaves the electrodynamic action of the gravitons as the only related action subject to retardation effects, owing to propagation delays, but even here, exceptionally in the gravitational context, since the gravitons are in synchronized motion owing to their dynamic interaction with the charged matter, even the gravitational force is not subjected to retardation so far as it applies between charged matter at rest in the electromagnetic reference frame. In essence, therefore, this summary account is the basis of the unified field theory offered here by the author. It requires the existence of the energy-active aetherial medium which is our 'Creative Vacuum'. It further requires that this medium, so far as it is coextensive with the range of gravitational action, is, in effect, a universal clock keeping everything in harmonious synchrony so as to share the same jitter frequency. This universal clock keeps what, in Einstein terminology, might be said to be 'improper time'. In order then to explain why experiment suggests that atoms moving through the electromagnetic frame adapt to what is termed their 'proper time' we need to apply the above teachings to a free atom in motion through the electromagnetic reference frame. Note that the connection between electrodynamic interaction and gravitational interaction requires that the electrodynamic force acting between gravitons is directed along the line joining them. The gravity force between matter is, in fact, not a force set up directly between the charges in that matter
file:///C|/mp3/a/3335.htm (2 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:47
but rather a force on their 'field', meaning the closely-associated gravitons. There is no use of the Lorentz force formulation in this analysis because the Lorentz force law is not sufficiently fundamental. As is shown in the papers referenced in this work, we can derive that law as a version of a generic formulation for restricted use in electric circuit theory, but a more fundamental generic force law is needed to explain gravitation. See particularly reference [1]. Fortunately, there is a way of proving this, but first take note that we are to adopt the position that, for gravitons in motion in the electromagnetic reference frame but holding their relative positions unchanged, their electrodynamic interaction force is of the inverse-square of distance form and acts directly between the gravitons. An analogous condition electrodynamically is found in the case of a hydrogen atom in translational motion at speed u through the electromagnetic reference frame. It follows, therefore, that experimental tests on the spectral displacement of radiation from such an atom as a function of speed should confirm the hypothesis about this aspect of the electrodynamic force law. Note here that Einstein's theory dodges the issue by always looking at the problem as if u is zero, and by translating the form of the problem on the assumption that there has been some kind of physical transformation, even one involving time passing at a different rate. This is where the `proper' time versus ìmproper' time aspect is introduced. Unfortunately, for those who adhere to Einstein's principles, those transformations between frames of reference, when applied to the aether itself, actually smear vacuum charge as such, meaning the charge that sustains Maxwell's displacement currents and participates in the quantum jitter motion. They make those currents appear as a series of continuous current filaments. This treats the vacuum medium as having the closed circuit properties which suit the Lorentz version of the electrodynamic force law. The problem treated by the Einstein technique then becomes a distortion of the truth. It is essential, therefore, to stay with the problem of the atom in motion at a translational velocity u and accept the complications of having to factor the actual electrodynamic action into the analysis, whilst working in the universal 'improper' time frame. The basic physics of the Bohr hydrogen atom suffice for this exercise but there is something new here that will surprise physicists. It will be presented below in the precise form of a paper submitted to Physics Letters. The letter of rejection is reproduced immediately following the paper, to show the reader the cursory editorial treatment administered. Then it is for the reader to judge whether the paper, which has bearing on the whole of the unified field theory discussed in this work, warrants such rejection.
file:///C|/mp3/a/3335.htm (3 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:47
file:///C|/mp3/a/3335.htm (4 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:47

PHYSICAL REASON
As we have just seen, it is not a satisfactory argument to say that something can be explained in terms of a `principle' that emerged from Einstein's thoughts. Quoting from Professor A. M. Taylor's Imagination and the Growth of Science (John Murray, 1966), this being the published version of the Tallman Lectures 1964-5 which he delivered at Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Maine, U.S.A.: "Einstein, as a schoolboy of sixteen, was struck by the electrodynamic paradox, and for ten years he puzzled over it."
The paradox concerned the breach of Newton's third law: that action and reaction must always be equal and opposite. The action of a moving magnet on a stationary electric charge appeared to be different from the action of a moving electric charge on a stationary magnet. This is contrary to Newton's third law. Hence the paradox. So, as Professor Taylor stated: "Einstein postulated that the phenomena of electromagnetism, as well as those of mechanics, possess no properties corresponding to the idea of absolute rest; from which it followed that the action of a moving magnet on a stationary electric charge is equal and opposite to the action of a moving electric charge on a stationary magnet. There is in fact no meaning in the words stationary and moving; one ought to say rather that action between a magnet and an electric charge depends only on their relative motion."
So we are told that, based on the experimental findings of the 19th century, certain conclusions were reached about how electric charges and magnets interact. These conclusions were 'paradoxical' and young Einstein worried about it for ten years from the age of sixteen and finally concluded that when we say a magnet is moving it is not really moving and when we say it is at rest it is not really at rest. He told us that we must look at the problem in just such a way as to avoid the paradox by, as it were, putting on special spectacles. These allowed us to see the situation from either perspective, that of the electric charge and that of the magnet and we could rely on the prescription of those spectacles to
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (1 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
contrive to make sense of the paradoxical situation. Now, to me, this is not physics, but illusion. No 19th century physicist would ever say something is at rest or in motion without admitting a frame of reference. The question really at issue, so far as electricity and magnetism are concerned, is simply that of whether one needs to adopt, as that frame of reference, the aether through which body Earth moves in its motion with and around the sun. Whether or not there is a real aether filling all space is not something to be determined by Einstein pondering on the matter for ten years. The empirical properties of interacting electric charges and magnets are the facts from which to decipher the properties of the aether, because the aether is the 'unknown' parameter in the physical equations which apply. One can be sure that, if there is a paradox, it is not because Nature has a problem, but rather because some human intervention has led us astray in interpreting the evidence. Surely the so-called electrodynamic paradox is not to be regarded as the consequence of something akin to Fermat's Last Theorem, where we found a problem to think about but could find no immediate solution. Indeed, on the basis of the Einstein philosophy, Fermat's Last Theorem can be proved by virtue of a postulate that says the problem has no meaning and therefore can have no solution. To say there is no aether on the basis of the problems encountered by the Michelson-Morley experiment is a statement that the person reaching that conclusion has decided that the aether is like a single sheet of graph paper providing a fixed frame of reference on which one can plot the motion of all light waves whatever their source. The paradox posed by that experiment can then be dismissed by declaring, not that there is no aether, but that the analogy with the graph paper is incorrect. The only open question is that of determining the true nature of the aether and this author is not at all disposed to accepting that Einstein's thoughts have rendered that problem meaningless. We will therefore now target Einstein's interpretation of 'time dilation' for attack, to see how it can stand up to scrutiny on the basis of experimental facts. Suppose I am at rest on body Earth and I am looking at an atom moving in uniform translational motion, relative to me and past my field of view at a speed u. The atom is subjected to excitation and radiates photons of a certain frequency which I measure and take as the timing of an atomic clock. Apart from any doppler effects, Einstein's theory tells me that that clock runs slower, so far as I can judge, owing to that motion at speed u. In other words, if I could jump into the atom and share its motion, so that I would then see the atom as at rest from my new perspective, it would beat to a faster time rhythm, even though there is no variation of clock rate as viewed from that Earth-based observation position. Well, this is a very curious clock because it seems able to send its time signals to Earth and somehow lose a few on the way! That is a paradox in itself, but those who advocate this philosophy approach the problem differently, by saying that the clock loses 'time', the faster it travels. They will even tell you that it has all been proved by transporting atomic clocks in jet aircraft and comparing their time with clocks on the ground. Those statements do not stand up to scrutiny, however, because we are concerned with nonfile:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (2 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
accelerated motion and any clock transported by an aircraft is subjected to acceleration. So the experiment to take note of is the one in which atoms radiating photons are transported in a laboratory experiment at very high speed across one's field of view, the atoms being part of a discharge through an evacuated tube. Einstein's theory does not explain how an atomic clock works. It is Bohr's theory of the hydrogen atom that provides the basic insight into how the atomic clock has a time rate. The photons emitted have a frequency determined by the energy released as its electrons change state. Now, when we first learn about Bohr's theory, we are concerned with atoms which we see as being at rest. This means that the only significant forces acting between the atomic nucleus and the electrons are the electrostatic forces and the only significant energy involved is the related electric potential energy plus the kinetic energy of the electrons. The theory assures us that the electron suddenly drops from its excited state to one of lower potential and spontaneously there is emission of a photon having a very well defined frequency proportional to that energy. The timing of the clock must therefore be a function of how fast the energy can be wrapped up, as it were, in a quantum package and receive its 'stamp' of value, its frequency characteristic, before being dispatched at the speed of light. Neither Einstein nor Bohr were concerned with this exercise in logistics. It is like an artillery officer giving the order 'fire' and taking it for granted that his men have loaded the gun. That officer needs to know that the logistics are in place to assure that the shells of the right calibre are in position. Regarding the atom as such a gun, the photon energy to be shed is dispersed through space in the field enveloping the atom, but somehow the act comes together as if everything is instantaneous and the energy is duly dispatched by virtue of rules which we accept as being simply the facts of quantum theory. In a real world, someone needs to express an opinion on that logistics exercise and the opinion I offer is a simple one, namely that the interaction energy adjustments in what is termed the 'Coulomb gauge' do occur with an action that is virtually instantaneous. If Einstein's followers say otherwise, then let them explain the logistics, as otherwise all they are firing from that 'gun' are a few words and mathematical symbols, but not energy. Accepting the proposition of 'instantaneousness', the question then of interest is that of understanding what happens if the atom is moving at that speed u when it sheds the photon. In theory this should introduce electrodynamic forces as between the charged atomic nucleus and the electrons and it should introduce electrodynamic field energy considerations, which are not subject to the instantaneous action but are affected by retardation at the speed of light. Even before we embark on the task of accounting for the effects of motion of the atom, we know, therefore, that we can be sure that the photon package will not be able to capture that electrodynamic energy fast enough to define sharp spectral lines. The clock frequency, however, must be affected by that motion but we confront a mystery in how to factor the electrodynamic effects into the analysis of the problem. Einstein's theory gives an easy answer by saying that the atom itself is not moving anyway, so it emits the photons with the same timing that applies for the atom when presumed to be at rest. There
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (3 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
are no electrodynamic problems to consider. The physical processes involved are pushed aside as if they do not exist. Instead, one takes the clock frequency and simply declares that `time' itself is transformed as the photons are viewed by an outsider watching the atom move across his field of view. Now, I am not willing to accept that argument. It seems to me that, bearing in mind the photon is emitted spontaneously when the atom is 'at rest', it must be emitted spontaneously when the atom is 'moving' at speed u. This means that the electrodynamic energy component cannot contribute to the photon energy, but note, however, that the electromagnetic forces which determine the separation distance between the electrons and the nucleus do affect the electrostatic and related kinetic energies which do, in turn, govern the energy released and so the photon frequency. I expect, therefore, to be able to deduce the effect of motion on the atomic clock rate and the key question is how this compares with the result indicated by Einstein's theory and how both stand up to test against what is observed by experiment. Note that we are here facing the simple issue of whether atomic clock motion supports so-called `time dilation' or whether we are dealing with the loss of clock rate owing to physical reasons connected with the electrodynamics of the moving atom. At this stage I ask the reader to have the good sense to understand that, before one can say an atomic clock when in motion runs slow, solely because Einstein said time itself `dilates', one should at least examine how the physics of the Bohr atom are affected by motion. I admit that I find it outrageous and beyond belief to see physics taught as if everything stems from Einstein's way of looking at the world when our textbooks do not even explore the normal physics of the problem. This is all the more concerning when one sees that the alternative very logical physics treatment gives an atomic clock rate as a function of speed of the atom that is in full accord with experiment. More to the point, the physics involved provides answers helpful in resolving the problems of the Unified Field Theory, which defeated Einstein! The formal paper already mentioned will now be presented, followed by the text of the referee rejection. The expression will be used to represent (1-u2/c2)1/2. The reader's knowledge of the binomial theorem will be needed to compare the expansion of this expression as: 1 - (1/2)(u/c)2 - (1/8)(u/c)4 - ... with the difference of two energy expressions, one concerning electric energy potential and one concerning kinetic energy, being 22 and 5, respectively. These are therefore: 2 - 3(u/c)2 + (3/4)(u/c)4 .... and: 1 - (5/2)(u/c)2 + (15/8)(u/c)4 ..... which differ by: 1 - (1/2)(u/c)2 - (9/8)(u/c)4 ...
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (4 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
It follows that, for small values of u/c, the expression is the same as that for (23 - 5), except for a term of the order (u/c)4. I am going to base my case on the fact that the time dilation formula as used by Einstein has not been tested to this level of accuracy by atomic clock experiments. For the benefit of readers who understand the theory of relativity, I point out also that the fact that fast moving cosmic mesons exhibit a longer life in proportion to 1/ has nothing to do with 'time dilation' and all to do with the enhancement of energy with speed. The added kinetic energy materializes as a statistical presence of mesonic particle pairs of opposite polarity and this adds mesons which can act in an 'understudy' capacity if the primary meson is hit by a decay influence. The decaying meson merely replaces one that is part of the pair-creation and annihilation system. This causes the mean lifetime of the meson, as measured, to be increased approximately in proportion to 1/. For a detailed account of this process see particularly reference [32], but also reference [33] for onward experimental confirmation. We are here concerned, not with muons which have a decay lifetime, but with electrons which exhibit no such lifetime, except as part of their ability to tunnel through potential barriers, as they decay only to be promptly reincarnated in the same form in the near vicinity of their demise [38]. In criticizing Einstein's theory of relativity, I have no intention to allow its advocates to squirm out of the argument by trying to sidetrack from the main issue by appealing to other evidence about some other aspect of the theory. The immediate task at hand is the problem of the atomic clock and its relevance to the electrodynamic interaction between two discrete charges sharing a common component of motion at speed u. Einstein said that the clock would run slow as seen by an observer witnessing that motion. I say that it will operate at a lower frequency because of those electrodynamic forces and that its frequency will not be the same as that derived using Einstein's time dilation formula. I further say that I am making this a point of issue because the correct understanding of the true nature of the law of electrodynamics is going to bring us to the point of success in unifying the gravitational and electromagnetic force. We shall see that the electrodynamic force between two charges moving together at the same velocity is a force acting directly along the line drawn between the two charges and not one of the form prescribed by Lorentz or Einstein. Next we come to the rejected paper in question, as submitted to Physics Letters. Note that the references in the paper are identified by a number sequence applicable only to the paper and do not relate to the main bibliography of this work.
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (5 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (6 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48

ATOMIC SPECTRA AND THE MOVING ATOM

Energy deployed in electrodynamic interactions is physically separate from the electric field and cannot be recovered fast enough to affect photon emission. An atom moving at speed u then has a spectral redshift proportional to 22-3, where is (1-u2/c2)1/2, identical to relativistic time dilation, apart from minor differences of order (u/c)4, but the latter put the relativistic interpretation in doubt.
The Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation based on a study by their Electronics and Surveillance Research Laboratory has recently issued a report [1*] which urges an aether-based treatment of space and time measurement. That report does not, however, contribute any new insight into the physical processes which regulate the time keeping of the atomic clock in motion through space. It assumes that clocks are slowed by the factor of (1-u2/c2)1/2 and that the momentum of a particle of mass m takes the form mu/, where u is the velocity of the clock in the aether frame. The argument then develops from these assumptions using non-relativistic doctrine. However, in the debate between relativity and aether, the fundamental question concerning the timekeeping of an atomic clock is not the issue of whether time itself is speed-dependent, since 'time' has no feature which can be said to have a speed, but the effect of motion on the clock 'mechanism'. In the case of the atomic clock the issue is whether the electrodynamic interaction between the nucleus and the electrons in an atom is dependent upon the translational motion of the atom at that speed u relative to the aether or the observer at rest. There is the equally important question concerning how energy deployed in the field surrounding the atom can be collected in a package fast enough to be shed as a photon, which is the signature of the action we see as defining frequency and which we interpret as time. Note that a photon emitted by an atom changing between specific energy states can hardly be something that waits for the atom to recover its field energy and then stores the energy about to be released until it has all been collected and packaged for emission. That would need another secondary theory to determine the delay time, the storage mechanism and the nature of the ultimate trigger permitting its release. This confronts us with an impossible task, bearing in mind that the deployment of the atom's field energy in its ground state is spread over an indefinite range and supposedly affected by field retardation in the everchanging positions of the atomic electrons. The answer to the first question is that we do not know from our laboratory experiments on charge
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (1 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
interactions how two discrete electric charges in motion relative to the laboratory frame interact in force terms, because all our experiments smear at least one of those motions into a circuital current form. As to the second question, the easiest answer, and the only logical answer for a physicist impressed by the sharpness of frequency of spectral lines, is to say that the motion-related distributed field energy just cannot be redeployed fast enough to affect the emitted photon. The energy component attributable to the electrodynamic interaction is not part of the photon emission. It must be energy that is lost by adding entropy to the field environment, the so-called 'zero-point field', but energy which no doubt can somehow be regenerated, repackaged and shed back to matter-form as part of a process of thermal equilibrium prevailing in atomic matter at a steady mean temperature. There are many researchers who are now looking to the aether as a way forward in explaining certain energy anomalies that are creeping into their experiments and this makes the issue raised by Edgar [1*] topical. The reason is that it seems that energy can become divorced from a specific atomic connection and stored in the aether pending gradual recovery from a quantum-electrodynamic field coupling between atomic electrons and the aether, and in this one sees a link with the problem of the atomic clock. The object here is to show that the above answer to the second question, when taken in conjunction with the facts of experiment concerning the atomic clock, can lead us towards an answer to the first question. It shows us how to avoid the problem of that 'smearing' action by verifying that the component electrodynamic force action between two charges as attributable to their translational motion at a common velocity u is, contrary to the Lorentz force law, at all times the same and is directed along a line drawn between the two charges. In atomic theory one of the primary inconsistencies is the notion of a quantized unit of angular momentum, having regard to the fact that mass can vary as a function of . We find that electric charge is quantized and this would suggest quantization of magnetic moment rather than angular momentum. To bring reconciliation the logical step is to realise that the mass added by motion is seated in the materialization of a kind of 'ghost' particle system. This is that of the fleeting and transient statistical presence of pairs of oppositely charged leptons which can be said to have massenergy accounting for the kinetic energy of the source charge. Separate from the kinetic energy of the individual charges, the electrodynamic action between charges in motion then becomes a collective action seated in a local reference frame defined by that 'ghost' world. It involves field energy which one could say is 'mutual kinetic energy' but which, unlike the kinetic energy of a discrete charge, cannot itself contribute to mass, because it has no overall motion relative to the governing frame and so cannot augment the lepton population. The Bohr theory of the atom affords the easiest presentation by which to bring these factors into perspective in determining how the translational motion of an atom might affect its spectral emission. The Bohr theory assumes a conserved angular momentum for the atomic electrons when there is no spectral emission or event affecting the energy state of the electron. In Newtonian mechanics a conserved angular momentum is the consequence of a centrally-directed force and energy conservation. It makes sense therefore to regard the atom as conforming with both the Bohr and Newtonian conditions between such events and to assume that the regulating quantization of charge velocity moment occurs as a kind of reset action at times of energy transition. Implicit in this is the
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (2 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
underlying requirement of that centrally-directed force, by which any electrodynamic action between the atomic nucleus and an electron must act along the line joining those particles, as does the force of gravity. If these assumptions are correct, then we should be able to derive a satisfactory explanation for the observed electrodynamic redshift of the spectrum of the moving atom without making assumptions about time dilation. The magnetic field energy associated with the electrodynamic force cannot be recovered from the surrounding field fast enough to contribute to the frequency characteristic of an emitted photon. However, the related electrodynamic force action does prevail in the periods between such emission. The radius of the orbital component of electron motion in the atom is affected by that and so depends on the translational motion of the atom, with a consequent modification of the Coulomb interaction energy as between nucleus and electron. As is well known from the Bohr theory of the atom, the energy shed in emitting a photon is determined as the change of the Coulomb interaction energy as offset by half this amount owing to the corresponding change of the kinetic energy of the electron. If, however, the electrodynamic interaction causes the Coulomb attraction to be offset by a factor (u/c)2, then the force which determines the orbital radius of electron motion changes in proportion to 2. The result of this is to adjust the energy state governing the photon to relate to the Coulomb interaction energy as offset by a factor 2/2. However, note that the Rydberg constant, as derived by Bohr theory, is proportional to (Ze2)(Ze2me), where Z is atomic number, e electron charge and me electron mass. The first Ze2 term in brackets corresponds to the energy of the charge interaction but the second such term is really the result of calculating the electron's distance from the atomic nucleus. This latter distance is changed in proportion to 2 owing to the electrodynamic forces and further in proportion to owing to the centrifugal effect of the increase in mass me with speed u. The net result of these 2-dependent modifications is to change the Rydberg term in proportion to [22](3), which is 22-5. This corresponds to a reduction of emission spectrum frequencies with increasing speed u of the atom. Now, when this is compared with the relativistic time dilation factor we find that the differences only appear in the fourth and higher order terms in (u/c). These are too small, given the flow speeds of atoms used in experimental tests for the findings to be capable of interpretation as proof of the time dilation hypothesis. Such evidence of slight discrepancy, as has been reported for the relativistic formulation, gives support for this author's proposition that aether-based electrodynamic principles offer the true explanation. Indeed, there is an underlying and compelling argument in favour of the interpretation based on the non-relativistic case, because if the u-dependence of the atom's time keeping were based on the Lorentzian formulation of eletrodynamic force, which is consistent with relativistic formulation, the 2 term introduced above would become time-dependent during the period taken for the electrons to move around their orbits and its effective mean value would be much reduced. Yet, it is the assumption that the electrodynamic force between electron and atomic nucleus is a direct interaction force along the line joining them, as required for compliance with a gravitational action, and is
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (3 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
constant for action between charges sharing a common motion component u, that results in a redshift in accordance with experimental observation. As the author has shown elsewhere, for example in reference [2*], the known empirical data governing electrodynamic action results in the relevant force law, because two interacting charges cannot develop a turning couple by their mutual interaction and because their interaction with everpresent charge activity in the background field environment can permit energy exchanges with that environment. Such energy exchanges are, in the general case, associated with out-of-balance linear force actions. The law derived by admitting such imbalance of action and reaction nevertheless assures full balance of action and reaction for the specific case where the two interacting charges have no relative motion. This is evident from reference [2*], where it is shown that, since the Neumann potential contains the total energy we associate with the electrodynamic interaction, any force component not represented by this potential must either do no work or do work in such a way that the relative velocity of the two charges is not affected. The Neumann potential component of the resulting force law has a symmetry owing to its (v.v')r form by which the force acts along the charge separation vector r. It would seem, therefore, that when such electrodynamic force action is applied to the atom there is a strong case for regarding the spectral redshift from atoms in rapid translational motion transverse to the observer's line of sight as being not an indication of relativistic time dilation but rather evidence contributing to the empirical data which determines the true law of electrodynamics. The form of law so determined is compatible with the action of gravitation and so this is a step forward in the quest to resolve the long-standing problem of unifying electrodynamics and gravitation. The so-called theory of 'field unification' may not, in the end, be a theory concerning 'fields' as such, but rather a theory in which energy and force are seen as separable from the 'field' at times when there is spontaneous release of energy quanta. The development of the theory of retardation governing actions between electric charge in relative motion and particularly the separation of the Coulomb action from the electrodynamic action has been addressed by this author in a recently published review paper [3*]. The detailed analysis and presentation in that paper are wholly consistent with the new theme presented above. Finally, it is noted that the assumption is often made that the enhanced lifetime of the mu-meson with speed is evidence of time dilation. This is not a valid assumption. As seen by an observer at rest in the lepton-pair creation frame which characterizes the applicable reference frame in electrodynamics, the mu-meson has a mass enhanced by speed and attributable to transient pair creation of mu-mesons. The chance of total decay of this mu-meson complex is reduced by the increase in the mu-meson population, the measure of chance and the overall mass incremented by speed being in inverse proportion. If mass increases in proportion to 1/, so the lifetime of a lepton subject to natural decay is proportional also to 1/, because the chance of decay has reduced in proportion to . Since we have above seen the Lorentz force law come under challenge even though it is unaffected by transformation between inertial frames and this is generally seen as its supporting feature as based on relativity, a note is added below as an Appendix to justify this challenge.
Appendix
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (4 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
If the Lorentz force formula holds in one inertial frame it will, as Edgar [1*] shows, hold in all such frames, given the assumption that momentum is conserved as between lossless colliding particles. Implicit in this, however, is the assumption concerning momentum that we are dealing in mass only and this overlooks the fact that the Lorentz force is concerned with electric charge. Conservation of angular momentum about a centre of motion is solely a consequence of motion of mass under the action of a centrally-directed force, given that energy is conserved. When two electric charges come together in a collision they are subject to mutual force action before they collide and the electrodynamic component of this action is determined by energy which is a function of the square of their relative charge velocities, v'-v. This energy together with kinetic energy and electrostatic Coulomb interaction energy is conserved and one can adduce from this that, since the energy is the same before and after collision, but there has been a redeployment, the two mathematical solutions of (v'-v)2 apply to the two respective states. In other words, the relative velocity of the two charges after impact is -1 times the relative velocity before impact. In Newtonian mechanics, which do not concern electric charge, this circumstance of lossless collisions was derived as Newton's Rule from the assumption of conservation of linear momentum. However, the physics is that of particles which are in their underlying structure nebulous entities of electric charge. By approaching the problem from the electrodynamic aspect one then sees how Newton's Rule takes priority over the momentum conservation principle and in fact we can see that momentum is conserved solely because we have an electrodynamic action between two colliding particles and no net energy transfer to or from that two-particle system in the process. In the real world, however, there are numerous systems of charge in motion and there is inevitably an ongoing exchange of energy between those systems. The physics of the notional two-body problem do not govern the electrodynamic interactions of a system of electrical charge in motion. However, from the physics applicable to electrodynamic actions between two charges if generalized to permit energy exchanges with surrounding charges, one can derive the solutions to problems in mechanics relating to force action between two bodies, each comprising a neutral cluster of many charges. The heart of the problem which besets the Lorentz force law is that it does not, in the general case, satisfy Newton's Third Law but it is accepted because it satisfies the transformation rules which suit relativistic doctrine. The electrodynamic law derived in reference [2*] gives results identical to those based on Lorentz law when applied to closed circuit interactions. Contrary to the Lorentz situation, it also gives the correct form of the law of gravity, even with the planetary perihelion refinements [4*], when applied to charge systems sharing a universal jitter motion, the causal physical basis of Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty. The 'universal' factor is one for which a component of motion shared by all charge is a common velocity u, as used in the above analysis. The electrodynamic force of mutual attraction acting directly between the charges in the atom, has a gravitational counterpart for mutual actions between atoms, but in the latter case the charges involved are those of an overallelectrically-neutral virtual charge population that keeps the dynamic balance with that common jitter motion of matter. We need, therefore, to question the current acceptance of the time dilation hypothesis by reexamining the electrodynamic interactions within the atom.
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (5 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
References
[1*] R.S. Edgar, 'Field Analysis and Potential Theory: Part 3', DSTO Report RR-0017, Australian Government Defence Science and Technology Organisation, December 1994. [2*] H. Aspden, 'A New Perspective on the Law of Electrodynamics', Physics Letters, 111A, pp. 2224 (1985). [3*] H. Aspden, 'Retardation in the Coulomb Potential', Physics Essays, 8, pp. 9-28 (1995). [4*] H. Aspden, 'Physics Unified', (1980), Chapter 2, Sabberton, P.O. Box 35, Southampton, England. In connection with the above paper the following referee statement was provided with the letter of rejection received from Physics Letters: "Manuscript Ho738: Atomic Spectra and the Moving Atom, by H. Aspden The paper is very nicely written but I do not think it is physics, more science fiction. The author is clearly very open minded about the foundations of his subject, being willing, apparently, to jettison relativity, quantum mechanics, even conventional classical electrodynamics. However, since these theories are accepted by almost everyone else, he must provide very strong arguments, which should be explicitly mathematical and include convincing detailed sample calculations, before a physics journal such as Physics Letters A should publish the ideas. I insist on the need for mathematical formulation of the ideas because it is all too easy to be carried away in a verbal phantasy which has only the lexicon of physics but none of its tight logical structure."
The accompanying letter on behalf of Physics Letters A was dated 26 September 1995 and signed by Professor P. R. Holland of the School of Interdisciplinary Sciences at the University of the West of England in Bristol. It read: "Please find enclosed the response from the referee(s) on your paper. We regret that on the basis of the referee's report your paper is not suitable for publication in Physics Letters A. We must therefore unfortunately decline it. Thank you for submitting your work to our journal."
I note that I did enclose with the submitted paper copies of the two references to my prior published papers in Physics Letters and in Physics Essays that I identified in the submitted paper. Both had that 'explicitly mathematical content' and, indeed, I deem the analytical account presented in the submitted paper as being quite explicit in a mathematical sense, especially as the logic of the few equations used in the Bohr Theory of the Hydrogen atom is so elementary and so well known. So, there you have it! Physicists are so well satisfied with their theory of relativity and its 'tight
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (6 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
logical structure' that they would rather stay looking for their Holy Grail, their hoped-for Unified Field Theory, without listening to someone who points his finger directly at the weakness in what they adopt as their logical picture of the moving atom. They have failed to see that the electrodynamic force as between two discrete charges in motion reveals itself very clearly in the radiation spectrum emitted by a moving hydrogen atom as having a form wholly consistent with that of the force of gravity in that it acts directly along the line drawn between the two charges. Yet, when this is drawn to their attention, by inferring that the spectral redshift is the signature of an electrodynamic effect, rather than being a 'time dilation' phenomenon, they choose to regard the argument and the evidence as 'science fiction'. Can you wonder, therefore, why this author has now resorted to experimental investigation aimed at extracting energy from the aether that the learned professors of physics say is an illusion?
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (7 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49

AN EXCURSION INTO QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS

The starting point in the whole of my research has been the subject of electrodynamics and its energy anomalies, by which I mean the experimental anomalies and not the paradoxical notions that beset the theory of the subject. I have found repeatedly, from my attempts to write about such matters, that referees of physics journals delight in pointing to the success of quantum electrodynamics in explaining the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron. They claim such precision in their calculations that is so overwhelming that surely only a fool would dare to think that, by contemplating an aether, there may be a better and easier way of going about that task. So, having discovered the easy alternative, I delved into that wonderful world of QED to see how its magic derived a theoretical value for the g/2 factor of the electron which measurement shows as being 1.001159652193(10). This is the value adopted in consultation with the CODATA Task Group in 1986 and as made available to scientists in U.K. by a pocket chart published by The Royal Society jointly with other learned bodies. The numerical value just quoted is stated to be the magnetic moment of the electron in terms of the Bohr magneton. I saw that a book entitled Introduction to Gauge Field Theory had been authored by Bailin and Love and published in 1986 under the auspices of the Institute of Physics in U.K. and that the promotion literature specifically declared that it provided 'a detailed treatment of quantum electrodynamics'. I bought that book with the express purpose of seeing exactly how those who really understand QED actually obtain the wonderfully precise number that one understands fits so well with the value measured. In a browsing mood, I first opened the book on page 214 and was pleased to see that chapter 14 began with the words: "The spectacular success of quantum electrodynamics (QED) in calculating the Lamb shift and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron and the muon ...". Yes, that statement meant that what I was looking for would be found in the earlier chapters of the book. After all, here was a book on that very subject. I found the relevant section heading on page 140: 'The electron anomalous magnetic moment'. The opening words were: "In this section, we specialise to the case of QED (Abelion gauge theory) and derive the electron anomalous magnetic moment. For convenience we shall work in the Feynman gauge..."
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (1 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
I was expecting then to see the analysis develop to the derivation of something very close to that 1.001159652193(10) number recited above, but, to my horror, the derivation ended on page 142 with the words: "Thus the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron is: ()/2)(e/2m)." Alpha, , is a fundamental constant in atomic physics, the fine-structure constant. I knew that this was only the first-order determination, /2) being the reciprocal of 2(137.036), which is 0.0011614. Evidently the 'spectacular success' was not something I could verify by guidance from that book. I was expected to accept that QED was a 'spectacular success' but it was something I had to take on trust without knowing what assumptions were made in the onward iterations of the calculation. The book was, of course, full of equations, each one following the other and so conveying the impression of being 'a tight logical structure' but when the crunch came and a numerical result should have emerged I had to be satisfied with the above first-order approximation formula. From my academic background in engineering I had always judged the result of a 'tight logical structure' on the end result, by comparing the numerical value derived with that observed as an actual experimental result. I am now going to make the outrageous statement that QED is so powerful a technique that it is like taking a power-driven sledgehammer to crack a nut or, may I say, like using the method of Professor Andrew Wiles to prove Fermat's Last Theorem. There just has to be an easier way to explain how Nature determines that anomalous magnetic moment! A back-of-an-envelope type of calculation can do better than that QED result presented in the book by Bailin and Love. All that is meant by the anomaly of the electron magnetic moment is that the antics of an electron in motion cannot bring to bear the electric energy in the far field zone fast enough to affect its inertia when in orbit having a very restricted radius. There is a cut-off range connected with the electron's Compton wavelength and only the electric field energy within that range contributes to the electron's inertia in its state of minor orbital motion. This may be an engineer's way of looking at the problem, but it is a realistic approach, just as that artillery officer I mentioned earlier would expect to be able to turn his field gun without swinging something around in far off space. If what I have said above about the moving atom and its problems in collecting energy spread over its electromagnetic field is 'phantasy', then so the world of QED is phantasy of an extreme kind, because that goes even further by involving us in the problems of photon-electron interactions and something called 'normalization' to avoid infinities but which amounts to the 'cut-off' range just mentioned. So, I sit, in my aging years, watching the world of physics evolve its 'tight logical structure' and
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (2 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
wonder if that world will ever look up my paper, reference [61] in the bibliography, ('Fundamental Constants derived from Two-Dimensional Harmonic Oscillations in an Electrically-Structured Vacuum', Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 9, 315-323 (1986). That paper shows, in a few pages, how the electron's g/2-factor, can be explained with at least the same precision that is claimed for QED. The formula is: g/2 = 1 + /[2(1+31/2/N) - ] Here, N is determined as the nearest prime number to the value 3/2. Since -1 is just a little above 137, N is 647. Table I below is reproduced from that referenced paper to show how g/2 depends upon the value of -1. -1 (g/2) factor
137.03597 1.001159652365 137.03598 1.001159652280 137.03599 1.001159652195 Table I: Relationship between the fine structure constant and the g/2-factor Now, that paper [61] was received by the publishing journal in November 1985 and at that time I, the author, was completely unaware of the prospect that the CODATA values to be adopted later in 1986 would establish 1.001159652193(10) as the g/2-factor of the electron. Nor did I imagine that the -1 value adopted would be 137.0359895(61). What must then be absolutely clear to anyone reading this is the fact that if QED is a 'spectacularly successful' theory because it provides something very close to this relationship between the finestructure constant and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, then it cannot be any closer than the value derived above using my very simple formula with N as 647. What I offer, however, is a 'back-of-the-envelope' type of analysis for deducing that formula, whereas the eighth-order calculation based on numerous, indeed thousands of, Feynman diagrams as well as arbitrary hadronic involvements, as needed to get a close QED value, is a task that could well keep the reader fully occupied for several years. That assumes the reader has very advanced skills in the relevant mathematics, skills far in excess of the school-level training which suffices to understand my method. As is well known, the electron exhibits a characteristic wave frequency, which is the Compton electron frequency c. This is the frequency of the photon corresponding to the mass-energy of an electron at rest. Now, although Einstein may have said that the idea that something can be at 'rest' is meaningless, I do not accept that. You see, it is a question of deciding whether each electron in the universe is a law unto itself so far as external governing influences are concerned, or whether it is regulated by external influence. I can assure you that that Compton electron frequency is a universal
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (3 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
regulating rhythm that beats the time and all electrons have to dance to that time. They are not free to wander, each having its own proper time, much as Einstein might have wished that to be the case! If you have read in books about 'time' that there is no such thing as 'universal time' then you have exposed yourself to a 'brainwashing' exercise conducted by devil authors who preach the Einstein doctrine but contribute nothing to the science which sustains technological progress. My method involves an energy cut-off range determined by a wave resonance in the near-field zone of the electron as shown in Fig. 1. The length of the radial lines in the outer cavity is half the Compton wavelength of the electron, because the field oscillations are phase-locked by the charge polarity condition. The length of the radial lines in the inner core of the electron charge is approximately the electron charge radius a and represents a standing wave condition of much higher frequency.
Fig. 1: Pattern of electron field cavity wave resonance Now, the electron itself is a form of energy compressed into a field and we can calculate how that energy is distributed. J. J. Thomson did that calculation in the 19th century to find that, in electrostatic units, the energy e2/2a was seated outside the charge radius a. However, he discovered from the study of how electron mass increased with speed, even tending to become infinite as the speed of light was approached, that the effective rest mass of the electron was 2e2/3ac2. This meant that, if the electron were hollow within the radius a, then we could write the energy E as being 3Mc2/4. However, even before Einstein came into the picture in 1905, the Cambridge
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (4 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
cosmologist, the James Jeans already mentioned had, in his early years before being knighted, explained that mass and energy are equivalent and had argued that matter could be annihilated to produce radiant energy. He saw this as being the energy source feeding the sun and all other stars. It is a simple exercise to work out that if the pressure of the electron field at the radius a is the same within the body of the electron, meaning that the charge e has an appropriate distribution conforming with this condition, then the speed of propagation of wave disturbances in the electron charge itself has the value c and that the electric energy inside that radius is e2/6a. So, you see, the net result is an electron of energy 2e2/3a giving a relationship between energy and mass that we can write as E=Mc2. Much of this was accepted physics before Einstein appeared on the scene and was known as 'electron theory', so it is very hard to understand how modern physicists can write that history off as if it never happened! For our immediate purpose, we have now the basis for studying the coordinated wave interaction as between that external influence at the Compton electron frequency and the wavelengths associated with that radius parameter a of the electron. Looking now at Fig. 1, ask yourself how the world outside the electron might interface with the world inside the core charge of the electron. If you think of pressure from the viewpoint of a gas then the interface is just a pressure interface and there is not much to say. However, a gas comprises numerous particles all moving in different directions. There are three degrees of freedom. However, inside that electron it may be that there are not numerous component particles behaving as a gas and moving with those three degrees of freedom. There could be an oscillation that has only one degree of freedom, amounting in its overall effect to a radial oscillation within the radius a. I emphasize here that I have no special insight into what goes on inside an electron. I can only make tentative assumptions and reason on that basis to see how what develops compares with what we see and measure in our experiments. So, I trust you are following the gist of my argument, because I am coming to the point that between the sphere of radius a and the sphere interfacing with those Compton frequency oscillations there is an adjustment at constant pressure in going from one degree of freedom to three degrees of freedom. What this amounts to is that the surface area of that intermediate interface will be three times the surface area of the inner interface. In short, the outer interface radius will be 3a, subject, however, to a little 'tuning'. Now, if this seems a little speculative, there is an alternative approach giving the equivalent result. Look again at Fig. 1 and imagine both the radial oscillations within the core charge of the electron and in the cavity excited at the Compton electron frequency as setting up standing wave antinodes needing to balance those of travelling waves progressing by reflection around a circuit within the middle cavity. You will see that the three-wave interface at the charge surface requires a 120o angular separation. The geometry of this system also requires the outer radius to be 3a. A vital consideration is that point made earlier as to what it is that tells an electron that it is a negative
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (5 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
charge or a positive charge. I do not want to dwell too long on this point so I will simply explain that it is all a question of how those the two frequency modes of oscillation beat together. Undoubtedly, as those who may study the history of aether theory may discover, the answer lies in developing the concepts of C. A. Bjerknes of the period 1877 to 1910 as already mentioned. Positive and negative are states involving oscillations in antiphase, all positive charges sharing a common phase and all negative charges sharing a common phase, but I leave that research to others. Suffice it here to say that the phase of oscillation is important. The Compton electron wavelength has to blend with the wavelength 2a, as the reader can work out from the diagram in Fig. 1. The ratio of these wavelengths has to be an odd integer that cannot be factorized as that would allow the phase of the electron oscillations to have optional values in relation to the regulating universal rhythm of the Compton frequency oscillations. All positive electron charges have the same phase and all negative electron charges have the same phase but positive and negative charges are different because they are in antiphase. This is the secret of the meaning of electrical charge polarity. It is just a question of phase, but there is phase-lock ensuring that there are no maverick charges in the electron family. There are only electrons or their positive versions, the positrons. It is on this basis that there is a constraint on the adoption of the distance parameter a as a wavelength. The wavelength c assumed by the resonant oscillation within the electron has to ensure that: c/2 = Na where N is a prime number. Now, from what has been said above, it can be seen that, since a without this constraint is given by 2e2/3hfc, hfc being the rest-mass energy of the electron and the Compton wavelength c being c/fc, we can write: a = [2e2/hc]c/3 approximately. From these two equations we find that N becomes the nearest prime integer to 3(137)/2, bearing in mind that , which is 2e2/hc, is approximately 1/137. This gives N, uniquely, as 647. The formula on page 49 is then easily explained because the field energy of the electron disposed outside the cutoff radius R is simply e2/2R and R is simply (c/2)(1+ (3)/647). Using the formula: (g/2)(mc2 - e2/2R) = mc2 where m is the normal rest mass of the electron, and also the fact that c is h/mc, it then needs a little algebra to find the residual electron energy thereby effective in confined orbital states of motion. This allows us to determine its ratio to the normal energy applicable for translational motion but one then arrives at the result presented in Table I above.
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (6 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (7 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50

SOME CRITICAL REMARKS

Just in case, at this stage, you are asking yourself why, if what I am offering by my theory is so wonderful, the physics community has not responded in an enthusiastic way, I ought to offer you an explanation. It is because I did not sit in one of those academic compartments occupied by theoretical physicists who enjoy the benefit of state funding allocated to coordinated research within such compartmented peer groups. There is a strong reaction aimed at repelling all who try to intrude into the private territory claimed by such groups. The weapons used are silent but effective. One's original ideas are simply rejected under the cloak of referee anonymity or, if they do somehow penetrate into printed form in journals which are not deemed to be 'mainstream' they are just ignored. Indeed, papers in many nonmainstream journals are excluded from inclusion in the abstracted science literature and so avoid citation record: they are lost forever! There is one other weapon that is brandished in those rare instances where the intruder does penetrate the barriers, as by getting a point across in a Letter to the Editor which refers to the writings of those who have found favour. It is the weapon of public scorn and ridicule. Do you wish me to quote an example to support that assertion? Well, yes, I will even give you an example pertaining to that anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, my non-QED derivation of the g/2 factor. I had drawn attention to this in a Letter to the Editor as published in American Journal of Physics, v. 54, p. 1064 (1986) and, some few months later, I found the following Letter to the Editor had appeared in July 1987 in volume 55 at pp. 584-585. "PI IN THE SKY H. Aspden's [1] amusing "unbelievable" formula for g/2 reminds me of Ramanujan's remarkable number: (2143/22)1/4 = 3.14159265258.. (to be compared with = 3.14159265358..) The agreement with is to 300 parts in a trillion, a factor 10 less spectacular than Aspden's agreement with QED, but, like his, still well within the error of even the most careful measurements of the circumference and diameter of the very finest physical circles. Should one hope that a future theory will confirm that is indeed equal to (2143/22)1/4 thereby freeing us from the need to compute higher and higher order terms in any of the many tedious series mathematicians have had to resort to in these
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (1 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
unenlightened times? Ramanujan's approximation to offers a rather more transparent example of an unbelievable formula against which to assess the validity of one's amazement at Aspden's. Speaking for myself, I'm a little surprised. But not at all astonished. [1] .. H. Aspden, Am. J. Phys. v. 54, p. 1064 (1987). Aspden says there is a theoretical model behind his formula, but he invites the reader to consider the result in and of itself, 'without further elaboration' and it is in that spirit that I offer this reaction." N. David Mermin Department of Physics Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853-2501 Now, it may be that David Mermin was simply seeking to amuse the many physicists in USA who would read this contribution. I had said, in effect: "Look, you are all told that QED gives wonderful quantitative results which can explain the anomalous properties of the electron with such remarkable precision that it convinces you to accept QED principle, but here is a very simple formula that serves the same purpose just as well and which is very simple and has an equally simple supportable physical basis." In the event, David Mermin had implied that I was merely 'playing with numbers', but he had seemingly not taken account of the fact that I had presented a formula which gave the same result as QED whatever the ultimate value of the fine-structure constant . I gave a specific case, showing that the formula was the same as the QED result, even if -1 were 200 rather than a little above 137. I hinted that I might have discovered by my wave-resonance derivation something bearing upon the identity or wave-particle duality that had come from the introduction of quantum theory into electromagnetic energy transfer processes. I still do not see how this has any connection with the subject of Ramanujan's formula for , nor, I presume, had Ramanujan derived his formula from a genuine study of the geometric characteristics of a circle. However, I cannot just point my finger at David Mermin and say that his 'ridicule' has destroyed interest in my own scientific proposition, because, since that formula of mine was published not one single enquiry has been addressed to me asking how I deduced the formula. David Mermin himself could have written to ask if, in fact, he really had doubts and was at all interested. So you must draw your own conclusions. Do those, including perhaps your goodselves, who read about physics generally, really care enough to ask questions to find answers to doubts about what is being told, or are they (and you) merely living a passive role expecting others to select, inform and amuse? Evidently, the world of physics does not conduct itself in the way those who feed it with public funding have a right to expect. It is a world which, so far as I can see, bestows its favours amongst its
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (2 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
own members with no tolerance of any would-be intruder whose only motivation is to interest that community in something discovered outside its closed ranks. If you, the reader, think I am merely exploiting one isolated example in referring to David Mermin, then do refer to pages 160 to 164 of B. W. Petley's 1985 book 'The Fundamental Physical Constants and the Frontier of Measurement', as published in U.K. by Adam Hilger, the publishing house of the Institute of Physics. He explains how "it is not too difficult to synthesize an eight digit decimal number by combinations of the integers 2, 3 and 5 with " and he quotes a Physics Today article in 1971 by Roskies and Prosen and one in 1971 by Robertson in Physical Review Letters on the same point. The gist of this quotation concerned the efforts of record aimed at deriving theoretical values for that constant -1 and also , here used as the proton-electron mass ratio. In the paragraph of Petley's book just preceding those comments, Petley made the following statement: "No doubt the theoretical attempts to calculate the value of and will continue possibly with a Nobel prize winning success. Aspden and Eagles (1972) obtained: -1 = 108(8/1843)1/6 " This was a very curious observation, seemingly ambiguous in its context, given that the following paragraph harped back to the 'numbers game' of those who waste time trying to discredit genuine theoretical effort. In Table 5.3 on page 161 of his book Petley had listed 6 theoretical expressions for -1, dating from 1914 to 1972, including one by Eddington in 1930 giving 137 exactly. The sixth entry in the list was 137.035915, which was this author's value. A seventh entry dated 1973 was the then measured value, stated as 137.03604(11). A separate listing gave three entries for , the proton-mass ratio, dating from 1951 to 1969, but, sadly, it seems that Petley had not seen this author's derivation [3] of the protonelectron mass ratio which was published in a mainstream physics periodical in 1975, as otherwise he would no doubt have included that also in his tabulation. That theoretical derivation of was in full accord with the measured value, even though the latter was known to part per million precision and it was based on the same theoretical principles as applied to -1. I may add here that, as you read through the fourteen papers which follow these remarks, you will be shown how these precise theoretical values for -1 and are derived. Here, I mention further that Brian Petley was writing on the subject on which he was an expert, being a scientist with the National Physical Laboratory in England. I further note that my coauthor on the 1972 paper about the derivation of -1 and also on the 1975 derivation of was employed by the Australian CSIRO at their National Measurement Laboratory and, indeed, these two papers [2, 3] had been submitted for publication with the supporting approval of the Director of that Australian government laboratory.
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (3 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
So, I trust I will not be judged as being a little unreasonable in suggesting that all is not well in our scientific world. Certainly, there is no room for the free-thinking person who has ideas that differ from those prevailing within an institutional research project. I hope that what has been outlined so far will serve as a good introduction to the more formal collection of published papers which follow. This introductory commentary has been given the title 'The Creative Vacuum', because that is what it concerns, the medium in which you, the reader, exist and came to exist as a consequence of Creation. I did not, in the spirit of David Mermin, name this work 'Pi in the Sky', because this is a serious endeavour, not intended to amuse or to mislead, but merely aimed at disclosing some simple solutions to a few of Nature's scientific riddles. These papers, as now reproduced in Part 2, are identically those as presented several years ago. They could be improved by reworking and inevitably there will be the few points that need further clarification and possibly some correction. With that in mind I will await events and see if publication of this work entices comments from readers. Hopefully, in a second edition version, if there is one, I can provide supplementary notes on such points. One such note, directed to an important paper I have referenced but not included in the fourteen appended is needed here in connection with reference [42]. This is the paper, already mentioned, in which I derive the Hubble constant. In that paper I quoted incorrectly the value of the Thomson scattering cross-section of the electron and used that incorrect value to deduce the Hubble constant H. I find upon correction that H-1 would be 3,600 million years if I rely on the standard formula for the Thomson scattering cross-section. Referring to Fig. 1 of this text (page 51) and using the electron radius a of the Thomson electron as defining the obstructing cross-section, the value 21,600 million years would apply. However, if the intermediate field cavity radius shown in that figure is effective the obstructing area is enhanced threefold, making the Hubble time period 7,200 million years. Cosmology today is confused as to the age of the universe based on the notion of an expanding universe. As the conflicting evidence points more and more to a non-expanding steady-state universe the theoretical approach I offer for the cosmological redshift should begin to command the attention of theoreticians, especially those who are inclined to be constructive in their criticism. I find, however, that critics usually prefer to be destructive, no doubt because that is a safer course when confronted with something potentially controversial. It was in 1969 that I published my book 'Physics without Einstein'. One reader wrote to say it was 'too mathematical', even though its formulations were quite simple. Influenced by that, I produced a book 'Modern Aether Science' in 1972, without including any mathematics. A reviewer, someone who had just authored his own book claiming that the universe expands and contracts in cycles, seized upon that non-mathematical aspect and declared that I, the author, was evidently lacking in mathematical skill! No doubt, the title of the book did not help. It seemed to classify it as something archaic and it was not shelved amongst physics books in some bookshops I visited. It did not sell, but yet its message is even more apt now than it was those 24 years ago. Its book jacket indicated that a further mathematical treatment would follow under the title 'Aether Science Papers', but I received no enquiries for that follow-on work and so exercised prudence and patiently struggled to get the occasional paper published in the science periodicals. This, I mention, only because I am now redeeming my 'promise' in naming this book 'Aether Science Papers'. As will be seen, the papers
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (4 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
which follow are mathematical. I ought here to mention again the book 'Physics Unified' which I authored and published in 1980 to get my research to that date on record in a consolidated form. That book gives the formal 'teaching' background which introduces my theory. The fourteen selected papers which follow form a core but are supplemented by many earlier papers of record in the science literature, such as the 1972 paper about -1 and the 1975 paper about . It may, incidentally, come to be noticed from scanning though the titles of those papers, as listed separately on pp. 63-67, that I have shown how to calculate the lifetime of various particles but that the muon lifetime is not mentioned in the titles. The reason is that the muon mean lifetime was derived and published in Physics Unified using my theory and so I did not solicit its separate publication as a paper. I cannot, therefore, resist the temptation to tell you that the 'remarkable success' of QED does not seem to extend to calculating the muon lifetime. The Bailin and Love book, which I mentioned on page 48, included a chapter on 'Feynman Rules for Electroweak Theory'. In that chapter, under a subheading of 'Test of Electroweak Theory', it gave the not-impressive prediction of the mean lifetime of the muon as 2.90+/-2.61 microseconds. It compared this 'test value', as albeit subject to that overwhelming uncertainty, with the measured value of 2.197138+/-0.000065 microseconds. The theoretical value I derive on p. 146 of 'Physics Unified', using the same aether theory that gave -1 and , is 2.1973 microseconds, so I do not see the Feynman methods as being so wonderful. If you, the reader, have been at all impressed by my very simple precise derivation of the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron without use of Feynman diagrams, then you will not be disappointed by what follows. If you remain unimpressed then the rest of this work will not prove of interest and I will not have succeeded in winning you over, but I have done my best and if you can do better in solving the physical riddles of Nature then may you have more success in your own efforts to get your findings accepted! If you feel that the 'aether' is not something one should take seriously and prefer to read about 'electroweak theory' then, to ease your thoughts as you begin to read the first of the selected fourteen papers, I quote from the opening three paragraphs of my 1983 paper entitled 'Planar Boundaries of the Space-Time Lattice' [34]. 'Modern physical theory is tending to regard the vacuum medium as having structure somewhat analogous to that of crystalline materials. Thus we see WEISSKOPF [1] discussing quantum electroweak dynamics and asserting that the Higgs field implies that the vacuum has a certain fixed direction in isospace, namely that of the spinor associated with the Higgs field. WEISSKOPF states that the situation is like that of a ferromagnet, in which the direction in real space is determined as long as the energy transfers are smaller than the Curie energy. This, of course, implies an ordered structure of the vacuum medium, a feature discussed at some length by REBBI [2] in an article entitled 'The lattice theory of quark confinement'. REBBI refers to a 1974 proposal by WILSON that QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) should be formulated on a cubic lattice, an array that divides space
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (5 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
and time into discrete points, but is essentially an approximation to real space-time. The advantage is that this allows calculations to be made that would otherwise be impossible. This author, in collaboration with Dr. D. M. Eagles [3], has advocated the analysis of a vacuum structure and shown how a value of the fine-structure constant correct to about one part in a million can be determined by a cubic lattice model of the vacuum. Further research on this model has now shown the essential need for a particular boundary condition imposed upon a physical portrayal of the vacuum state expressed in terms of electrical charge. It is in view of the current interest in lattice theory as applied to the vacuum field system that it seems appropriate to draw attention to what has been, to the author at least, a rather elusive consideration. [1] V. C. WEISSKOPF: Physics Today, v. 34-11, p.69 (1981) [2] C. REBBI: Scientific American, v.248, p.36 (1983) [3] H. ASPDEN and D. M. EAGLES: Physics Letters A, v. 41, p.423 (1972)." This paper went on to explain why the storage of electric field energy in the vacuum (the aether) demands the presence of planar lattice boundaries, which implies a domain structure in space somewhat analogous to that found in ferromagnetic materials. The paper was written in 1983, a few weeks after I retired from my executive position with a multinational corporation to engage in a private research venture as a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at my local university. Some 29 years earlier I had parted from my Ph.D. research on magnetism at Trinity College, Cambridge to take up a career in industry, but it was that academic research background concerning ferromagnetism and its domain structure that led me to conceive the need for an aether that was similarly structured. The chronological development of the papers, as reproduced and as listed in the following pages, reflects that circumstance by which I spent those 29 years away from the academic world, whilst still developing a scientific theory of such wide scope. It may also explain why this effort has proved such a struggle, but, then again, it might further explain why there has been such fruitful progress, because there were no peer-constraints affecting project funding and suppressing originality. The time has, however, come when, some 13 years on from retirement from the business world, this consolidated presentation of my theory is warranted.
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (6 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51

EPILOGUE
Having shown the power of my theory and presented (as by the tenth appended paper) what has to be a convincing account of the true nature of gravitation, I remind readers of that riddle and the challenge I introduced at the outset of this work. It will, I am sure, become possible to build the machine that can harness the force of gravity. One might hope to see a levitating machine operating with an energy input that is minute in relation to the power demands of 20th century aerospace technology. That objective is a little beyond my own horizon, even though I remind readers of my early reference on page 28 to John Davidson's book The Secret of the Creative Vacuum. It is not beyond my range of view to see in prospect the possibility of so enhancing the gravitational pull on the working core of a machine that the drop in consequential energy potential releases very substantial amounts of heat energy. This could become a way of doing the work of the Maxwell Demon, namely the effortless pumping of energy from a cold to a hot environment. That would provide us with a pollution-free new source of power. With that in mind I offer now another clue. It was noted that uranium was amongst the four metals that were candidates for use in exploring the supergravitational activity, but neodymium and samarium were more likely to be destined to be at the heart of that future technology. However, it will give confidence to the project if we can also understand why uranium is also so very special in this gravitational context. The reason is similar to the dual influence applicable close to the atomic number Z=61 (promethium). There was a 5th harmonic resonance by the K-shell electrons coupled to the gravitational frequency (the Compton electron frequency). Also, as explained in the fourth of the appended papers, for corresponding orbital motion there was a strong perturbation because the orbiting electron sweeps close to the aether lattice charges at radius d 2 from the atomic nucleus centred at an aether lattice site, where d is the lattice spacing. One needs now to imagine a gravitational resonance involving the electrons in the L or higher order atomic electron shells. Note that the harmonic pulsation frequency of the electrons, as set up in the electromagnetic reference frame, is the Compton electron frequency multiplied by the factor:
file:///C|/mp3/a/6062.htm (1 of 3)25.4.2005 22:31:51
(Z)2/n3 Here is the fine structure constant (approximately 1/137), n is the Bohr quantum number of the electron, is 1 or 2 according to whether one electron is active or two in antiphase motion are active and is the order of the harmonic setting up the resonant condition. The latter condition is then given by resonant tuning giving a phase-lock condition in an atom for which Z has a value close to that given by: Z2 = (n3>)(137)2 From this, with n=2, the least value of corresponding to a value of Z in the range of stable atoms is then seen to be 9, with equal to 2, so determining Z as 91. Now this is a quite remarkable circumstance, because it not only determines which harmonic is governing but it also replicates the situation we see for neodymium (Z=60), promethium (Z=61) and samarium (Z=62) by a new sequence. Thorium (Z=90), protactinium (Z=91) and uranium (Z=92) constitute a special group as well, with a very rare middle element. Unlike promethium, protactinium has a finite abundance, but it is virtually non-existent, being ten parts in a billion of the abundance values of its `next of kin' thorium and uranium! Surely this is evidence of a supergravitational influence acting upon the two atomic elements that are at the centre of each of these dual resonant situations. I can also add the point that had I set 85 J/gm as the threshold level for the latent heat of fusion of metals with melting points in excess of 1,000oC, there is only one metal that would then have been added to Nd, Sm, Au and U in that introductory note on page 1. That metal is the one we see next to protactinium, thorium with a latent heat of fusion of 82.8 J/gm! The latent heat of fusion of promethium Pm (Z=61) and protactinium Pa (Z=91) were not listed in my data source as having been measured. Promethium (3.7 year half-life) is a fission product of uranium. As to protactinium, even if the wisdom of nuclear experts favours attributing its scarcity to some quirk of radioactive decay, they must surely view the natural absence of promethium as a real mystery and give serious consideration to the supergravitational proposition offered here. Hopefully these thoughts will cause scientists to realise that the gravitational theory I have developed gives a new direction for research aimed at harnessing the link indicated between gravity and these particular atomic elements. In the meantime, and even before that research prospect of technological benefit emerges on the near horizon, I do hope that common sense will prevail and scientists will have the wisdom to turn their attentions away from Einstein's theoretical treatment of gravitation. Leaving the gravitional challenge to the future, I now conclude this dissertation. I believe that enough has been presented in this work to put my discoveries on record for scrutiny by future generations. The present generation of theoretical physicists has shown an unwillingness to pay attention to my findings and so they are best left to squander their time on their own devious attempts to interpret a universe of their own imagination. I was, by that anonymous referee quoted on pp. 46-47, accused of presenting phantasy and science fiction as physics and offering no tight logical mathematical structure.
file:///C|/mp3/a/6062.htm (2 of 3)25.4.2005 22:31:51
You, the reader, if you have read what I have presented in this work, must now judge whether or not my `phantasy' world has something to offer. Meanwhile, I now look away from the 'physicist' who wears his fine and invisible garments woven from a 'relativistic web' over his 'superstring' vest. I appeal instead to that portion of the scientific community that sees technology as having the more prominent role in scientific endeavour and I ask that attention be paid to the role the aether can play in supplying the pollution-free power we need in the 21st century. As readers will understand from the dates of the papers referenced and presented, virtually all of what has been described was completed more than six years ago. I could have produced this collection of papers then, but I have deemed it more important to divert my attentions to experimental projects. I shall now concentrate on writing about 'Energy Science' from a practical viewpoint and describing the results of my endeavours of the past six years on that task of extracting energy from the aether. Being academically trained and well versed in conventional disciplines of physical science it has not been easy for me to overturn in my mind the dogma that block research interest in the latter field. Nor has it been easy to solve the riddle of gravitation but we have now the solution, thanks to overturning belief in erroneous dogma. Gravitation aside, the breakthrough factor in this work has been the new fundamental principles of electrodynamics which we can already see have practical application in the latest research on the generation of a new form of electrical power. It came as a welcome surprise to see that Dr. Paulo Correa acknowledged the relevance of my work [1,34,112] in the U.S. patents [117,118] which describe the research findings on that new power generation project and I record here my appreciation for that recognition. Undoubtedly the way forward is to show that we can tap energy from the aether even though this does mean overturning some of the accepted doctrines in physics. 'Aether Science Papers' may help to ease the bewilderment of the scientific community as the new technology emerges. H. Aspden, PhD, BSc, FIEE, FIMechE, MInstP, C.Eng, C.Phys, Wh.Sc. May 1996
file:///C|/mp3/a/6062.htm (3 of 3)25.4.2005 22:31:51

THE BIBLIOGRAPHY
Papers by H. Aspden [1] ... 'The Law of Electrodynamics', Journal of the Franklin Institute, 287, 179-183 (1969). [2] ... [Jointly with D. M. Eagles], 'Aether Theory and the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 41A, 423-424 (1972). [3] ... [Jointly with D. M. Eagles] 'Calculation of the Proton Mass in a Lattice Model for the Aether', Il Nuovo Cimento, 30A, 235-238 (1975). [4] ... 'The Fresnel Formula applied to Empty Space', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 15, 263-264 (1976). [5] ... 'Inertia of a Non-radiating Particle', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 15 631-633 (1976). [6] ... 'A New Approach to the Problem of the Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Electron', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 16, 401-404 (1977). [7] ... 'Electrodynamic Anomalies in Arc Discharge Phenomena', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS-5, 159-163 (1977). [8] ... 'Energy Correlation Formula Applied to Psi Particles', Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 59-63 (1978). [9] ... 'Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism', Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 281-288 (1978). [10] .. 'G Fluctuations and Planetary Orbits', Catastrophist Geology, 3-2, 1-2 (December 1978). [11] .. 'Ion Accelerators and Energy Transfer Processes', U.K. Patent Specification No. 2,002,953A (Published 28 February 1979). [12] .. 'The Spatial Energy Distribution for Coulomb Interaction', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 25, 456458 (1979). [13] .. 'Energy Correlation of Radiative Decays of Psi(3684)', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 26, 257-260 (1979). [14] .. [Jointly with D. M. Eagles], 'The Spatial Distribution of the Interaction Contribution to the Magnetic-Field Energy Associated with Two Moving Charges', Acta Physica Polonica, A57, 473-482 (1980). [15] .. 'The Inverse-Square Law of Force and its Spatial Energy Distribution', J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 13, 3649-3655 (1980). [16] .. 'Speculations in General Plus Some of My Own', Speculations in Science and Technology, 3, 114-116 (1980). [17] .. 'UFOs and the Cosmic Connection', Energy Unlimited, 8, 37-40 (1980). [18] .. 'A Theory of Neutron Lifetime', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 31, 383-384 (1981).
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (1 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
[19] .. 'Atmospheric Electric Field Induction', Speculations in Science and Technology, 4, 314-316 (1981).' [20] .. 'The Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Electron', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 32, 114-116 (1981). [21] .. 'Electron Form and Anomalous Energy Radiation', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 213-216 (1982). [22] .. 'A Theory of Pion Lifetime', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 237-239 (1982). [23] .. 'The Correlation of the Anomalous g-Factors of the Electron and Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 481-484 (1982). [24] .. 'Mirror Reflection Effects in Light Speed Anisotropy Tests', Speculations in Science and Technology, 5, 421-431 (1982). [25] .. 'Charge Induction by Thermal Radiation', Journal of Electrostatics, 13, 71-80 (1982). [26] .. 'The Aether - an Assessment', Wireless World, 88, 37-39 (October 1982). [27] .. 'Relativity and Rotation', Speculations in Science and Technology, 6, 199-202 (1983). [28] .. 'The Lamb Shift for a Cavity-Resonant Electron', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 36, 364-368 (1983). [29] .. 'The Thunderball - an Electrostatic Phenomenon', Institute of Physics Conference Series No. 66: Electrostatics 1983, pp. 179-184. [30] .. 'The Determination of Absolute Gravitational Potential', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 169172 (1983). [31] .. 'The Nature of the Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 210-214 (1983). [32] .. 'Theoretical Resonances for Particle-Antiparticle Collisions based on the Thomson Electron Model', 37, 307-311 (1983). [33] .. 'Meson Lifetime Dilation as a Test for Special Relativity', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38 206210 (1983). [34] .. 'Planar Boundaries of the Space-Time Lattice', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 243-246 (1983). [35] .. 'The Mass of the Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 342-345 (1983). [36] .. 'The Assessment of a Theory for the Proton-Electron Mass Ratio', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 423-426 (1983). [37] .. 'The Scope for First-Order Tests of the Light Speed Anisotropy', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 568572 (1983). [38] .. 'The Finite Lifetime of the Electron', Speculations in Science and Technology, 7, 3-6 (1984). [39] .. 'Electromagnetic Reaction Paradox', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 247-251 (1984). [40] .. 'The Muon g-Factor by Cavity Resonance Theory', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 271-275 (1984). [41] .. 'Boson Creation in a Sub-Quantum Lattice', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 40, 53-57 (1984). [42] .. 'The Steady-State Free-Electron Population of Free Space', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252256 (1984). [43] .. 'Don't Forget Thomson', Physics Today, 15 (November 1984). [44] .. 'The Nature of the Pion', Speculations in Science and Technology, 8, 235-239 (1985). [45] .. 'The Maxwell-Fechner Hypothesis as an Alternative to Einstein's Theory, Speculations in Science and Technology, 8, 283-289 (1985). [46] .. 'Unification of Gravitational and Electrodynamic Potential based on Classical Action-at-aDistance Theory', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 44, 689-693 (1985) [47] .. 'The Paradox of Constant Planetary Mass as Evidence of a Leptonic Lattice-Structured Vacuum State', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 44, 705-709 (1985).
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (2 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
[48] .. 'The Exploding Wire Phenomenon', Physics Letters, 107A, 238-240 (1985). [49] .. 'A New Perspective on the Law of Electrodynamics', Physics Letters, 111A, 22-24 (1985). [50] .. 'Theoretical Evaluation of the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 110A, 113-115 (1985). [51] .. 'The Proton Enigma', American Journal of Physics, 53, 938 (1985). [52] .. 'More on Thomson's Particles', Americal Journal of Physics, 53, 616 (1985). [53] .. 'Weak Violation - a New Concept in Relativity?', Nature, 318, 317-318 (1985). [54] .. 'Earnshaw's Theorem', Nature, 319, 8 (1986). [55] .. 'Anomalous Electrodynamic Explosions in Liquids', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS14, 282-285 (1986). [56] .. 'How to Test Special Relativity', Nature, 321, 734 (1986). [57] .. 'Classical Relativity', Nature, 320, 10 (1986). [58] .. 'Electron Self-Field Interaction and Internal Resonance, Physics Letters, 119A, 109-111 (1986). [59] .. 'The Mystery of Mercury's Perihelion', The Toth-Maatian Review, 5, 2475-2481 (1986). [60] .. 'Flat Space Gravitation', Physics Education, 21, 261-262 (1986). [61] .. 'Fundamental Constants derived from Two-Dimensional Harmonic Oscillations in an Electrically Structured Vacuum', Speculations in Science and Technology, 9 315-323 (1986). [62] .. 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, 9, 129-136 (1986). [63] .. 'Meson Production based on Thomson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 137-140 (1986). [64] .. 'An Empirical Approach to Meson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 153-157 (1986). [65] .. 'The Theoretical Nature of the Photon in a Lattice Vacuum', pp. 345-359 in the Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Quantum Violations: Bridgeport, Connecticut 23-27 June 1986, published by Plenum in NATO ASI Series B: Physics vol. 162. [66] .. 'A Causal Theory of Neutron Diffraction', Physics Letters 119A, 105-108 (1986). [67] .. 'On the Creation of the Sun', The Toth-Maatian Review, 5, 2609-2612 (1986). [68] .. 'The Case for the Sub-Electron', The Toth-Maatian Review, 5, 2827-2833 (1987). [69] .. 'Ampere's Law: Comments on a Discussion by Milnes', The Toth-Maatian Review, 6, 29812984 (1987). [70] .. 'Derivation of the Electrodynamic Force Law', The Toth-Maatian Review, 6, 2985-2987 (1987). [71] .. 'The Exploding Wire Phenomenon as an Inductive Effect', Physics Letters, 120A, 80-82 (1987). [72] .. 'Earthquake-Related EM Disturbances', Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 28, 535-536 (1987). [73] .. 'A Note on the Silvertooth Experiment', Speculations in Science and Technology, 10, 9-12 (1987). [74] .. 'Earnshaw's Theorem', American Journal of Physics, 55, 199 (March 1987). [75] .. 'The Physics of the Missing Atoms: Technetium and Promethium', Hadronic Journal, 10, 167172 (1987). [76] .. 'Synchronous Lattice Electrodynamics as an Alternative to Time Dilation', Hadronic Journal, 10, 185-192 (1987). [77] .. 'Steady State Electrodynamic Induction - A Feature of the General Law of Electrodynamics', Progress in Space-Time Physics 1987, Editor J. P. Wesley, Benjamin Wesley, Blumberg, Germany, pp. 137-155 (1987).
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (3 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
[78] .. 'Tests of Photon Theory in Terms of Precision Measurement', Problems in Quantum Physics; Gdansk '87, (Conference Proceedings), Editors L. Kostro et al., World Scientific, New Jersey, pp. 353-373 (1987). [79] .. 'EM Wave Interference', American Journal of Physics, 56, 103 (February 1988). [80] .. 'Ghost Mass and the Unseen Energy World as Revealed by the Anomalies of the Gyroscope', The Toth-Maatian Review, 6, 165-3171 (1987). [81] .. 'Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer', Hadronic Journal, 11, 307-313 (1988). [82] .. 'The Theory of the Proton Constants', Hadronic Journal, 11, 169-176 (1988). [83] .. 'A Theory of Proton Creation', Physics Essays, 1, 72-76 (1988). [84] .. 'Do We Really Understand Magnetism?', Magnets, 1, 19-24 (1988). [85] .. 'The Vacuum as our Future Source of Energy', Magnets, 3(8), 15-18 (1988). [86] .. 'A Modern Test for the Ether?', Physics Today, 41, p. 132 (March, 1988). [87] .. 'The Proton Factor and its Unknown Effects', The Toth-Maatian Review, 7, 3725-3734 (October 1988). [88] .. 'Anti-Gravity Electronics', Electronics & Wireless World, 29-31 (January 1989). [89] .. 'Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation and Biological Effects', Speculations in Science and Technology, 12, 17-20 (1989). [90] .. 'Conservative Hadron Interactions Exemplified by the Creation of the Kaon', Hadronic Journal, 12, 101-108 (1989). [91] .. 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant', Physics Essays, 2, 173-179 (1989). [92] .. 'A Theory of Pion Creation', Physics Essays, 2, 360-367 (1989). [93] .. 'The Supergraviton and its Technological Connection', Speculations in Science and Technology, 12, 179-186 (1989). [94] .. 'Standing Wave Interferometry', Physics Essays, 3, 39-45 (1990). [95] .. 'The Harwen Energy Radiation Regenerator', Speculations in Science and Technology, 13 295299 (1990). [96] .. 'Maxwell's Demon and the Second Law of Thermodynamics', Nature, 347, 25 (1990). [97] .. 'Switched Reluctance Motor with Full A.C. Commutation', U.S. Patent 4,975,608 (4th December 1990). [98] .. 'Thermal Power Device', U.K. Patent Specification 2 239 490A (Published 3rd July 1991). [99] .. 'The Theory of Antigravity', Physics Essays, 4, 13-19 (1991). [100] . 'Power Lines, Cancer and Cylotron Resonance', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 774-775 (September 1991). [101] . 'Magnets and Gravity', Magnets, 6(6), 16-22 (1992). [102] . 'Electricity without Magnetism', Electronics World, 540-542 (1992). [103] . 'The Law of Perpetual Motion', Physics Education, 28, 202-203 (1993). [104] . 'The First Law of Thermodynamics', Physics Education, 28, 340-342 (1993). [105] . 'Retardation in the Coulomb Potential', Physics Essays, 8, 19-28 (1995). [106] . 'Vacuum Spin as a New Energy Source', Proceedings: International Symposium on New Energy, Denver, Colorado, April, 1996, pp. 1-19.
Books by H. Aspden
[107] . 'The Theory of Gravitation', pp. 48 (1960), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (4 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
SO16 7RB, England. [108] . 'The Theory of Gravitation', 2nd Ed. pp. 132 (1966), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [109] . 'Physics without Einstein', pp. 224 (1969), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [110] . 'Modern Aether Science', pp. 165 (1972), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [111] . 'Gravitation', pp. 78 (1975), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [112] . 'Physics Unified', pp. 206 (1980), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England.
Other publications by H. Aspden

[113] . 'Space, Energy and Creation', pp. 24 (1977), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England.
Other references
[114] . Altschuler, M.D., Howe, L.L. & Hildner, E., 'Is Ball Lightning a Nuclear Phenomenon?', Nature, 228, 545 (1970). [115] . Chukanov, K.B., 'Final Quantum Revelation', General Energy International, Salt Lake City, Utah, pp. 220-221 (1994). Samokhin, A., 'Vacuum Energy - a Breakthrough?', Press Release No. 03NTO-89071CM04, Novosti Press Agency, Moscow (1989). [116] . Correa, P.N. & Correa, A.N., (1995), 'Electromechanical Transduction of Plasma Pulses', U.S. Patent No. 5,416,391. [117] . Correa, P.N. & Correa, A.N., (1995), 'Energy Conversion System', U.S. Patent No. 5,449,989. [118] . Correa, P.N. & Correa A.N., (1996), 'Direct current Energized Pulse Generator Utilizing Autogeneous Cyclical Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharges', U.S. Patent No. 5,502,354. [119] . Davidson, J., 'The Secret of the Creative Vacuum', pp. 429 (1989), C.W. Daniel & Co., Saffren Walden, England. [120] . Kapitza, P.L., Reviews of Modern Physics, 51, 417 (1979). [121] . Lambertson, W.A., 'History and Status of the Win Process', Proceedings of the International Symposium on New Energy, Denver, Colorado, May 12-15, 1994, pp. 283-288. [122] . Pappas, P.T. & Vaughan, T., 'Forces on a Stigma Antenna', Physics Essays, 3, 211 (1990). [123] . Veronnet, A., Comptes Rendus, 188, 1380-1381 (1929).
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (5 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (6 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
Aether Science Papers (Back Cover)
Aether Science Papers: Commentary on Back Cover

BY HAROLD ASPDEN
The author has, for some 40 years now, sought to interest the world of science in his discoveries concerning the nature of the force of gravitation. His contribution has not been heeded because the research findings have not developed from the conventional theoretical stream. Yet, from his Ph.D. research at Cambridge on anomalous energy activity in ferromagnetism, Dr. Aspden could see so clearly where the mathematical philosophers had erred drastically in replacing the aether by mathematical symbols before they had fully understood how it stores energy. The aether plays a creative role, besides constituting a universal energy bank, giving us the means to deposit and withdraw energy. Left to its own devices it even absorbs the energy we shed as waste and which we write off under the heading 'entropy' but it does something our textbooks say is impossible. It thrives on that energy and regenerates it in a material form by creating the particles we know as protons and electrons. However, scientists have become blind and cannot 'see' such an aether in their vision of things. They look only at how created matter evolves and see no creative source. So they devise computer programs to test their imagination of a universe in a notional Big Bang scenario, with scant regard to the simple problem of how the energy of electromagnetic induction is actually stored in 'empty' space in our laboratories here and now on earth. In so doing they create obstacles in science where none exist, imposing their will on Nature's province and missing key issues which should be obvious to any mechanic. They use equations to represent electrodynamics, say energy has mass, introduce a quantum jitter which makes the position and momentum of that mass uncertain, and then forget to look for whatever it is that accounts for dynamic mass balance and so keeps their jittering wave mechanical universe from tearing itself into pieces. They try to understand gravity as a property of matter and cannot see that it is a property of the aether by which it responds to the presence of matter to keep it in dynamic balance. They complicate gravitation by declaring it to be a distortion of 'space-time' by matter but still cannot reach their objective of field unification. In adopting Einstein's theory mathematicians have confounded our understanding of physics, without realising that there is a better way forward by which to solve the mystery of unification of gravitation and electrodynamics. Although this unification is of clear record in the scientific literature, one needs a guide map to find a way to the relevant clearing in the jungle of periodicals which line university library shelves. This book provides that guidance and goes further in presenting the full text of fourteen of the basic papers. The reader will see from these papers how easy it is to derive the constant of gravity in terms of the electron charge-mass ratio and determine by simple theory the precise value of the protonelectron mass ratio. Given this unifying connection between gravitation and matter creation, one can see a way forward by which to tap some further energy from the same source as that which fed the creation of the universe. We are now on the brink of a technological revolution that will deliver us energy in abundance with no risk of pollution, but we need to understand its source, that real medium, the aether, that so many think of as a mere vacuum. ISBN 0 85056 015 2 Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England
file:///C|/mp3/a/back.htm (1 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:52
CAN GRAVITY BE AN ELECTROSTATIC FORCE?

H. Aspden, 2005 Introduction Unlike electromagnetic force, which acts at right angles to charge motion, gravity is a simple direct inverse-square of distance force, as is electrostatic action. Yet we struggle and fail to forge a link between gravitation and electromagnetism. Can it be that what is seemingly impossible, mutual electrostatic action between matter that is uncharged electrically, is the true answer to the mystery of gravitation? Here we see that there is a strong case in favour of this proposition. A Quantum Theory of Gravitation The Schuster-Wilson hypothesis is of relevance here, as is the related research of Nobel Laureate, Blackett [1], it being evident that the charge only reveals itself indirectly in setting up a magnetic moment and only then in a form not concentrated locally as a function of mass density of matter present. In-depth research on this topic has led the author to believe that rotation of the omnipresent space medium, our quantum underworld, can induce electric charge displacement which can set up a magnetic moment, as in the Sun or body Earth. This research indicates the existence of a charge continuum in space which is neutralized by a structured array of charges of opposite polarity and which governs quantum phenomena and determines basic physical constants. One then finds that continuum charge is displaced by the presence of a graviton population associated with matter present and here one discovers the physical basis of gravitation. The gravitons, which share with matter the Heisenberg jitter motion of quantum theory, provide the mass-related dynamic balance essential to cope with the motion imparted by the quantum underworld of space. This means that the force of gravitation really acts between those gravitons and is, via them, dynamically-coupled with matter that is itself electrically neutral. Note now a key point at issue. Electrostatic force between two like polarity charges is repulsive but here we are concerned with charge displaced by the presence of gravitons and that implies the effect of voids in a background charge continuum and so mutual attraction between the gravitons creating those voids as the enveloping charge seeks to spread by pushing the gravitons together. Another key point which needs consideration is the question of how a quantum theory of gravitation which implies a graviton form as a unit of gravitational action can account for weak gravitation forces that still depend upon G but arise from mass or its energy equivalent that is much smaller than the graviton mass. The answer to this is found by recognizing that gravitons, being leptons, can exist in charge pairs and can exchange energy as between themselves and another associated particle form. On a steady gravitational basis the taon form dominates the action according to the charge continuum volume displaced but on a transient basis minor fluctuations in volume of a heavier graviton form cater for the balance.
How then do those gravitons feature in the spectrum of particle physics? Research shows that they mainly comprise the taon - the mystery lepton particle that sits alongside the muon and the electron in the bottom line of the standard quark picture of the particle grid. As to that heavier graviton form it is somewhat elusive but has been detected at around 2.587 GeV in the particle spectrum and is best referred to as the Japanese Hquantum [2]. It exists in anti-particle pairs alongside two anti-particle taon pairs, meaning that there is one such heavy graviton for every two taon-gravitons. How is all this justified? Simply by derivation of G, the gravitation constant, in terms of the taon mass. Where is the proof of all this? Now, seriously, how can the Gravity Research Foundation expect that in an Essay of 1500 words or less? The proof is of record elsewhere [3] but, this being written solely to meet the concise requirements of the Foundations Essay competition, it can best be summarized by the following commentary and equations which show how G depends upon the taon/electron mass ratio. Step 1: Determine , the charge density of the space continuum. Do this by delving into the quantum properties of space, as evidenced by the Bohr Magneton er, e being the charge of the electron. With r having the value h/4mec we then account for the photon in terms of spin of a 3x3x3 component of that structured charge array mentioned above. This gives us the equation: hc/2e2 = 144r/d where r is the orbital radius of charge motion, h is Plancks constant, c is the speed of light and d is the cubic spacing of those charges. Accordingly: = e/d3 We now know the value of because we can eliminate h/r and deduce that: mec2 = 72e2/d me being the rest mass of the electron. Step 2: For encouragement at this stage note that we could digress to find the ratio r/d simply by analysis of electrostatic interaction energy density of the space medium and arguing that it cannot be negative, thereby accounting for charge being displaced from sites at which they would be at rest and so determining r and telling us that the quantum underworld must have that jitter motion postulated by Heisenberg. The analysis is of early record elsewhere [4]. It allows precise determination of the fine-structure constant, a quantity explained by no other theory. Step 3: We now formulate the link with G in terms of the taon and the heavier graviton form, of masses m and mg and volumes V and Vg, respectively: %G(2m + mg) = (2V + Vg) Next we need to use a formula dating back to the pre-Einstein era of J. J. Thomson: mc2 = 2e2/3a which applies to the electron and also relates the mass m of our two particles with their charge radius a and so their volume. This assumes that the charge e is distributed within the sphere of radius a so as to have uniform pressure or energy density. The volume to mass ratio of the two-taon and heavy graviton combination must match the corresponding volume to mass ratio for transient fluctuations in which a pair of heavy gravitons annihilate one another to share the volume of three such gravitons in a single charge. The same condition arises for the case where energy is exchanged between the field system of matter and the heavy graviton with, for such minor fluctuations, the preservation of gravitational potential overriding the need for perfect dynamic balance. In the latter case the slight expansion of graviton volume increases just enough to match the
mass-energy added to the system of matter, thereby keeping gravitational potential unchanged. The relevant volume to mass ratio which has to equal: (2V + Vg)/(2m + mg) is then: 3Vg/mg Since charge volume is inversely proportional to the cube of the related mass one finds from the above equality that: (mg/m)3 - 3(m/mg) -1 = 0 which, upon solution, gives: (mg/m) = 1.452627 This allows us then to write: %G = (3Vg/mg) Step 4: One can now evaluate G based on the measured value of the taon massenergy, which is 1.781 GeV or 3485 electron mass units, to find that the heavy graviton becomes 2.587 Gev or 5063 electron mass units. Note that d is 72e2/mec2 and so is 108 times the electron charge radius, the latter being 5063 times the charge radius of the heavy graviton. Given that is e/d3 we then find that: %G = 4(e/me)/(108)3(5063)4 and, e/me being 5.272 esu/gm, this tells us that G has the value 6.67x10-8 dynes.cm2.gm-2. Conclusion Physicists, and notably Weisskopf [5], have been puzzled as to the role played by both the muon and the taon, the heavy electrons of particle physics. Separately [6] the author has shown how the muon governs the creation of the proton and here we have seen that the taon governs in the field of gravitation. The case put here is that gravitation is an electrostatic phenomenon and this is deemed to justify the above use of the electrostatic units of the c.g.s system. We have derived G, the constant of gravitation, in good accord with its measured value. However, the author has gone further in this quest and is of record in showing how to derive by the same theory the masses of both the muon [3] and the taon [7] in terms of electron mass. Hopefully, therefore, this case that gravitation is an electrostatic phenomenon will come to be accepted in the future spectrum of physics. References [1] P. A. M. Blackett, Nature, 159, 658 (1947). [2] S. Hasagawa et al, Prog. Theor. Physics, 47, 126 (1971). [3] H. Aspden, The Physics of Creation, www.aspden.org (2004). [4] H. Aspden & D. M. Eagles, Physics Letters, 41A, 423 (1972). [5] V. F. Weisskopf, Physics Today, 69-85 (Nov. 1981). [6] H. Aspden, Aspden Research Papers, 4 www.aspden.org (2005) [7] H. Aspden, Hadronic Journal, 9, 153 (1986). [1489 words]
ENERGY SCIENCE: AN INTRODUCTORY OVERVIEW

HAROLD ASPDEN, 2004
HAROLD ASPDEN Energy Science Ltd P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB England Preliminary Note The science literature dealing with the alternative energy sources needed once we confront depletion of conventional sources, and the escalating cost of power as that decline begins, includes a sector classified as free energy. This is a field of energy research which tends to be shunned by conventional science owing to it being seen as based on the belief that perpetual motion is an impossibility. Surely, as every scientist knows, energy is conserved in physical processes and cannot be destroyed or created, that being a proposition accepted as the first law of thermodynamics. Yet there is activity in this free energy pursuit that warrants attention, as do the fascinating stories about pioneers in this field who are no longer with us. However, it is not our purpose here to capture your imagination be retelling those stories. You can read about them elsewhere as in references [1 to 4]. Instead, under this heading ENERGY SCIENCE, but guided by those stories, we will here engage in exploratory detective work as we try to solve the secret of their underlying physical processes that allow energy to be tapped, as if from nowhere. The solution of the mystery is needed now so that we can choose the best route to follow in our immediate efforts. We do not have many years to waste, if we are to win in the game of survival as our oil and gas reserves are burned away and avoid the dangers associated with nuclear power. We cannot just hope for the miracle discovery of some as yet unconceived technological breakthrough. The answer has to be in whatever is already of record. Scope of this Overview By the using the word overview it is meant that we shall not here be indulging in a full and detailed in depth presentation for the physics student. That can follow in due course. Here the intention is to summarize the factors and steps involved so as to focus rapidly on the issues that come into play in delivering excess energy. The comments to be made are not arbitrary statements, but reasoned deductions, many of which are based on research recorded elsewhere. Thus, and without further ado, this whole account is based on there being two complementary options as to the energy source involved, both satisfying that first law of thermodynamics. The less exciting option involves thermodynamics, a breach of the second law of thermodynamics possible where magnetism is involved. We can tap into waste heat of our immediate environment and generate useful electric power by deploying that heat energy. Alternatively, there is the fascinating prospect that we can exploit an insight into the way Mother Nature supplied the energy needed to create our Sun and Earth, and accept that a real aether exists from which we can borrow energy to power our machines before returning it after use by heat radiation. This may seem to be a bold objective but, as already stated, the research involved is of record elsewhere [see later references] and, to put it bluntly, given that there is no rival theory that can match what is covered by this overview, one has no choice but to hope that our story here is correct. The onward account comes under 16 headings, each relating to a different example of an energy-related anomaly that has no feasible explanation other than the one suggested by this
2 author. Note that, concerning the description of the well known free energy experiments, the reader should refer to the appropriate references [1 to 4] already mentioned. (1) The Magnet System of Hans Coler Coler had six bar magnets arranged in a loop with a small carefully-adjusted spacing between the adjacent end faces of the magnets. Each had a solenoidal winding and these were connected so as to set up some kind of interaction as between their magnetic flux pulsations that delivered output EMF via capacitors with a frequency in the 100 kHz region. It is suggested that the relevant physical principles involved are those concerned with magnetostriction and the fact that magnetic permeability of iron changes according to internal strain, so that if there is a sustained longitudinal magnetostrictive oscillation of the bar magnets at that 100 kHz or so frequency the EMF induced in those solenoidal windings delivers the output power. To understand the energy input source we need to understand the true nature of ferromagnetism. It involves electrons (the 3d state electrons in iron) adopting a coordinated orbital motion so as to produce a polarized magnetic state. Magnetic energy has negative potential as we know from the fact that energy in excess of the specific heat requirement has to be supplied (as heat) to destroy the ferromagnetic state upon upward transit through the Curie temperature. However, though this might suggest that all materials should exhibit magnetic polarization, this coordinated electron state involves an associated high stress and strain condition and that means mechanical stress energy. Iron, nickel and cobalt are three of the very few atoms for which the electron interplay (that of the 3d state electrons) can release more energy owing to the magnetized state than is needed to sustain the associated mechanical stress condition. The implications of this are relevant to the discovery of Hans Coler. The magnets, when oscillating magnetostrictively at their resonant frequency, as determined by the elastic constants of the iron and as sustained by the superimposed magnetic field action produced by an oscillatory solenoidal current, will conserve mechanical oscillation energy whilst producing fluctuations of magnetic permeability, magnetic flux and negative potential energy of the magnetic state. The latter involves depletion of heat if electricity is drawn off as output. Therefore, the Colers magnets should cool as they deliver power to the output circuit. Though this might suggest a power source operating on ambient heat it cannot be a feasible prospect for solving the worlds impending energy crisis and so we must look elsewhere. For references to Colers invention see pp. 210-212 of ref. [4 ] and p. 221 of ref. [1]. (2) Bowmans Permanent Magnet Machine This is the best example of a perpetual motion machine. It is simple in construction and leaves no room for doubt as to its operability. Here it cannot be heat input that provides the motive power. The machine uses rotors having axes of spin that are parallel. On these rotors there is an assembly of cylindrical Alnico magnets spaced around the rim, their axes being mutually parallel with the rotor axes. The arrangement is such that the magnets of one rotor come into end face to end face relationship with the magnets of another rotor as the rotors spin, meaning that their cyclical alignment causes an increase in their magnetic flux as they come into register followed by a decrease as they separate. The magnets share the rotation speed of the rotors and so we know from the research of Michael Faraday that an EMF is set up in a radial direction between their axes and their outer cylindrical surfaces. Moreover, this EMF fluctuates owing to the encounters between magnets
3 of adjacent rotors. Somehow this initiates inflow of angular momentum that sustains the rotor rotation and accounts for the perpetual motion property. This is hardly likely to become a practical way of running the worlds power generating plants of the future, but it gives us insight into the mystery involved and can guide us forward in our onward search for that free energy source. What have we done in operating such a machine? We have displaced electric charge radially within an electrically conducting medium, the metal of those Alnico magnets. Something within the space occupied by those magnets has reacted as a result and delivered angular momentum. That surely is a pointer to the aether, the medium of the quantum underworld, the medium that has the built-in intrinsic property of determining universally the quantum unit of angular momentum that is basic to the theory of the atom. It is that medium that regulates the orbital motion of electrons in atoms and determines the motion of those 3d state electrons in iron as mentioned above and so we are now looking at the aether as the energy source that powers Bowmans perpetual motion machine. See p. 27 of ref.[2] and p. of ref. [5]. (3) The Homopolar Magnet Machines A so-called homopolar magnet machine is a curious name for one which merely involves a large rotating magnet arranged to deliver electrical output by a current circuit including a radial path through the magnet itself or through a conductive disc rotating with it and linked by its magnetic flux, the input and output being via electrical brush contacts. Such machines have extremely low voltage output at high current and are not normally regarded as having anomalous energy properties. However, the researches of Bruce DePalma and Dr. Paramahamsa Tewari, amongst others, reveal the anomalous energy properties of homopolar machines. These two examples are discussed here because DePalmas machine was tested by Dr. Robert Kincheloe, Professor Emeritus of Electrical Engineering at Stanford University who agreed there was evidence of excess energy, whereas Tewaris machine had features which, owing to an a.c. aspect, promised better performance. Quoting from Dr. Kincheloes report noted in DePalmas paper at pp. 283-287 in ref. [6]: During 1985, I was invited to test such a machine. While it did not perform as claimed, repeatable data showed anomalous results that did not seem to conform to traditional theory. In particular, under certain assumptions about internally generated output voltage, the increase in input power when power was extracted from the generator over that measured due to frictional losses with the generator unexcited seemed to be either about 13% or 20% of the maximum compound generated power, depending upon interpretation. DePalma then added that after a thoroughgoing critique and examination of his data Kincheloe concludes: DePalma may have been right in that there is indeed a situation here whereby energy is being obtained from a previously unknown and unexplained source. So why are we not seeing these machines scaled up for use in generating electricity? Well, in my opinion it is because physicists in general do not believe this excess power generation to be possible and do not understand the mysterious energy source. DePalma did not produce a commercially viable product. In my opinion such excess energy as was produced on a sustained basis owed its existence to the erratic pulsations in the brush contact output which affected the field within the rotor. Moreover, apart from its very low voltage, very high d.c. current ouput,
4 the machine would easily overheat and DePalma could not run the machine for prolonged periods. One can say that it is unlikely that the cumbersome machine technology of the homopolar motor can ever serve as a future power source, but here you have that pointer to the aether underworld as the supplier of energy and angular momentum as a result of charge displacement from a central axis, but it has to be a pulsating charge displacement because with no pulsation you merely have the one-off start-up input of aether energy and no sustained energy inflow. (4) The Discovery of John Searl Here again we are told that magnets can seem to perform a magical trick or rather display a state of perpetual motion. Here the magnets are Alnico, meaning that, unlike ferrite magnets, they are a metal alloy that is electrically conductive. If they spin about their axes then they induce electric charge displacement, suggesting that charge of one polarity can be contained within an enclosing boundary surface to which charge of the opposite polarity has been displaced. The key point of interest from the reports of Searls experiments is his use of a large central non-rotating magnet around the rim of which cylindrically shaped magnets held in contact with the central magnet by magnetic attraction were free to roll. What Searl discovered was that, once set rolling, those magnets kept on rolling! The motion escalated and seemed to bring into play what can only be described as an anti-gravitational effect, which led Searl into a fantasy world of flight rather than the down to Earth task of generating power in a new way. Getting the aether to spin whilst enveloping the apparatus inducing that spin may well affect the gravitational properties of that apparatus, but that is not what we are considering here. Our focus is on the extraction of energy from the aether and if those rolling magnets really do speed up for no apparent reason and with no visible power input then the aether as an energy source is in evidence. However, yet again, given that powerful magnets are needed, this is hardly likely to become part of the technology of our future power generation industry, but it provides a further clue to the mystery role of the aether underworld. Here there is no pulsation of the magnetic strength of the magnet but that motion is sustained. Somehow whatever it is that imports angular momentum is being replenished at a steady rate. So what is different here? One answer is that those rolling magnets are moving laterally with respect to their spin axes. The other is the presence of that central magnet. Now for a little creative detective work. Just suppose that, because we have referred to the aether, one can picture a chunk of aether coextensive with a spinning magnet as reacting to develop its own state of spin. Can it be that that spinning aether unit, which itself may have become a kind of quasi-magnet, is pulled free from its host magnet to be held in place by that central magnet? If so then the onward motion of the rolling magnet to a new position would imply regeneration of more aether spin, perhaps consolidating into a larger aether spin form and precessing or reorientating its spin axis direction as the initial process centred on each individual magnet is repeated. This is effectively a pulsation that generates a steady inflow of aether angular momentum that sustains the motion. Indeed, according to Searl, what he witnessed was not just sustained motion but escalating motion, speed up with somewhat alarming consequences! It is submitted from this that, guided by certain experiments involving spinning magnets, there is good reason to point the finger at the aether as a reacting source of energy, a source triggered by producing a concentration of electric charge of the same polarity so as to set up a
5 radially-directed electric field in the vacuum medium, the aether. See pp. 200-216 of ref. [1] for an extensive description of Searls efforts. (5) The Aspden Effect This author has assembled a motor using disc-shaped ferrite magnets of the kind used in loudspeakers, mounted on a rotor shaft and interleaved with electrical sheet steel laminations each having eight poles. Here rotation causes the magnets to induce radial EMFs in those poled rotor laminations and the passage of those poles past the corresponding poles of a stator assembly causes flux pulsation. So we have the induction of a pulsating radial electric field in aether coextensive with the rotor assembly, a recipe according to what has been stated above for inflow of aether energy. However, here again, this being an alternative version of a homopolar magnet machine, the thought of this ever being a way forward in meeting our future energy needs has been ruled out. However, the tests on this motor did give further insight into that interplay with the aether and the presence of an anomalous energy gain. When the motor was first started, spinning at some 1500 rpm, it was noted that it reached that speed after switch-on in a period of 20-30 seconds. If it was then stopped and restarted, its speed-up time to that speed was some 5 seconds if no more that two or three minutes had passed since it had come to rest, but the longer the period waited before restart, the longer it took to reach 1500 rpm. It was as if there was something there having a weak inertial coupling with the rotor that was spinning separately and slowing down at a slower rate. Here was what seemed to be an aether phenomenon. Before moving on from that research effort several tests were performed at different times of day and with different compass orientations of the rotor axis. The phenomenon varied with spin axis direction, suggesting that the quantum spin of the aether has a fixed orientation in space, a result consistent with the authors theoretical expectations dating back to the late 1950 period. This phenomenon has been named The Aspden Effect by Dr. Hal Fox, editor of the U.S. publication New Energy News, which is why that expression is used as the title to this section. For a detailed report of the authors tests on this machine (though not including that axial reorientation phenomenon) see ref. [7]. (6) Thunderball Energy It is appropriate here to include mention of a phenomenon that has long puzzled physicists, namely what it is that sustains for a noticeable period the glowing state of a spherical cluster of ionized air produced on occasion as a by-product of a lightning discharge. The answer, quite obviously in view of the above commentary, is that the concentration of electric charge, as by the so-called electrodynamic pinch effect associated with a high current discharge, can induce a reacting aether spin which lasts for several seconds, sometimes minutes, after the lightning discharge has ended. That aether spin would form a sphere in which the aethers own electric charge is displaced so as to have charge of one polarity in the body of the sphere and opposite polarity at the surface and, until it dissipates its energy in keeping coextensive air ionized, so we see what is known as a thunderball. In this way the evidence mounts, the aether plays a role we cannot ignore in our search for a future energy source. A paper on this by the author was published by the U.K. Institute of Physics, ref. [8].
6 (7) The Suns Energy Source To add weight to the argument, there is now of record some very strong evidence concerning the role played by the aether in creating the Sun and then in sustaining its energy radiation. Given the size and mass of the Sun and our knowledge of Bohrs theory of the hydrogen atom, one can work out that those atoms must be so close together as to have electrons of adjacent atoms banging into one another. This means ionization and energy radiation, but energy replenished once the electrons are recaptured by a free proton to reestablish the hydrogen atom. The process by which the energy is replenished has to be whatever it is that determines the quantized state of electron motion, and that can only be the quantum underworld of the aether itself. So the aether has to be a medium alive with energy owing to it comprising a system of its own electric charges in harmonious motion, a system which, when subjected to a radially directed electric field, will react in retaining the synchrony of that motion, by spinning as a coextensive bodily unit. Aether spin plus the quantum interplay with matter account for the energy inflow and angular momentum that is shed to matter by the aether. Cosmologists have puzzled for centuries over why the Sun and all the planets rotate about their axes in the same directional sense. They like to think that angular momentum is conserved, just as energy is conserved, but need to factor the aether into their equations to keep the books in balance! Those who see hot nuclear fusion as the way forward on the energy front, believing this is also the Suns energy source, need to heed the message here presented. Note that once an electron comes free from a hydrogen atom the proton is freed as well and so, since two protons have a mutual attraction by gravity that implies an acceleration rate 1836 times greater than that of the corresponding gravitational attraction of two electrons, the Sun must be positively charged body surrounding by a spherical boundary shell of electrons. Here you have the radial electric field needed to establish aether spin and import energy along with angular momentum. This is fully described in ref. [9]. (8) Our Earths Magnetism To add further weight to the aether theme under discussion, just accept for the sake of argument, that when a magnet spins it may be that the aether coextensive with that magnet also develops a spin as the induced displacement of electric charge in magnet and aether complement one another. It has been argued above by reference to the authors motor research that aether spin can have a characteristic dependent upon orientation in space. The Earth is a magnetized body. It seems logical, it being so massive and it spinning at quite a steady rate for eons of time, that its aether would share the same spin velocity. However, that does not necessarily mean that the two spin axes have the same orientation. Earth and its aether being in effect two interacting magnets, it is conceivable that there could be precession of the Earths aether spin axis relative to the Earths proper axis. On that basis we have an explanation of why the North and South magnet poles precess around the Earths North and South poles and that yields further information about the aether properties. Our quest to tap aether energy depends upon our acceptance that the aether exists and then probing its properties to see how we can gain access to its store of energy. So, before coming back to bench-type experiments, let us just look at one more factor of relevance, the Earths electricity. This subject is discussed in detail in ref. [10]. (9) Our Earths Electricity A sphere of aether that is spinning about an axis through its centre is a state in which aether charge of one polarity is displaced radially with respect to that axis relative to aether
7 charge of the opposite polarity. So imagine the Earth as a sphere sitting within such an aether sphere with the Earths ionospheric regions corresponding to its spherical boundaries. Both spheres rotate in the same sense. The uniformly distributed negative aether charge set up within such boundaries by displacement will, of course, be cancelled by the Earth itself shedding enough electrons to provide enough positive ions to neutralize the charge. Those electrons will have migrated to those ionospheric boundaries, where there will be a residual net positive aether charge equal to that of the electrons. Those electrons, as a concentrated spherical shell of charge, will share the Earths rotation and most of them will probably occupy aether sites vacated by displaced negative charge, though some, in repositioning between such sites, will be in transit and so seen as belonging to the ionospheric charge that we detect by its effect on radio waves. As to the residual positive aether charge associated with the spin-induced displacement, this will surely not be part of a sudden spherical boundary transition between spinning aether and enveloping non-spinning aether. Rather the boundary transition will be graded, with the mean effect that, on average, that residual positive aether charge will spin at half the speed of the main aether sphere. The net effect is to endow the rotating Earth-cum-aether combination with a magnetic moment attributable to a net negative charge. For the Earths east-west motion this will account for its North and South magnetic poles. Furthermore, this theory leads to a precise account qualitatively and quantitatively for the Earths measured magnetic moment, as shown elsewhere [10]. The physical picture thus portrayed tells us something else, namely that in the space between the Earths surface and ionosphere, our atmosphere, there should be a prevailing negative charge density, meaning that when we walk around in the fresh air of the countryside we are walking through aether that exhibits a net electrical charge density. We can measure its presence because it sets up a vertical electric field of more than one hundred volts per metre and this also fits well with the value derived from the aether spin theory under discussion. In addition this author has performed a laboratory experiment which proves that this aether charge density exists even in the empty space within an earthed Faraday cage, a feature which may help to unravel the mystery of why certain precision measurements of G, the constant of gravitation, at different laboratory locations give slightly different answers. Here, therefore, is one further factor confirming the claim that setting up radial charge electric displacement can induce aether spin and the converse that aether spin induces radial charge displacement in coextensive electrical apparatus, thereby giving us scope to tap aether spin energy. The author will report on this separately in the near future. (10) The Correa PAGD Power Generator The research of Alexandra and Paulo Correa has revealed excess power generation based on setting up a plasma discharge in gas at low pressure. PAGD is an abbreviation for Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge. Where there is cold cathode operation, meaning no heat input to cause electron emission from the cathode, the ion flow through the tube involving positive ions. These capture electrons from the cathode and as neutral units, atoms or molecules, migrate back to the anode where the high voltage pulls electrons free to sustain the current flow around the part of the closed circuit path external to the tube. The result of this is a concentration of positive charge, thereby setting up a radial electric field, and, given appropriate power input conditions, producing pulsations, we comply with the recipe for inducing aether energy inflow.
8 This particular research venture by the Correas was the first to recognize that this authors theoretical insight into aether physics is relevant to their findings. Apart from the aether energy inflow there are anomalous aether forces at work which account for the excessive cathode reaction forces long recognized where cold cathode discharge tubes are involved. Electrodynamic action has a way of introducing such forces, attributable to imbalance of linear momentum, whereas electrostatic action can introduce imbalance of angular momentum, all based on aether reaction effects. There is much of record concerning the Correa findings, including three U.S. Patents Nos. 5,416,391, 5,449,989 and 5,502, 354. See pp. 218-222 of Ref. [4] and also this authors commentary in ref. [11]. (11) Geoffrey Spences Power Generator Keeping in mind the proposition that the induction of a radial electric field as between a central cylindrical electrode and an enveloping cylindrical electrode can be a direct way of inducing aether spin, it will be understood why this author was particularly interested in the free energy claims made on the basis of what was disclosed by Spences U.S. Patent No. 4,772,816. See this authors reference to this in ref. [11] and be aware that Spence later told an audience at a talk he gave on the occasion of a political party meeting in Salisbury in England that he had closed the loop and his device was self-generating and delivered electrical power on a scale that could soon become commercial. We therefore look forward to hearing how the Spence project is developing. (12) Teslas Free Energy Quest There has been so much speculation about the free energy aspect of the research efforts of Nikola Tesla that it is impossible to focus clearly on anything definite. He sought to tap into the radiant energy source of our electromagnetic environment. Had he built an enormous wireless system of antennas feeding energy into electromagnetic wave pulsations of the Earths atmosphere then maybe he would have proved there is a way of tapping aether energy. He envisaged this as a way of delivering electric power without reliance on transmission by overhead power lines or underground cables. You see, one can argue that electromagnetic waves need energy input to establish them in the first place but it could be that the energy is merely absorbed by the aether over a short range of propagation, whereas the waves, as an oscillatory disturbance of the electric field of the aether merely ripple the sea of energy possessed by the aether. On that basis I can see scope for an energy gain that taps into the quantum underworld of aether energy, which is why I was interested in the research findings of Dave Giesking reported elsewhere [12]. As to whether Tesla did succeed in devising an over-unity power generating device, one can but speculate about the reports of an automobile he built in his later years that ran without gasolene and was powered electrically. Certainly, however, one can be sure that such technology was based on high voltage operating oscillatory circuits involving capacitors and inductors. Atmospheric electricity was the energy source he sought to exploit in his early research but he may have discovered that producing a high voltage in an enclosed apparatus such as could be housed in an automobile was a sufficient catalyst for tapping some of the energy of the omnipresent aether. As Keith Tutt states at p. 23 of his book The Search for Free Energy [4]: In one of his famous lectures of 1892 he (Tesla) told an astounded audience:
9 Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point in the universe .... Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static, our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is, for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature. (13) Dr. Henry Morays Capacitor Power Generator Moving on to 1914, and quoting again from Keith Tutts book, I see that he opened his Chapter 3 entitled: T. Henry Moray - Capturing the Energy of the Universe with the following quotation of that years date by Moray: It is the belief of the writer that all space is saturated with energies which are doubtless electrical in their ultimate energies or very closely allied to electrical action. The relation of matter to energy and energy to matter then becomes the potential of the universe, one continuous series of oscillations to and fro like a great pendulum across the universe. Here, hidden in these words, is a revelation that Moray could only have sensed but never explained. He had unknowingly referred to the universal rhythm of the quantum underworld of space, the aether with its cyclical motion at the frequency we associate with the name Compton, that at which the photon has energy equal to the rest-mass energy of the electron, the energy needed for electron creation. However, the story of Moray is about his success in discovering how to power electrical appliances without any obvious source of power input other than an antenna strung between poles a few metres above ground. I believe he needed the antenna input to provide a high enough voltage to prime his capacitors by a d.c. input which could not deliver a sustained inflow of energy, but by virtue of the electromagnetic fluctuations (noise) owing to atmospheric electrical effects, these were enough to trigger the oscillatory exchange of charge as between two capacitors. My guess is that these must have been of concentric electrode construction as otherwise there could be no radial oscillations of electric field in the coextensive aether region, the recipe for tapping aether energy. The reference to Swedish stone in what has been written about Morays demonstrations points to a component serving as a rectifier in converting the high frequency output into d.c. which could power the light bulbs and electric iron, the proof that here was a viable power source at least on a domestic scale. To generate kilowatts of power from apparatus of the size used in Morays demonstrations and by technology based on capacitors and inductors operating at what must have been a frequency of the order of 100 kHz implies scope for economic large scale exploitation, which is why this research of Moray in the early years of the 20th century is so important. If only he had disclosed every detail of what he had constructed! But, one wonders, did he really understand the underlying physics at work in what he had built? (14) The Methernitha Project Now it is as good as certain that Morays process of tapping energy from the aether is the secret also of the modern day apparatus hidden away in a reclusive community in Switzerland. What has been reported and demonstrated has all the necessary features, as I see it, in that there is a high voltage d.c. input provided by an influence machine (Wimshurst machine) of the kind I saw demonstrated in my youth in the physics laboratory of my school. The apparatus has two large Leyden jars (capacitors of concentric electrode construction) and the necessary inductors
10 to exploit resonant oscillations in transferring charge between the two capacitors. Here again, however, I suspect that those who have built this apparatus as well as those who have visited Methernitha and witnessed its operation have no idea how the device taps actually draws energy from the aether. Understanding the theory of its operation, meaning an in-depth insight into the physics involved is essential if one is to see a way forward on the commercial front and convince those in authority who need to sponsor and fund such effort on a large scale. As to that knowledge, here we need to recognize the link with the creative underworld of the aether, as brought to bear in forming our Sun, as described in my book: The Physics of Creation [9] (15) The Aspden Capacitor Project It was early in 2002 that I was invited to be a speaker at an Energy Symposium in Berlin to be held in June. Having already reached the conclusion that it should be possible to draw energy from the aether by suitable interplay of two capacitors of concentric electrode construction I faced the choice of diverting my attentions into that experimental pursuit or simply publishing my ideas in the hope that others having the necessary facilities would engage in such effort. My primary aim was to consolidate my theoretical pursuit of aether science by writing a new book updating what I had published earlier and so, in 2003, a first and then a second edition of The Physics of Creation duly appeared on my website www.aspden.org. It made sense to file a patent application in U.K. before disclosing what I planned to say at the forthcoming event in Berlin and so that was duly filed at the U.K. Patent Office on March 3rd, 2002. I am writing this now owing to that Patent Application having just been published bearing the number GB 2390941, it being accessible via http://gb.espacenet.com. The presentation I made in Berlin has been of Internet record since 2002 and will not be repeated here. See Lecture No. 27 in the Energy science section of my website www.aspden.org. One point, however, that I should add is that the basis of the invention recognizes that when a capacitor of cylindrical electrode construction is charged, its discharge returns the same net charge as was fed as input, but the voltage across the plates does not reduce as might be expected from standard theory. It is, at least so the theory based on aether involvement predicts, as if the capacitance during the discharge phase is somewhat higher owing to aether energy having been trapped and adding power to the discharge. The cylindrical capacitor construction with well-spaced cylindrical electrodes to assure the spatial annular character needed to accommodate aether spin means using and a high voltage to provide an adequate level of energization and d.c. to avoid the high energy source itself delivering energy continuously. Two capacitors appropriately connected via inductors are then needed to encourage oscillation as the charge is exchanged cyclically between them and surplus energy as output can then be drawn inductively from the inductors. It now remains to be seen whether what is here suggested will bear fruit in our free energy efforts, but at least I have presented the case as I see it, and so, until we know what emerges, I just now hope to be proved right. The next and final note concerns an experimental anomaly I once encountered but never reported. I am still puzzling over it but suspect it has some bearing upon the free energy theme under discussion. (16) The Aspden Motor Project I assembled a switched reluctance motor having eight rotor poles interacting with eight stator poles, the latter having windings powered by a pulsed d.c. input controlled by a Hall
11 sensor of rotor shaft position so as to run at a speed determined by the load and the voltage applied. The special feature of this motor was that the poles of both rotor and stator were inclined to the radial direction at an angle of 45 degrees. I just wanted to see if operation was more efficient according to whether rotation was clockwise or anticlockwise and so see if inclining the poles made any difference. The problem of fitting windings to the inclined stator poles meant that there was a price to pay design-wise because it limited the use of copper wire and meant higher resistance in the excitation circuit. I confess that after building this machine the fitting of those stator windings was offputting and I moved on to more interesting motor research pursuit at the time, but only after seeing how the inclined pole motor operated. I then witnessed something I had not bargained for. I had reasoned before building it that it would run steadily in either direction once given a torque impulse in the chosen direction, and my hope was that it would run on the same load at the same speed with less power in one or other direction. So I was quite astounded when I switched it on and gave it a starting turn in the anticlockwise sense. The motor increased in speed and ran well for a few minutes as I was assessing operation before gearing up to make measurements, but then I sensed that it was beginning to slow down even though the d.c. input voltage was unchanged. The slowing down action even escalated to the point where the motor passed through a standstill and started to rotate clockwise. Not only did it change its spin direction but, once rotating clockwise, it gained speed rapidly, accelerating much faster than it had on start-up in the other direction, settling eventually at a much higher speed in that direction that it had reached earlier in the clockwise direction. This was a repeatable performance and I even demonstrated it to a friend and later videotaped its operation for my private records. I admit being baffled by this. I had hoped it would function better spinning one way than the other but when it did I then wondered if I had introduced a bias by not setting the commutation control symmetrically, which is probably why I did not pursue the tests further. However, on reflection, since it did run steadily initially as input power matched the load, how is it that the machine rotor could then slow down, actually stop and then decide to rotate the other way? Something was introducing an element of inertia, a time-lag in the governing physics at work in the machine, but something that was saying to the machine at its moment of standstill: Go clockwise!. My thoughts then suggested two possibilities. The d.c. current input combined with the magnetic flux pulsations may have gradually introduced a polarizing bias in the magnetic state of the poles which may or may not have played a role. Yet this does not seem probable. Alternatively, in view of my awareness of the aether spin seemingly evident in the tests on the motor of quite different design (homopolar machine) mentioned above in note (5), I am now wondering if that same phenomenon was at work in the inclined-pole machine. At least, given aether spin building up and for some reason induced in a clockwise direction, this might explain why the machine, in coming to rest from its anticlockwise motion, had a hidden memory, an input that encouraged it to spin up in a clockwise sense. I admit this is speculation at this stage as I have no firm theory for what I observed, but hopefully I shall one day find time to pursue this matter further. However, in ending on this final note, I stress that I do not regard motor technology as the best route forward in free energy research. The capacitor theme seems to me to be the best candidate. It has real promise in view of the pioneer research of Moray and those involved in the Methernitha venture.
12 References [1] John Davidson, The Secret of the Creative Vacuum, C.W. Daniel Co. Ltd (1989). [2] David Hatcher Childress, The Free-Energy Device Handbook, Adventures Unlimited Press (1994). [3] Jeane Manning, The Coming Energy Revolution, Avery Publishing Group (1996). [4] Keith Tutt, The Search for Free Energy, Simon & Schuster (2001). [5] Jim Kettner, Space Energy Journal, pp. 22-23, v. XIII, Issue IV (2003). [6] Bruce DePalma, Speculations in Science and Technology, pp. 283-287, v. 13, No. 4 (1990). [7] Harold Aspden, Power from Magnetism: The Transverse Reluctance Motor, Energy Science Report No. 7, Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [8] Harold Aspden, The Thunderball - an Electrostatic Phenomenon, Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser, No. 66: Session VI, Electrostatics 1983, Oxford, pp. 179-184 (1983). [9] Harold Aspden, The Physics of Creation, Book Section of www.aspden.org. [10] Harold Aspden, Physics Unified, Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB, England.. [11] Harold Aspden, Power from Space: The Correa Invention, Energy Science Report No. 8, Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [12] Dave Gieskieng, An Antenna with Anomalous Radiation Properties, Appendix to Lecture No. 10, Energy Science Section of www.aspden.org. Note: References [7, 10 and 11] are all of full Internet record. See www.aspden.org.
ENERGY SCIENCE: A BRIEF REVIEW AND A CONCLUSION

H. Aspden, 2004 Introduction Exploring the scope for tapping energy from a new and non-conventional source is a research pursuit of a few worthy individuals, very few, in comparison with the many, very many, highly qualified scientists who work in the power industry. We need that new source of energy because our oil and gas reserves are being rapidly depleted, because reverting to burning coal, which also cannot last for ever, creates pollution and because nuclear power involves other dangers. In a perfect world we would have come to understand how what we see around us was created, meaning finding the answer to the question: Where did the energy needed come from? and then discovering how we can harness that mystery energy resource. Understanding Creation is not just an act of faith based on religious doctrine, nor can we rely 100% on the doctrinaire principles of science of modern physics. Something else is needed. Fortunately, there is now enough evidence of record to justify enquiry which probes into the secret world of energy science. What follows is a brief review, a summary, of my own efforts in recent years, followed by a culminating conclusion which may inspire others to undertake further work of their own. If future generations are to survive by relying on power from windmills, then let us just hope that there are those who, in the spirit of Don Quixote, find the energy needed to meet the challenge. Concerning Nuclear Energy Our ability to harness atomic power, a by-product of atomic weapon research, does not mean, as most physicists accept, that the heat generated within the sun and which, by its radiation, keeps the Earth warm is the product of a nuclear reaction at the suns centre. Gravitation pulls the suns hydrogen atoms so close together that their electrons collide and cause ionization. Protons are freed along with electrons. Then, because two protons interact gravitationally to set up an acceleration rate that is 1836 times that applicable between two electrons, the ionized plasma we see as the body of our sun contains more protons than electrons, leaving a surplus of electrons at its boundary surface. There is therefore a balance of gravitational compression pressure and electrostatic expansion pressure throughout the body of the sun, meaning it has a uniform mass density, and there is no reason to think that its temperature at its centre is any different from that at its surface. Its core temperature is not sufficient to account for nuclear reaction. Instead, the quantum interplay between the hydrogen atom and the underworld medium that fills all space sustains the atoms electron motion, thereby having supplied the energy needed to ionize when gravity brings hydrogen atoms into collision, but duly replenishing energy that might be lost by radiation, once free electrons are captured by free protons to restore the atomic hydrogen form.
The quantum underworld, the space medium, the aether is the energy source, not nuclear power! We are therefore being misled. It is one thing to build more and more nuclear power plants to meet future needs but quite another to do so thinking that we are merely replicating Natures processes at work in the sun and so be blind as to the true source of energy. Indeed, one might say that it is the energy of the quantum underworld that, in sustaining the suns energy radiation, controls the weather on Earth and so empowers those windmills that provide the alternative to nuclear power. On such a foundation one must see sense in looking for ways to tap energy directly from that all-pervading quantum underworld energy source, confident that it must be possible. Then, guided by certain reports of historical record, there is a path to follow, but it is not an easy path as there are sidetracks than can lead nowhere and so frustrate ones efforts. The Governing Rules There are two governing rules or principles that dominate energy science. One is the Principle of Conservation of Energy and the other is the Principle that Action and Reaction are equal and opposite. Teachers of physics expect us to accept these without question, as they form the bedrock on which they build, sure in the knowledge that experience over time has proved their validity. Yet when they discuss energy deployment as it applies to the real world of technology they do not even contemplate the quantum underworld of space and ask whether energy balance and so its conservation can include the latter. Energy conservation does not mean that we cannot transfer energy from that quantum underworld and bring it into the apparatus of our real world. The notions of the high energy particle physicist concerning the interplay between electron-positron creation and decay and photons do imply energy conservation as between matter and the space medium but, for some mysterious reason, such physicists are not open minded when it comes to tapping energy from that vacuum medium. As to the action and reaction theme, this happens to be enshrined in Newtons Third Law of Motion and so is taken as beyond question, but yet physics is taught also by reference to the Lorentz force law which, as applied generally between two electrons in motion, breaches Newtons Third Law, unless the force acting on one of those electrons is calculated as the average force on the basis of the other electron describing a closed circuital path. So, you see, when it comes to convincing those who govern opinion on what is possible and what is not possible there is uncharted energy territory to be explored in an effort to tap energy from space, but yet we confront unwarranted hostility and ridicule for aiming at the impossible. My Research My Ph.D. research addressed the problem of anomalous excess energy loss in the magnetization processes at work in transformer cores. That was back in the years 19501953 and I was destined to pursue a professional career peripheral to the research field, one concerned with evaluating and protecting inventions stemming from research in the electrical power industry and electronics. However, as early as 1956, I privately researched a few theoretical ideas of my own, one being an attempt to understand how energy is stored in the vacuum medium. I concluded that the medium reacts to the presence of a magnetic
field as if it is the seat of electric charge in motion that can act in opposition to the applied field. Energy criteria, meaning maximum amount of energy transferred to the medium, indicated that the reaction would be one that is exactly half the strength of the applied field. I saw this as resolving an anomaly in physics, one which had mistakenly given birth to the notion of so-called spin, the half-quantum state that supposedly explained the primary factor-of-two implicit in what is known as the gyromagnetic ratio. This was theoretical physics. It caused me to see the need to understand how the aether was structured, taking account of all the problems that had beset belief in the aether and caused its demise from the physics curriculum and its replacement by Einsteins notion of space-time. Apart from my onward theory leading to an insight into the cause of gravity and how protons are created an early conclusion was that the creation of an electric field radially directed from an axis would induce aether spin about that axis. The energy inflow from the aether needed to account for that state of spin was found to equal the energy supplied in creating that electric field. This all being a theoretical and not a technological interest, I soon found that I could explain how stars are created and why they spin, apparently in breach of the physicists rule that angular momentum must be conserved. To say a star spins poses the question of how it acquires its angular momentum, but that was answered by my theory as all I had to explain is how the star acquires the electric core charge within a balancing surface charge, and the explanation of that is presented above under that heading Concerning Nuclear Energy. The aether provides the angular momentum, it having a vast store of angular momentum by virtue of its quantum activity in the form of its electric charge having a jitter motion, the basis of Heisenbergs Zitter-bewegung and so his Principle of Uncertainty. When I did, after some 30 years in industry, move to a retirement position for 9 years as a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the university local to my home town, my research was aimed at advancing my theory rather than efforts to tap energy from the aether. Interest in the latter theme was aroused, however, during the latter part of that 9year period and has prevailed ever since. I became involved with motor experiments based on rotating an electrically conductive rotor magnetized parallel to the axis of rotation, this involving induction of an electric field radially directed with respect to the axis of spin. The object, by analogy with the action that imports energy and angular momentum from the aether when a star is formed, was to see if the motor behaved anomalously. The experiments proved positive and confirmed the speculation involved, but were not extended, there being an impractical feature in that, to import energy steadily from the quantum underworld, the action had to be pulsed. To have a pulsating magnetic field acting through the plane of a conductive rotor disc implies eddy current loss and limits possible speed of operation. That meant that there was little, if any, scope for any practical application leading to technology that could serve as a future power source. Other ideas involving motors did emerge but proved equally disappointing. Accordingly, it seemed best to switch interest to devices that are essentially solid-state and static in operation. Then the day came when, after pondering over the reports of the findings of Dr. Henry Moray back in the 1930 period said to tap energy from the atmosphere by the use of an overhead wire connection to a capacitor apparatus as well as the information concerning the modern day Methernitha apparatus, which incorporates large capacitors in the form of Leyden jars, I concluded that here were devices that set up a pulsating radially
directed electric field and import energy by aether spin. I saw this as analogous to my efforts on motors and my interpretation of how a star develops its state of spin. That was in the early months of 2002 and it seemed an appropriate topic to address as an invited speaker at a conference held in Berlin in June of that year. Not having verified operability but yet being about to disclose this at that conference, I deemed it prudent to file a patent application in U.K. before speaking at that event and so my Patent Application GB 2390941A was duly filed and then eventually published on 21st January, 2004. Not surprisingly, this has raised questions by those who saw this printed publication almost immediately after it appeared and so I submitted an article on the subject which has appeared in at pp. 19-25 of Issue 55, v. 10, 2004 of Infinite Energy. Meanwhile experimental work has been undertaken and the bad news is that there is no energy excess developed, at least on a practical scale which needs the apparatus to operate at high voltage of the order of 10 kV and fairly high frequency of the order of 100 kHz. This means that the angular momentum of the aether spin developed by successive pulsations, at a frequency far exceeding the pulsation rate of a hundred cycles per second as used in my motor research, cannot slow down and convert its spin energy into electrical form fast enough to be captured as output upon capacitor discharge and so deliver useful power output. Hence that capacitor theme is not the answer to the riddle posed by the Moray and Methernitha route to generation of what has come to be known as free energy. The Conclusion This brings my efforts to a conclusion, but a conclusion that still offers hope. Being forced to look once again at the common factors evident in the Moray and Methernitha projects there is the possibility that what Dr. Moray meant by the reference to his dependence upon the availability of Swedish stone implies magnetically polarized magnetite, otherwise known as lodestone. The Methernitha apparatus used horsehoe magnets and had coils of wire conductor wound around the legs of the horseshoe form. Moray could have had coils wrapped around a lodestone core. Then there is what has been reported concerning the findings of Hans Coler in Germany in the years preceding and during World War II.. Coler had coils wrapped around bar magnets and generated electrical power output with no other input power connections. So, in asking myself how it can make sense to take a material already magnetized and then pulse it magnetically by developing electric current oscillations in an enveloping winding, I was surprised to find that I was led to ask myself another question. We know that oscillating current in a solenoid enclosing a magnetic core will produce an oscillating magnetic flux over the whole cross-section of the core. A back EMF is produced which means that we feed energy into the solenoid as current strength increases and a forward EMF is induced which returns that energy as current strength decreases. This is the phenomenon of inductance. Now, within that core, it having ferromagnetic properties, there are atoms containing electrons in orbit, the 3d-state electrons in iron, for example, and as these turn to augment the magnetic flux when the solenoid current increases so whatever it is that powers the motion of those electrons will also experience a back EMF and so involve inflow of energy. Then, of course, one might expect as the current subsides so there will be a return of energy to those 3d-state electrons in their orbital motion. That makes sense
and is a natural assumption once that aspect of the magnetization process is considered. However, here now is that other question. How does the energy shed by the 3d-state electrons and stored pending its return force its way back by passage through the limited area of those electron orbits? EMFs are induced as a function of flux linkage by the current loops involved. Yes, I certainly knew how the magnetic field energy is stored. That is the basis of aether charge reaction theme by which I explained that gyromagnetic ratio factor-of-2. But here one has a reacting field system that is uniform across the area of the magnetic core. Logically, therefore, since only a fraction of that area is accounted for by the 3d-state electron orbits, two per atom for iron, then only of fraction of energy shed by the quantum underworld that powers the electron motion can be returned to that medium as the magnetic field subsides in strength. This has to be the case unless one is to accept the belief that there is no field reaction such as I suggested years ago and that instead there are merely lines of magnetic flux having a physical reality that somehow store energy. Such flux lines would need to be rigid in their spatial fixation in relation to the source current orbits with the degree of their numerical concentration being a measure of the energy density involved. To me, lines of magnetic flux are merely notional, a way of portraying how energy in a magnetic field spreads itself in surrounding space but not of themselves having any real physical form. So you can see how I am led to believe that a magnet might be caused to shed energy drawn from the quantum underworld of space and have no direct way for its atoms to recapture that energy. Here I am treading more familiar ground, three years of experimental Ph.D. research being concerned with magnetic hysteresis loss and associated eddy current loss. Once I had this idea of a magnetic core shedding energy that it could not recover, I asked myself what we really know about the process producing hysteresis loss. In my Ph.D. years it was something one could dismiss as being due to sudden erratic movements of magnetic domain walls as inclusions are encountered by those walls as the domains they bound grow and shrink with reorientation of magnetic direction in the ferromagnetic crystals involved. Hysteresis loss was accepted as a fact, an unavoidable phenomenon that one finds in magnetic cores, though one that is of less importance in well annealed cores of high purity that have a high magnetic permeability property. My research concerned measurement of loss aimed at studying how it changed under different conditions, including internal mechanical stress as well as stress applied externally as well, of course, with variation in frequency and superimposed states of magnetic polarization. With this new thought in mind, I enquired into the energy process involved in a cycle of magnetization around the whole of an imaginary truly-rectangular form of B-H loop, a close approximation to the actual form applicable to closed magnetic cores having no air gaps. The magnetizing solenoid inputs energy in proportion to HB, because H is a measure the current in the solenoid and the rate of change of B is a measure of the back EMF resisting current flow. That applies to the right-hand side of the loop. The left-hand side represents further input from the solenoid in proportion to (-H)(-B) and because this equals BH, the overall energy input from the solenoid is 2BH. With B in gauss and H in oersteds this, divided by 8, is a measure of hysteresis loss measured in ergs per cc. per cycle. The top side represents outflow of energy because, ignoring the small H component of B, B is effectively the notional current action of the 3d-state electron orbits in the core, and the rate of change of H, which is negative, is the effective flux density change that accounts for an induced EMF. So, in theory, for 100% flux coupling with those orbits, the
quantity B(-H) is the measure of energy change involved, suggesting that the energy BH fed in during loop passage up the right-hand side and also along the top side is transferred as input to the quantum underworld of space. Similarly the energy represented by (-B)H applies to energy transfer along the bottom line of the loop, meaning it drains away the energy supplied during the left-hand side downward step. All this amounts to the whole loss defined by the area of the hysteresis loop being supplied by the solenoid and fed into the quantum underworld of space, the very reverse of what we aim to achieve. However, though experiment confirms that loss, we know that it does, at least for its major part, stay with us in the real world by appearing as heat in the core. So here then is the proof that, as atomic theory tells us anyway, those 3d-state electron orbits are too small to capture the full measure of energy shed by the magnetization process. Now the symmetrical B-H loop is characteristic of a ferromagnetic core that is not polarized as one finds in magnets. Once a certain H value is reached by increasing magnetizing current the domain wall movement that accounts for the width of the hysteresis loop, the so-called coercive force, no longer occurs and any onward magnetization arises from those 3d-state electron orbits turning towards the direction of magnetization, virtually a loss-free process apart from eddy current effects. This takes us to a roughly linear range of magnetization where B and H increase or decrease in proportion. Over this range increase of B involves energy input from the solenoid proportional to HB, where B is the change of B over that range. However, here we now also have energy input from the quantum underworld in measure given by BH, where H is the change of H over that same range. Given that B is proportional to H over this range these energy quantities are equal. So we expect the inflow of energy from the quantum underworld to match that supplied via the solenoid. Furthermore, during the downward half of a cycle of magnetization over that limited range although energy is returned to the solenoid as expected owing to the inductance property, most of that energy tapped from space cannot, from the evidence we have of hysteresis loss phenomena, go back into the quantum underworld. Here then we see a glimmer of a possibility in our search for a free energy source. Either that energy is shed as heat or it is amenable to capture in its electrical form. So now consider why it is that it has eluded notice in laboratory experiments in university laboratories. Where is the evidence of tests on the rapid oscillatory excitation of a ferromagnetic core over a range above the territory of hysteresis loss, that being at a flux density level in the region of 70% of saturation? No one would undertake such an experiment ever expecting to gain energy especially as the obvious expectation is increased loss of energy. However, the Cambridge professor who was head of the Department of Electrical Engineering during my Ph.D. years at Cambridge did report an experiment magnetizing an iron core including a variable air gap which purported to measure leakage inductance as a function of the gap width. What his experiment proved was that as the gap width increased, for a given level of magnetic flux linking the magnetizing winding, it needed less current than expected to sustain that level of flux. In other words, either there was flux leakage, meaning flux that somehow avoided the gap, as the professor assumed, or there was more magnetic energy fed into the air gap than was supplied by the magnetizing winding. When I eventually did repeat the experiment under conditions which assured flux passage around the whole core, including air gap, I proved that the latter interpretation was
correct. The experimental data I proved that the energy in a gap of 2.25 mm width in a small 100 VA transformer core is as much as 180% of the input energy, which is supporting proof for what is suggested above. This experiment is described under the heading Mystery Energy Source: The Energy Balance Sheet in my Energy Science Report No. 1 of record on the web site www.aspden.org where I then examined the prospect of generating free energy based on motor technology which exploits the excess energy fed into magnetic pole gaps by reference to the Adams motor. You see, here I was thinking that to tap that excess energy, the free energy supplied by the aether, we would need to harness motor technology, whereas, now that I realise that the extra inductance energy cannot all by drawn back into the aether as the current drops, a new horizon appears. Solid-state aether power generation now becomes a possibility, shedding light helpful in our onward energy quest. Ferromagnetism becomes the doorway for energy inflow. Morays experiments seem to have been motivated by attempts to tap energy from the atmospheric electric field, inspired perhaps by Teslas pioneer efforts, whereas Coler might have been dabbling with efforts to sense radio signals based on coils wound around a bar magnet as an antenna and the Methernitha experiments may well have arisen from hearsay about the prior claims of both Moray and Coler. All three incorporated capacitors and certainly two, if not also Morays apparatus, had provision for two magnet systems to operate in a push-pull fashion with one generating power it its forward current half-cycle as the other resets in its reverse current half cycle. All three had some means for triggering the active state, be it Morays aerial wire, the Wimshurst machine of the Methernitha project, or, as in the case of Coler, patience in an environment active in long wave radiation, patience being needed to get the tuning right at an appropriate time of transmission, given that his coil-wound magnets were, in effect, antennae and his apparatus was known to operate at a frequency above 100 kHz. These signal triggering components could not have been the real energy source powering the apparatus once it had become operative. Now, reverting to that B-H loop theme, with permanent magnet cores in mind, the cycle of magnetization has to centre about the working point at which BH is a maximum in the upper left-hand sector of the loop. Small field oscillations of H about this point will produce variation of B and H around a thin minor hysteresis loop angled upwards from left to right and corresponding to a substantial increase of B for a small increase of H but with a very substantial base value of B. From the above discussion of energy deployment in cores that are ferromagnetic but not magnets operated over that linear range of magnetism at the B-H loop extremity one can then see how such a situation for a magnet implies the energy inflow from the quantum underworld of space. The hysteresis loss would be quite low in relation to the power gain. Such, therefore, is my verdict, my final verdict, I expect, as to how I believe the three free energy devices under discussion function. Knowing where and how the inflow energy enters the apparatus then leaves open the question as to how to extract that energy as useful electrical power output, followed by the key question as to how the process can be scaled up to prove viable as a major commercial power source. The latter question is not too difficult to answer, bearing in mind that on a large scale magnets as such are not essential as one can replicate the effects by polarizing large iron cores using superconductive excitation coils that absorb little energy. Operation at kHz frequencies may be needed and this involves eddy-current losses but the flux density
range of oscillation can be commensurately small to contain that to the normal level of loss in laminated steel cores we see in power transformers. The former question is the challenge and Colers apparatus affords guidance as to the coil connections required, though I feel sure his provision for current in the coils flowing also through the body of the bar magnets used is not necessary. A Final Note I have decided to publish this at this time because I am obliged to record that the capacitor experiments have proved abortive. I expect now to abandon the patent application mentioned in my article on that subject in Infinite Energy. Furthermore, I shall not be filing a patent application covering what I have disclosed here concerning magnetic cores as a new source of power, bearing in mind the relevance of the disclosure concerning Colers apparatus that became public when Official Secrecy on the related British Intelligence Report ended. Whether or not my onward efforts, including experiments on the subject of this Note, will bear fruit remains to be seen, but I can say that, from now on, I am concentrating on revising and consolidating my position on The Physics of Creation that features prominently on this web site www.aspden.org . For detailed information on the Coler Report just referenced see Lecture No. 7 in the Energy Science sector of this web site. H. Aspden
PHYSICS WITHOUT EINSTEIN A Centenary Review by Harold Aspden
Harold Aspden, 2005
Chapter I A Century Introduction The Electron In the 19th century, the pre-Einstein era, physics progressed in leaps and bounds, particularly in the field of electrodynamics, culminating in 1897with J. J. Thomsons discovery of the electron and then, in 1901, Kaufmanns discovery that its mass increased with speed. He measured how the charge/mass ratio of the electron varied with increase of speed, speeds as high as 95% of the speed of light. As a student of physics in 1945 I read about this in a book entitled Electricity and Magnetism by S. G. Starling that was presented to me as the School Physics Prize for that year. The data of Kaufmanns experiment were tabulated and his paper referenced as Phys. Zeitschr., 4, No. 1b (1902) and I mention this because the same data was quoted in several other books I later acquired, one of which quoted the earlier reference of Gottingen Nach., 2, 143 (1901). In the second edition of a student textbook Physics by S. G. Starling and A. J. Woodall dated 1957 one reads on p. 1212 by reference to the same Kaufmann data the words: Considering the difficulty of experiment these results may be considered to confirm the results obtained on the theory of relativity. Now I do believe that a student might be deceived by such wording, given that Einsteins theory did not exist at the time of Kaufmanns experiments and that it is for experiment to confirm pre-existing theory since experimental findings can only be confirmed by further experiment. I am, you see, aiming to be critical here because students of physics must not be misled and should be encouraged to question what they are taught as they themselves may have a future in scientific research. Pre-Einstein theory, the electron theory advanced by J. J. Thomson and others had already provided the necessary explanation. The fact that the mass-variation of an electron with speed is consistent with the formula E = Mc2 does not mean that we must accept the doctrines preached by those who believe in Einsteins philosophical concepts of four-
space. Physics in the years before Einstein was on-track and building on fact rather than conjecture, and we should not ignore what is on record in the preEinstein years of the 20th century (1900-1904). We shall return to this topic in chapter II of this work. So let us now look at another 19th century problem. Gravitation Newtons law of gravitation had come under scrutiny owing to effects attributable to retardation, the thought being that gravitation propagates at the speed of light rather than at infinite speed associated with Newtons concept of instantaneous action-at-a-distance. The object was to explain the observed anomalous advance of the perihelion of the orbit of planet Mercury. Whereas Newtons theory does explain an orbital perihelion advance owing to gravitational interaction between the planets, observation of the orbit of the planet nearest to the sun revealed a small and puzzling discrepancy. Several researchers attempted to solve this mystery and, still in the 19th century, but only just, a German schoolteacher named Paul Gerber in 1898 presented in Zeitschrift f. Math. u. Phys. 43 p. 93 a theoretical result giving the precise value of the anomalous advance of Mercurys perihelion as now measured by astronomical observation. He had assumed that the action of gravity propagates at the speed of light. Physicists well know that Einstein, some 17 years later, claimed this result as a consequence of his General Theory of Relativity, so we will return to this theme in Chapter III of this work. The Aether Meanwhile, still considering the physics of the 19th century, let us now examine another problem related to the speed of light. The universallyaccepted belief of the scientific community was that the speed of light c was regulated by the action of an omnipresent aether which provides a universal frame of reference relative to which the speed of light is constant. On that basis experiment should have allowed detection of the Earths motion through enveloping space, but in 1887 when an experiment to test this was performed by Michelson and Morley no such motion was indicated. It was then evident that physicists had made a false assumption. The properties of the aether were not fully understood. On this subject, dating back to Clerk Maxwells research of 1861-1864 period, the concept of electric charge displacement as a property of the aether related to its ability to store electrostatic field energy and its electromagnetic wave propagation properties had underpinned faith in the reality of the aether.
The dilemma confronting physicists on this aether issue was rooted in an unresolved question as to whether the aether, though invisible, was a fluid medium or a rather subtle solid medium in that it exhibited properties that implied a measure of rigidity. The problem had, in fact, been complicated by the theoretical findings in 1839 of Samuel Earnshaw as reported in Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 7, pp. 97-114 (1842). It was logical for the aether to be regarded as a system of electric charges of overall-neutral composition, an aether that defied detection except by its ability to store energy and regulate the speed at which light propagates through space. Note that a century before, in 1733, the Frenchman du Fay had introduced the concept that electricity was capable of flowing, as a fluid, this fluid then being deemed to be of two kinds as if in particle form, with like pairs repelling and unlike pairs attracting. Earnshaw had, it seems, recognized the need for the aether, if composed of electric charges, positive and negative, in equal numbers, to define a kind of crystal structure as a frame of reference for light propagation. However, by his famous theorem of 1839 Earnshaw proved by rigorous mathematical analysis that such a stable aether structure was impossible given our understanding of the law of force known to be operative between discrete electrical charge forms. If the aether existed, chaos had to prevail, there being no orderly form that could be possible. Sadly, just as there had been error in physicists merely assuming that the speed of light is constant and referenced on a universal frame defined by the aether, so Earnshaw had erred in his assumption that the aether is merely composed of electrically charged particles sitting in a void. There is an alternative he had not considered, but enlightenment on this all-important topic did not emerge in the pre-Einstein era. Also, although there had been a major advance of knowledge on the subject of electrodynamics during the 19th century, that field of physics, founded as it is on experiments measuring interaction between electric current in closed circuits and electric charge in motion, lacked specific experimental proof for electrodynamic interaction between two discrete electric charges in motion. Here was a field of physics intimately dependent upon the aether in interpreting the action between electric charge in motion that offered scope for measuring the earths motion through space. Yet, when an experiment involving a charged capacitor, and so two discrete spaced-apart charges deemed to share the Earths motion through space, failed to detect that motion, it was immediately inferred that here again was proof consistent with the finding of the Michelson-Morley experiment that challenged belief in the
aether. The experiment was that performed in 1903 by Trouton and Noble in Proceedings of the Royal Society, 72, 132 (1903). So the scene was set giving Einstein in 1905 his reason and opportunity for advancing the notion embraced by his Theory of Relativity, the notion that what we observe in physics takes as its true frame of reference the frame defined by the observer, even though that observer is moving through enveloping space. Now, if the reader well understands and, having checked every step in the mathematics involved, really believes what Einstein has presented by his Special and General Theory of Relativity, it is unlikely that he or she will be swayed by what is disclosed in the pages which follow. However, if the reader admits to doubt and to being just a little mystified by Einsteins teaching, there should be interest in asking oneself, in this centenary year of 2005, how physics might have developed if we had never heard of Einstein or his theory. To be sure, given, as we shall see, that E = Mc2 was self-evident from J. J. Thomsons research and given the needed modification of Newtons law of planetary motion in the light of the prior efforts of Gerber and others, all that was needed to exclude Einstein doctrine was to reinforce the work of Clerk Maxwell on the question of the aether by correcting for Samuel Earnshaws error. That error should have been so obvious, given that the aether had been seen more as a fluid than as a mere system of particles. Now I well know that few physicists are likely to be familiar with Earnshaws Theorem. I had never heard of it until, many years ago, a paper I had written was rejected on the strength of that theorem. I then traced Earnshaws original work in the records at Cambridge University and saw that what I had been working on myself had a feature that made the theorem irrelevant. Soon thereafter, in 1966 and because it included an account of Earnshaws Theorem, I purchased a textbook entitled The Mathematical Theory of Electricity and Magnetism published by Cambridge University Press in its fifth edition, its author being Sir James Jeans. On page 167 one finds that Earnshaws Theorem is: A charged body placed in an electric field of force cannot rest in stable equilibrium under the influence of the electric forces alone. The proof is then given, but I knew when I read this that there was a flaw somewhere in the argument, one which I could see depends upon use of Laplaces equation. The proof depends upon whether an energy term in the analysis can have a true maximum or minimum and Jeans argues that this is impossible from use of the Laplace equation by reference to preceding
argument on page 43 of his book. This made reference to another theorem headed Deduction from Law of Inverse Square, the theorem being: The potential cannot have a maximum or a minimum value at any point in space which is not occupied by an electric charge. Jeans had missed seeing that Earnshaws Theorem is only valid for interaction between discrete electric charges that exist within a void. Here was the flaw in Earnshaws Theorem. We can contemplate an aether comprising a continuum of uniform electric charge density permeated by discrete charges of both polarities but with a surplus of those of charge polarity opposite to that of the continuum so as to render the aether electrically neutral overall. If the aether has such a form then one can have stable equilibrium between an array of charges such as might define a frame of reference. Furthermore one can contemplate such frame-structured segments of aether latching on to a material body such as an atom or larger object and sharing the motion of that body with charges breaking away at collision boundaries between such moving segments of aether only to find their way to separation boundary regions and reform as part of the frame structure. On page 168 of his book Jeans states: One physical application of Earnshaws Theorem is of extreme importance. The theorem shows that an electron cannot rest in stable equilibrium under the forces of attraction and repulsion from other charges, so long as these forces are supposed to obey the law of the inverse square of the distance. Thus, if a molecule is to be regarded as a cluster of electrons and positive charges, then the law of force must be something different from that of the inverse square. Here the case then put by Jeans imposed limitations on the structure of matter as close-clustered compositions of elementary charge, all by appeal to Earnshaws Theorem. The advancement of particle theory as well as aether theory has accordingly been badly affected by this adherence to a theorem that has erroneous foundation. Indeed, as I stated at p. 88 in my book Modern Aether Science published in 1972: The search for quarks seems to be an effort mounted in ignorance or defiance of the great work of the Reverend Samuel Earnshaw. The modern notion that a proton comprises a stable union of three quarks seems to be forbidden by the teachings of Jeans based on Earnshaws Theorem.
The reader might now well ask why it has taken the 166 years that has elapsed so far since Earnshaw announced his theorem but yet physicists are ignoring his error and not reviving interest in the aether. All I can say is that I have done my best to draw attention to this issue but the physics community does not listen. I am, however, not the first to discover the error, because I found that W.T. Scott wrote a paper entitled Who was Earnshaw? It appeared in the American Journal of Physics 27, p. 418 in 1959. Later, in 1966, Scott wrote a book entitled The Physics of Electricity and Magnetism published by Wiley and one finds that at p. 41 he too records his discovery that there is a flaw in the derivation of Earnshaws Theorem He writes: In a region of continuous charge distribution, a maximum or minimum could exist, but a continuous distribution is an idealization. We have to consider each electron or proton as an isolated charge, so that pure electrostatic equilibrium is impossible. Whereas physicists in general have applied Earnshaws theorem to deny that the aether can exist in a form containing a structured array of electric charges and so give us insight into the aether properties pertaining to electromagnetic wave propagation, Scott, aware of the flaw in that theorem was content with his assumption that charge can exist only if pervading a true void so excluding the possibility that charge, being self-repulsive, cannot spread to fill that void! Surely we cannot just drift along by relying on our assumptions and, especially in this Einstein centenary year 2005, accepting a theory of relativity that is of no help in finding our way forward in the quest to discover a Unified Field Theory linking gravitation with our electrical underworld. The aether has to be revived, its structure formulated and the geometry of that threedimensional structure deciphered so as to evaluate theoretically the one fundamental constant that is governed by the quantum underworld, meaning the aether. That constant, known as the fine-structure constant, which links electron charge, speed of light and Plancks constant as a mere numerical quantity, is the very signature of the aether. It has been measured with high precision but where, in accepted physics, is its theoretical explanation? It cannot be explained without probing the very structure of the aether. That has been my personal quest, one which seemingly has now become that of leap-frogging 100 years, the Einstein Centenary (1905-2005), albeit taking notice of the evolution of quantum theory and discoveries in particle physics. Accordingly, this account becomes a two-fold introduction. Firstly, it introduces the reader to the state of physics of the pre-Einstein era, meaning the physics which Einstein claimed as his territory but which really had been discovered by others in earlier years. Secondly, it introduces the reader to this
authors work The Physics of Creation which does provide the long-sought Unified Field Theory that eluded those adhering to Einsteins philosophy. Apart from one final comment, this therefore concludes the introductory Chapter I of this work. Chapter II will be brief in showing how E = Mc2 and the related increase in mass of an electron with speed, the torch bearer of The Theory of Special Relativity, featured in pre-Einstein thinking. Chapter III will show how pre-Einstein thinking can resolve the mystery posed by the anomalous perihelion advance of planet Mercury, the jewel in the crown that glorifies the General Theory of Relativity. This leaves the concluding Chapter IV to herald the way forward to the discovery of the Unified Field Theory that eluded Einstein. Thereafter it is for the reader to decide whether he or she can contribute to the onward progress of physics, if only by teaching students to question and resolve doubt as they tread, step by step, along the thorny path that leads to the ultimate truth concerning the natural phenomena of our universe. The path has to lie in the real world and not the world of imagination described by Professor Paul Davies in his book The Last Three Minutes published in 1994. It was a book aimed at the educated but non-specialist reader and required no prior knowledge of science or mathematics. On page 20 of that work one is told that: Einsteins General Theory of Relativity proposes that gravity is actually a manifestation of curvature, or distortion, of space (strictly space-time). In a sense space is elastic, and can bend or stretch in a manner that depends on the gravitational properties of the matter in it. So there you have a picture of space according to Einstein, but do you understand what that means? Three pages later on page 23 Davies has introduced the notion that the universe is expanding and this is somehow illustrated in a figure which shows a curve relating size with time, followed by the question Are we justified in extrapolating the curve all the way back to the beginning? You are left to answer this yourself, guided by his statement: Remember that the expansion being graphed here is that of space itself, so zero volume does not mean merely that matter is squashed to an infinite density. It means that space is compressed to nothing. He goes on then to say that the same basic idea applies to time but I am sure the reader will share my view that this is all mere nonsense, even though addressed to the reader who has no command of mathematics. It is as if matter exists and space, whatever that is, is expanding and changing form around it. I have an adequate knowledge of mathematics to say with equal
force that the mathematics that one sees in Einsteins General Theory of Relativity as portraying space-time in four dimensions does not convey any real understanding of the nature of space or the action of gravity. Why, one must ask, is it necessary to formulate physics in a four-dimensional metric that one cannot visualize only then to transform its predictions back into the threedimensional world in order to compare its results with what we measure? That is merely telling us to wear a pair of spectacles of special formulation in order to distort what we see naturally in the hope that it will clarify our vision of things. Those who believe what they see by wearing those relativistic spectacles ought to cast them aside and, with natural eyesight, read, after Chapter II, what I have to say in Chapter III.
Chapter II E = Mc2 : Pre-Einstein Was the formula E = Mc2 part of physics in the pre-Einstein era, i.e. before 1905? If so, why does the world regard E = Mc2 as the symbol of Einsteins genius? Was the related notion that energy released by the destruction of matter and so reduction of mass of record before 1905? I will not attempt to answer the second of these questions. Concerning the first and third questions, I merely refer to and quote from the book The Recent Development of Physical Science by W. C. D. Whetham published in 1904. Whetham was a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, the venue of J. J. Thomson. Remember, as was stated in Chapter I, that J. J. Thomson discovered the electron in 1897and then, in 1901, Kaufmann discovered that its mass increased with speed. On page 283-284 of Whethams book: The property of mass is explained by electron theory as an effect of electricity in motion. The quantitative value of the effect has been calculated by Thomson, Heaviside, and Searle. Definite experimental evidence has been given by Kaufmann, who finds that the ratio e/m of the charge to the mass for the corpuscles ejected by radium diminishes as their velocity increases. The charge is almost certainly constant, and thus the mass must increase with the velocity. Theory shows that, for a slowly moving corpuscle, the electric inertia outside a small sphere of radius a, surrounding the electrified particle, does not depend on the velocity and is measured as 2e2/3a where e is the electric charge on the particle. But when the velocity of light is approached, this electric mass grows very rapidly; and, on the assumption that the whole of the mass is electrical, Thomson has calculated the ratio of the mass of a slowly moving corpuscle, and compared these values with the results of Kaufmanns experiments. In this remarkable manner has it been possible to obtain experimental confirmation of the theory that mass is an electrical or aethereal phenomenon. Included here in the space between these paragraphs was a tabulation showing Kaufmanns measurements of speed and the ratio mass at speed to mass if slowly moving, the data ranging up to 95% of the speed of light. As
10
part of the tabulation Thomsons calculated mass ratios were presented sideby-side to show the agreement. On page 280 of Whethams 1904 book, following an earlier reference to Thomsons ideas concerning radio-activity, one reads: A more fundamental suggestion has been made by J. H. Jeans, who imagines that radio-activity may result from the coalescence of positive and negative electrons. On this idea, the energy of radio-active atoms is supplied by the actual destruction of matter. So you see, if visions of the atomic bomb and nuclear power arise as commendation in support of Einsteins greatness as encapsulated by the formula E = Mc2, then just ask yourself why Jeans was not given credit for his 1904 idea. It was published in the journal Nature on June 2, 1904 at page 101 of volume 70. Jeans himself was quite modest in expressing an opinion as to who should be given credit for recognizing mass-energy transmutability. In his 1929 book EOS or the Wider Aspects of Cosmogony he states at page 36: More than twenty years ago I directed attention to the enormous store of energy made available by annihilation of matter, by positively and negatively charged protons and electrons falling into and annihilating one another, thus setting free the whole of their intrinsic radiation. On this scheme neither energy nor matter had any permanent existence, but only a sort of sum of the two; each was, theoretically at least, convertible into the other. When I put forward this hypothesis, I thought I was advocating something entirely revolutionary and unheard-of, but I have since found that Newton had anticipated something very similar exactly two centuries earlier. In his Optics (1704) we find: Query 30. Are not gross bodies and light convertible into one another; and may not bodies receive much of their activity from the particles of light which enter into their composition? The changing of bodies into light, and light into bodies, is very conformable with the course of Nature, which seems delighted with transmutations. Now, as to the formula E = Mc2, a discerning reader having a modest background knowledge of physics based on the electrical system of units familiar to scientists of the late 19th century can easily show that an electric charge e contained within a sphere of radius a will have an external electric field energy of e2/2a. Yet J. J. Thomson had reason to believe that the energy E of the electron was 2e2/3a and that this energy accounted for its mass M. No doubt he arrived at this result by assuming that the magnetic field energy
11
owing to the motion of e at speed v is (e/c)2v2/3a and regarding this as the kinetic energy Mv2/2. Do the calculation yourself. It is a very easy task for any physics student who has been introduced to the theory of electromagnetism. The speed parameter c has come into the act owing to electrostatic units being related to electromagnetic units by the ratio c. From the equality: Mv2/2 = (e/c)2v2/3a such a physics student will see that: Mc2 = 2e2/3a which is the energy E that J. J. Thomson recognized as that of an electron of charge radius a. So, although the specific formulated prescription E = Mc2 does not appear in the 1904 text by Whetham concerning the then-recent development of physical science, the physics it represents was there and had been well presented in mathematical terms. Indeed, should the reader be puzzled as to the physics implied by the energy 2e2/3a for an electron at rest, just accept that within the radius a the charge e is distributed so as to set up a uniform energy density distribution or pressure, with its internal electric field intensity being the same as that at its surface radius a. You will see that this adds e2/6a to e2/2a and so gives 2e2/3a as the energy E, which from the forgoing equation gives us E = Mc2. In my opinion, therefore, there is no reason to attribute to Einsteins genius our acceptance that E = Mc2. Nor, indeed, do I think that J. J. Thomsons formulation provides the ultimate insight into the physics governing this energy-mass relationship. So, still looking at physics of the pre-Einstein era, I draw attention to the discovery made by Larmor in 1897 as reported in Phil. Mag., xliv, p. 503. He presented a formula for the rate of loss of energy from a charge q having an acceleration f which has since been very widely applied in physics and astrophysics. The formula is: dE/dt = 2q2f2/3c3 a formula that can be used to calculate the rate of energy radiation from a radio antenna in which current oscillations are sustained by accelerating and decelerating a collective system of charge q formed by numerous electrons each of charge e. Next have regard to the fact that 1897 was the very year in which J. J. Thomson discovered the electron by an experiment which measured its charge/mass ratio and note that the Larmor formula includes the acceleration f but no term representing mass. It was derived by calculating field energy in terms of current and by assuming that electromagnetic wave radiation occurs at the speed c and conveys energy at that speed.
12
A question of interest which surely should have then been considered in the light of these 1897 events was whether each individual electron making up that charge q shares in the act of energy radiation or whether the source of the energy radiated was the interaction field set up by the numerous electrons as a collective action. In other words, does Larmors derivation of that formula, allow one to say that, q being Ne and N electrons sharing that acceleration f, the radiation energy rate is: dE/dt = 2(Ne)2f2/3c3 or should it be: dE/dt = 2N(N-1)e2f2/3c3 Quite obviously, since N, as it applies to electric currents strong enough to excite a measurable amount of energy radiation, will be truly enormous, there can be no experimental data allowing one to distinguish between these two formulations. So one is left to look at how the formula is derived. In this respect it is not sufficient to say Let there be acceleration and let f signify its rate. Instead, one must provide an electric field that acts on the charge to account for the force which produces that rate of acceleration. That must introduce an electron mass term. Given the presence of such a field at the source of any wave radiation, that field must interact with the fields of the charge accelerated and so affect the calculation. Larmors derivation overlooked this requirement. Had it been taken into account it would have been found that there was a condition by which each individual component charge contributing to current flow would not radiate energy itself. That condition is that the self-action of the electric field of each charge e has a field energy E that is equal to the mass M of the electron multiplied by the square of a speed term, the speed being that at which a field disturbance propagates within the body of charge e owing to the acceleration. In other words, if each individual electron reacts to an accelerating electric field so as to avoid radiating any of its energy then one obtains a formula of the form E = Mc2. The Principle of Conservation of Energy is surely the true basis of that formula. Larmor could have derived that formula in that year 1897 had he explored this possibility, namely the need to allow for the cause of the acceleration rather than merely assuming a state of acceleration and considering the field energy of propagated waves in regions remote from the radiating source. For readers interested in the analysis involved in correcting this omission see the section entitled The Energy-Mass Formula at pp. 80-84 in my book Physics Unified (1980) which is accessible on my website www.aspden.org
13
Just consider the consequences that would have emerged from the realization back in 1897 that the electrons property of inertia arises from the electrons energy-preserving reaction to an accelerating field. It is not just the formula E = Mc2 that would have made its debut but the relevance this would have had in supporting that hypothesis by Jeans in 1904 that there is transmutation of matter and energy, the forerunner of our insight into nuclear power. More than this, however, as the picture of the hydrogen atom emerged as a proton with a satellite electron subject to acceleration owing to its orbital motion, so it would be understood why its energy is not radiated. Quantum theory would not then have been seen as a mystery subject governed by empirical rules. The multi-electron atom would have been seen as a system of charge in which the electrons adopt orbits according to their energy level that are configured to allow them to avoid collective field interaction that generates energy radiation. I have discussed this in a paper that was published on my website in 1997. See Essay No. 6 in the technology section of www.energyscience.org.uk So do not say Quantum theory explains why an atomic electron does not radiate its energy but rather say Because E = Mc2 arises from the energy conservation property of an accelerated electron, so this explains the very basis of quantum theory, and where an atom has more that one electron the orbital configuration is restricted and must be such as to avoid radiation according to the Larmor formula, N(N-1) version. Those years from 1897 to 1904 were indeed years of enlightenment in physics, sadly darkened by the demise of belief in the aether owing to that error in Earnshaws Theorem. It is, by the way, well established by classical electron theory, thanks to J. J. Thomson, that an electromagnetic field has momentum and that the momentum of any system is equal to its energy multiplied by the velocity of the centroid of its energy and divided by the square of the velocity of light. Student textbook instruction on this, quoting a book I had in my last school year (1945), namely p. 10 of H. A. Wilsons Modern Physics: Second Edition 1944, presents the momentum M as Ev/c2 and defines the mass m of the particle as M divided by the velocity v so that m = E/c2. Then if the energy E and mass m when the particle is at rest or when v=0 are denoted by Eo and mo the kinetic energy of the particle is given by E-Eo or c2(m - mo). The argument then proceeds on the basis that, if a force F acts on such a particle along the direction in which it is moving, and we suppose that there is no loss of energy by radiation (the very basis of this authors derivation of E = Mc2), then we have: F t = M
14
and: Fvt = E = c2m so that vM = c2m, or since M = mv, M M = mc2m. Integrating this gives (M)2 = (mc)2 +const., so that, since m =mo when M = 0: (M)2 = (mc)2 - (moc)2 = (mv)2 As can be seen from the latter part of this equation, this means that we have derived the standard formula for the increase of mass as a function of v, the formula that Einstein claims to be the result of his special Theory of Relativity. Yet we have not applied any notion stemming from Einsteins theory and all we have done is to quote the findings of classical electron theory. Now the reason I have presented this analysis is to allow me to pose the question as to whether this so-called relativistic mass increase formula applies to a planet in orbital motion around the sun. Look at where v was introduced into the analysis. The argument began from the assumption that the particle was at rest with v = 0, but the word rest implies a frame of reference. So what is that frame of reference for a planet in motion around the sun? Is it the sun or is it the galaxy to which the solar system belongs or can it be the hypothetical universal frame of reference that was assumed in the 19th century? Since energy is added by motion and none is radiated, the v = 0 condition applies at the moment when the particle was first created. That is an interesting point given the notion of Big Bang creation and an expanding universe. The derivation of E = Mc2 requires c to be referenced on the charge of the accelerated particle but v would be meaningless if we took that charge as its reference frame. So physicists have a problem. We are guided to the answer from the experimental evidence that electrons here on Earth exhibit the mass increase according to their motion relative to the Earth frame which I see as an aether charge lattice structure sharing the Earths motion through space. Electrons, you see, do not have the structure needed to form their own aether lattice system. Atoms other than hydrogen do, but such atoms are electrically neutral overall and so cannot be tested experimentally to see if they increase in mass with speed, as they cannot be accelerated in a cyclotron. This suggests that our Earth cannot itself exhibit the relativistic mass increase. The answer, however, must depend upon what is the true nature of kinetic energy. Given that an accelerated charge has inertia in just the right measure to preclude radiation of energy, if it moves owing to the action of an electric field it will have to store its kinetic energy in its field system. That involves charge displacement in the enveloping aether lattice, for both the electric and the magnetic fields, energy which is stored and which is
15
recoverable on slow down. I see that local aether lattice as essential if the energy added as kinetic is to be carried along with the source particle and thereby add to the mass in motion. A further point of interest, having that time of particle creation in mind, stems from the question of whether the charged particles that constitute matter have a finite lifetime and whether, upon decay, since surplus energy in the aether system is no doubt shed in creating protons in company with electrons, the matter now constituting body Earth has actually emerged by creation within the Earths own aether lattice frame. Surplus energy in the aether surely is the energy source accounting for the creation of matter in the form of protons and electrons and it seems logical for our Earth to be subject to ongoing decay and recreation of matter. Even if the mean lifetime of a proton were 1,000,000 years that is minute compared with the age of our Earth. This may be speculation but it can explain why the kinetic energy of a planet is not subject to relativistic mass increase as a function of the planets speed in orbit around the sun or, indeed, its speed relative to a universal reference frame implied by the anisotropy of cosmic background as evidence by its temperature. E = Mc2 arises from the conservation of energy when a particle is accelerated as we have found by correcting for the error in Larmors formula. H. A. Wilson, in that book: Modern Physics, referenced above came close to seeing this error when, after deriving the Larmor radiation formula on pp. 1516, he stated: Electromagnetic radiation is obtained in practice from electrical oscillations produced by the discharge of a condenser through a wire. In such cases, in which enormous numbers of electrons are involved the radiation obtained agrees with that calculated by electromagnetic theory. Radiation from single electrons has not been observed, and according to the Quantum Theory, the electrons in atoms do not radiate when they are moving round orbits and so have an acceleration. The success of quantum theory makes it possible that the expression just obtained for the radiation from an electron is erroneous. Here, you see, was a student textbook pointing to something needing correction but implying that quantum theory was the governing factor, whereas the student really needs to correct the error and apply the law of conservation of energy and thereby show that a single electron avoids radiation by having an inertia that requires E to equal Mc2 and from that discover that E = Mc2 derived in this way gives foundation for quantum theory.
16
The reader should now begin to see that the Einstein interlude from 1905-1916, having put mathematics on a mental plane taking precedence over physical understanding, then helped to make quantum theory appear as a kind of mystique defined by a set of rules rather than something governed by true physical factors common to the roots of E = Mc2.. Such, therefore, is my verdict on Einsteins Special Theory of Relativity. It has reached its centenary and has explained nothing that was not amenable to explanation before Einstein appeared on the scene in 1905. Let us now in Chapter III take stock of Einsteins General Theory of Relativity.
17
Chapter III Concerning Gravitation and Planetary Motion Angular Momentum Here one must begin by noting that one of the greatest mysteries in science is the problem of how stars form and acquire their angular momentum. From the time of Isaac Newton we have accepted the fact that self-contained dynamic systems somehow contrive to conserve their angular momentum. The logical proposition is that, if stars form by matter condensing somehow from whatever it is that constitutes the aether, then the angular momentum is acquired by transfer from that medium which permeates all space, the aether. The illogical proposition adopted by most cosmologists is that there is no aether and that the universe emerged seemingly from nowhere at time zero and in an event they call the Big Bang with stars appearing with spins of opposite sense so as to have net zero angular momentum. Either way the prevailing principle is that angular momentum is conserved, but, as noted in Chapter IV ahead, the truths governing the process of stellar creation can only be ascertained by probing the one route that is amenable to analysis, namely the pathway that eluded Samuel Earnshaw. For the purpose of this chapter it suffices to accept without question that the angular momentum of a stellar system, such as the sun and its planets, is conserved and that there is little or no exchange of angular momentum as between planets over the course of the 100 year period 1905-2005 since Einstein introduced his theory. I well recall a meeting I had at Cambridge in an effort to put across my ideas about the aether. It was with Dr. Sciama and a few years on from the year 1954 in which we had both received our Ph.D. degrees from that university. He listened but his reaction was summed up by his words: We all believe the aether exists, but we call it space-time. Quantum theory hides by its mathematics the physical picture of how fundamental particles, electrons, protons etc., are created, meaning their source and their acquisition of angular momentum when they form into atoms and there seems to be no way that Einsteins theory with its space-time (or is it four-space?) can get into that act. Therefore, I hold firm in saying that the truth is to be found by probing Earnshaws vision of the aether based on a charge continuum permeated by the virtual particles, be they electrons, muons or taons that occasionally present themselves in a ghostly way in our particle experiments. Somehow also such aether particles are involved in the
18
storage of energy and angular momentum in what we see as empty space, be it a vacuum between the plates of a charged electrical capacitor or a vacuum region within the solenoid of a magnetic inductor. For the moment, however, we will proceed by addressing the question as to how electrostatic action or gravitational action traverses the space between two interacting particles. Propagation 35 years ago, in 1970, a book entitled Relativity Reexamined was published by Academic Press. Its author was Leon Brillouin. After discussing subjects such as the gravitational deflection of light, redshift of spectral lines in a gravitational field and the perihelion anomaly of Mercury, all derived from the same equation and purporting to be proof of Einsteins Theory of General Relativity, he concludes on page 55: There is no experimental check to support the very heavy mathematical structure of Einstein. All we find is another heavy structure of purely mathematical extensions, complements, or modifications without any more experimental evidence. To put it candidly, science fiction about cosmology - very interesting but hypothetical. Altogether we have no proof of the need for a curved universe (space plus time) and the physical meaning of the theory is very confusing. Now, of course, I could not resist drawing the readers attention to the above verdict by an eminent scientist, having expressed similar views above by reference to that book by Paul Davies. Science fiction about cosmology very interesting but hypothetical - a comment that applies equally to the notion of a Big Bang. However, before coming to that in Chapter IV, let us dispose of the General Relativity issue. That book by Brillouin had a page between the Preface and the Introduction and at the bottom of that page one reads: To form any notion at all of the flux of gravitational energy, we must first localize the energy. Heaviside - 1893 Oliver Heaviside was said by Brillouin (at page 103) to be the forgotten genius of physics, abandoned by everybody except a few friends. So, once again reverting to the physics of the 19th century and now paying tribute to Heaviside, I ask if physicists interested in the propagation of energy by gravitational action have tried their hand at the necessary calculation. It does not need the kind of mathematics that go with Einsteins theory - just the level of mathematics that I had been taught at school as a 17 year old.
19
Indeed the calculation is surprisingly easy (see the section entitled Retardation at pp. 24-25 in my book Physics Unified (1980) which is accessible on my website www.aspden.org ) if all one seeks to know is the mean range of interaction field energy deployment as referenced on either of the interacting bodies. If they are spaced apart by a distance R, there is zero net interaction energy within a sphere of radius R centred on either body. Beyond the radius R the net interaction energy decreases inversely with distance squared as does the self-interaction energy of either charge. What this means is that, if applied to sun and planet interaction, any change of kinetic energy of the planet as it describes its orbit must traverse the mean distance R in going to or from the field. So, if we now make the normal assumption that energy propagation through so-called empty space must be at the speed of light c, we define a time retardation period T that is R/c. Now, whereas that calculation is so simple, there is something of extreme importance that one has to consider but which has been overlooked for too long. We understand that a body moving under its own inertia and subject to no external force will continue moving at the same speed in a straight line. That is easy to comprehend and one might easily assume that no energy is being supplied to or shed by the moving body during such motion. The enveloping field energy shares the motion of the body and there is no interaction field energy involved. That said, now consider motion about a centre to which the body is attracted by gravity, motion at a steady speed in a perfect circular orbit. Here we do have field interaction energy. The kinetic energy of the body is not changing but somehow the distribution of that field energy is changing. There are then two ways in which that energy can redeploy. Numerous elements of it may go directly to their new location as the bodies change position or the energy involved has to traverse the distance R from the field to one or other of the bodies and thence the same amount of energy has to traverse the same distance R in going to the new field position by a different route. Without engaging in a quite extensive computer-assisted mathematical calculation it is hardly possible to estimate the retardation effect in the first of these cases. One could hope the answer might be identical to that of the second case, namely a mean retardation time of R/c but that question is left open. Alternatively we could proceed empirically and let experimental observation tell us what the time delay really is. Let us see then how retardation affects the planetary orbit. Note that we have gravitational potential energy of GMm/R as the field interaction energy. Here G is the constant of gravitation, M is the mass of the sun and m the mass of the planet. Consistent with the force of attraction this energy is a negative
20
quantity, which means that if some of that energy is deployed in transit owing to retardation effects it has to be associated with a gravitational potential of higher magnitude. In other words G will be effectively increased in proportion to the amount of energy in transit. Consider the planet moving along a linear axis x but deflected so as to progress in a direction y at right angles to x. The motion is in a circle of radius R but motion along x at speed v will be opposed by the action of a central force F resolved along x, meaning a force Fcos, where cos is equal to vt/R after a time t. The energy shed by motion in the x direction is then the time integral of vFcos or of F(v2 )t/R, which is F(v2 /R)t2/2 in time t, whereas the energy gained owing to accelerated motion in the y direction is that of the central force F acting through the distance ft2/2 and so is Fft2/2, f being the centrifugal acceleration rate. As can be seen, since f is (v2 /R), these are equal quantities, meaning that the kinetic energy of the planet is constant in its circular orbit, but that the total amount of energy in transit at any instant is F(v2 /R)T2, t having been replaced by the retardation period T. With T as R/c this energy in transit becomes FR(v/c)2 and what this means, since the force F is GMm/R2, is that the gravitational energy potential GMm/R or G, effectively, is enhanced by that factor (v/c)2. So now we are in a position, based purely on classical physics of the th 19 century, to understand how the Newtonian equation of planetary motion can be affected by retardation in the propagation of gravitational action. Taking a basic equation from a book by A. S. Ramsey entitled Dynamics, published by Cambridge University Press, another school textbook I have had since my final school year in 1945, the Newtonian differential equation of the planetary orbit is: d2u/d2 + u = /h2 when expressed in polar co-ordinates (R, ) where R becomes 1/u. Here h denotes the velocity moment vR and is proportional to G. On the same page of that book, page 175, Ramsey presents the corresponding Einstein Law of Gravitation and goes on from there to show how this leads to the value of the anomalous perihelion advance measured for planet Mercury. The Einstein version is: d2u/d2 + u = /h2 + 3u2 provided, as Ramsey notes, v is measured in units of the speed of light but, of course, this Einstein law must still apply even if the planetary orbit is not elliptical. We are still looking at a truly circular motion to consider the effect of retardation. Consider then the effect of enhancing the energy potential represented by G and so by that factor (v/c)2. Note then that (v/c)2 is proportional to (h/Rc)2 and gravitational energy potential is proportional to
21
1/R, which means that in terms of force, the basis of derivation of the equation for the planetary orbit, we find, owing to having to differentiate with respect to R the 1/R3 factor introduced by that (v/c)2 term to convert energy to force, that 3(v/c)2 is the factor needed to enhance in the Newtonian equation to allow for the retardation effect. One then can see that: (1 + 3(v/c)2)(/h2) = (1 + 3(hu/c)2)(/h2) = /h2 + 3u2 when c is taken as unity. Note that h is has been assumed to be constant, consistent with angular momentum being constant and the mass of the planet being deemed not to depend upon v for the reasons discussed in Chapter II. So there we are. We have derived the same formula as Einstein without the imaginary mathematical excursion into the mysterious dimensions of fourspace or space-time and have merely adhered to 19th century physics. If the planetary motion is not truly circular then, provided one can measure the advance of perihelion implied by the extra term, as we can for planet Mercury, then we can by the reverse argument deduce that the retardation time T is, in fact, R/c, thereby verifying that the gravitational action is subject to propagation at the speed of light. It was in 1898 that Gerber, the German school teacher mentioned in Chapter I, wrote his paper entitled: "The Space and Time Propagation of Gravitation" and derived in it a formula for the anomalous advance of the perihelion of planet Mercury that was exactly the same as the one presented by Einstein in 1916 in support of his General Theory of Relativity. This led in 1917 to a still unresolved debate between Seelinger and Oppenheim. See Ann. d. Phys., 52, 415 (1917), 53, 31 and 163 (1917), 54, 38 (1917). The debate was on whether speed-of-light retardation in gravitational action really accounts for the phenomenon observed. It is curious therefore that Einstein did not acknowledge Gerber in his writings on the same subject, as, for example, by questioning how Gerber had derived what he claimed. One surely must question the sense of accepting Einstein's notion that what we perceive so clearly as space having three mutually-orthogonal dimensions is really space distorted into four dimensions by an imaginary time factor, when a retarded force action based on classical physical concepts can provide a full account of what is observed. Gerber may have erred in his mathematical analysis of the problem, but that merely opened the challenge for someone to complete the task. Instead we have embraced Einstein's theory and now, some 90 years on from 1915 when Einstein first wrote about Mercury's perihelion anomaly, we remain defeated in our attempts to discover that Holy Grail, the Unified Field Theory. I, as author, must exclude myself from that term we' in view of what I shall disclose in Chapter IV. It will, I am sure be seen as justification for this
22
critical attack on Einsteins theory. As to that Holy Grail, the assumption has been that a Unified Field Theory will connect gravitation and electromagnetic theory, whereas the argument followed above has been based on a field energy distribution that is the same as that of the electrostatic action. Analysis of the magnetic field energy distribution in the interaction field of two moving electric charges reveals a different distribution pattern which implies less travel distance for energy in transit and so would not result in the Einstein equation for planetary motion. See my joint paper with Dr. D. M. Eagles, published in Acta Physica Polonica, A57, 473-482 (1980). Electrodynamic Retardation Physicists of the mid and latter part of the 19th century interested in the effects of speed-of-light retardation of electrodynamic action did arrive at the following formula for electrokinetic potential: P = (qe/R)(v/c)2 for the interaction of two electric charges q, e in relative motion at a separation distance R, v being their relative velocity and c the speed of light. This was used by Maxwell to derive the Neumann potential by appeal to the Fechner hypothesis and so the onward formulation of possible laws of electrodynamics based on a choice of different assumptions. These assumptions concerned action and reaction balance either in a linear sense or in a rotational sense or both as per Ampere but seemed to omit the one that matters, namely whether there is energy transfer as between other moving charges present and the charge pair under consideration. It is not surprising, therefore, that an analogous formula: P = (GMm/R2)(v/c)2 where G is the constant of gravitation and M, m are the masses of sun and planet respectively, was applied to account for the anomalous perihelion advance of planet Mercury. The formula, in effect, enhances G by the factor: 1 + (v/c)2 thereby giving the same basis for modifying Newtons law of gravitation as that derived above. Indeed, as Whittaker tells us in his classic historical work on aether theory, History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity (Part I of 1951 edition, pp. 207-208) it was back in 1872 that Tisserand (Comptes Rendus, lxxv,p. 760), basing his analysis of retardation effects at the speed of light in electrodynamic theory, derived a figure of 14 seconds of arc per century for the perihelion advance of planet Mercury. It was too small in comparison with what was observed and so there were other later attempts to solve the mystery in the years before Einstein claimed it to be the result of his General Theory of Relativity.
23
What Tisserand presumably failed to take into account was the fact, as we saw above, that this increase of G was in respect of energy potential (a function of 1/R) and that planetary motion is expressed in terms of force (a function of 1/R2). The conversion makes the factor: 1 + 3(v/c)2 and so modifies the Newtonian force equation: d2u/d2 + u = GM/h2 to give the Einstein equation: d2u/d2 + u = GM/h2 + 3GM(u2/c2) these equations, as before, being in polar coordinates u, where u is 1/R and h is vR. However, here we have not used units for v expressed as a factor of the speed of light c and has been replaced by GM, M being the mass of the sun. That 14 seconds of arc then becomes 42 seconds or arc, precisely the value of the anomalous perihelion advance of Mercury observed by astronomers. Had this simple error in analysis been noticed back in 1872 the course of science history over the past one hundred years would have been very different. In the event it was Gerber who, in 1898, as already noted, did make a case for the 42 seconds of arc figure in terms of gravitational action being retarded at the speed of light, but even this was ignored as Einsteins fourspace theme was embraced by the physics community. Yet, our conclusion here supports Gerbers case by correcting his analysis of the retardation involved in energy transfer between field and planet and thereby proving that the physics governing gravitation need not involve Einsteins four-space concept. The problem, however, that now arises from our above argument, founded as it is on deriving Einsteins equation of planetary motion by two different methods, both of which are based on purely classical pre-Einstein physics is that we now have to decide which method is correct. The second method, the one based on Maxwells electrodynamic analysis using Fechners hypothesis, would support the case for gravitation being an electromagnetic phenomenon but involves hypothesis at its roots and does not satisfy the correct retardation conditions associated with energy in transit at the speed of light besides denying gravitational action unless there is relative motion between the interacting bodies. For this reason the first method has to be favoured, meaning that a truly unified field theory will associate gravitation with electrostatic action rather than electromagnetic action. This suggestion might raise a few eyebrows amongst the scientific community but remember that, in correcting Earnshaws error, we have recognized that space contains an electrical charge continuum with no voids.
24
Atomic matter is coupled with the structured charge components of the aether that define the local electromagnetic frame of reference and when combined with coextensive charge continuum is electrically neutral overall. The only scope for gravitational action drawing that atomic matter together depends upon whether some other charge form, existing in pairs of opposite polarity and so neutral overall, has (a) freedom of motion, but (b) exists in amounts somehow related to the mass of nearby atomic matter, and (c), by its displacement of continuum charge, reduces the effect of electrostatic selfrepulsion within that charge continuum. That, as we shall see in Chapter IV, is the answer to the mystery of gravitation which we find is a quantum theory of gravitation which tells us that the taon, the third member of the charged lepton family, besides the electron and the muon, is a key actor in its role as a graviton. Suffice it here to conclude that Einsteins theory has nothing to offer so far as gravitation is concerned. Physicists who still wish to defend it must decide on that question of whether a body such as a planet is subject to increase in mass according to the teachings of Einsteins theory, meaning the relativistic formula for mass increase with speed. If not, why not? Can it be that relativistic mass increase with speed only applies to charged particles in free motion such as protons, pions, electrons, muons or taons? Surely one must see that those who adhere to Einsteins doctrine must face up to the fact that either the General Theory of Relativity is wrong or his Special Theory of Relativity is wrong in suggesting that all bodies, charged or uncharged, experience mass increase with speed. See further comment on this in Chapter IV by reference to time-dilation. I will now, in Chapter IV, outline the scope for progress as implied by the title words of this work Physics without Einstein, my preoccupation for many years, so be prepared to understand how Nature determines G, the constant of gravitation, and how Nature creates the proton and determines its mass, neither being possible if one adheres to Einsteins doctrines.
25
Chapter IV The Way Forward The Aether: A Preliminary Note The aether was pronounced dead by Doctors of Science obsessed with the belief that it provides a universal frame of reference for light propagation rather than containing such frames of reference dragged along by bulk matter. They had erred is not seeing the error in Earnshaws Theorem and erred in not being able to conceive a aether containing a multiplicity of adjacent domains containing independent charge structures that can define different electromagnetic reference frames, structures that can dissolve at collision boundaries and with the vacating aether charges reappearing at boundaries of separation. It was in 1913 that a book entitled Modern Electrical Theory by N. R. Campbell was published in its 2nd Edition by Cambridge University Press. At p. 388 and concerning the above notion about a multi-structured aether one reads: This is the simple way out of the difficulties raised by the Michelson-Morley experiment. If from the beginning we had used a plural instead of a singular word to denote the system in which radiant energy is localised (or even a word which, like sheep, might be either single or plural ), those difficulties would never have appeared. There has never been a better example of the danger of being deceived by arbitrary choice of terminology. However, physicists, not recognising the gratuitous assumption made in the use of the words the aether, adopted the second alternative; they introduced new assumptions. Campbell here meant that they turned to heed Einsteins preaching on the subject of relativity. The result, as we have seen, is that physicists have raced ahead, making assumption after assumption, only to find themselves in a world permeated with Black Holes but have lost their way in an attempt to link the phenomenon of gravitation with electrodynamics. Yet, the aether exists and is alive because it exhibits a heartbeat at the Compton electron frequency and because it is full of energy. 19th century physicists well knew that it can store energy by displacement of its intrinsic electric charge, as its positive and negative charge are held apart by setting up an electric field. Its pulse rate, that Compton electron frequency, was not discovered until some years after Einstein appeared on the scene, but Faraday
26
had shown that it can also store magnetic energy and here was the clue that should have revealed one of the aethers secrets. Whetham in that 1904 book mentioned earlier explained on p. 173 how magnetic force is produced at right angles both to the length and direction of motion of tubes of electric force carried along by a charged particle. So, if the aether consists of neutral cells of electric charge having motion, negative charge displaced from and moving around positive charge, it will react to an applied magnetic field. Whittaker in his book The History of Aether and Electricity at p. 262 tells us that Maxwell investigated this in the Cambridge Mathematical Tripos for 1869'. He pictured atoms deemed to occupy small spherical cavities in the aether, the outer shell of each atom being in contact with the aether at all points and partaking in its motion. One could from this picture how the effect of a magnet might act on aether charge describing an orbit in such an aether cavity and conclude that the motion of that aether charge would set up an opposing magnetic field which partially offsets the primary action of the applied magnetic field. For optimum energy storage one then finds that the reaction would halve the applied field. Sadly, it was not until 1908 that O. W. Richardson (Physical Review, 26, p. 248) suggested that when the magnetism in a pivotally mounted ferromagnetic rod is reversed, the rod should sustain an angular momentum change. It was predicted that the gyromagnetic ratio, the ratio of the change of angular momentum to the change of magnetic moment, should be 2mc/e, where e/m is the charge to mass ratio of the electron. Curiously it was Einstein and W. J. Haas who first observed the effect in 1915 (Verh. d. Deutsch. Phys. Ges., 17, p. 152) but it was not until 1923 that W. Sucksmith and L. F. Bates (Proc. Roy. Soc. London, 104A, p. 499) found that the effect was only one half of that predicted. Here was the clear evidence of the aether reaction but what did physicists then do? They still ignored the aether and invented yet another notion, the notion of half-spin, another arbitrary idea serving to side track genuine research into the realm of fantasy rather than reality. Bates was later to be one of the two examiners of my Cambridge Ph.D. thesis on a magnetic energy loss anomaly and it was my first step on my aether quest following those research years to see how that factor-of-2 anomaly proved the existence of the aether by showing how it optimizes that reaction to govern magnetic field energy storage. The point was that if the free conduction electrons in a ferromagnetic rod react to half-cancel the applied magnetic field then a similar action must occur for a magnetic field set up in a vacuum, which indicates that there must be free charge in motion in the aether. See the strong evidence in support in my paper Crystal
27
Symmetry and Ferromagnetism, Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, pp. 59-63 (1978). Analysis of Aether Structure During my Ph.D. years, essentially experimental, just as a matter of interest I delved into how electrons of adjacent atoms in a ferromagnetic crystal might interact electrodynamically to set up mechanical strain and satisfied myself that ferromagnetism stemmed from the 3d-state electrons and the fact that iron, for example, had sufficiently high tensile strength to tolerate the stress attributed to that strain. The analysis involved in this made it easy to contemplate an aether having a somewhat similar cubic-structured form as one sees in a ferromagnetic material, though whereas energy deployment in the crystal of a ferromagnetic material admits negative field energy density conditions, I ruled that out of consideration for the aether. The interacting charges could then not be at rest and had to be displaced in unison from centres to which they were attracted by electrostatic forces. From then on, having good reason for regarding aether structure as simple cubic in form rather than body-centred or face-centred cubic, it was a straightforward mathematical exercise to derive the parameters of the aether, charge spacing, radius of charge orbit in relation to that spacing, period of revolution of the charges in their circular orbits etc. This allowed me to picture the photon as seated in a disturbance set up by a tiny 3x3x3 cubic array of aether charges spinning and so having an angular momentum quantum proportional to the frequency of waves radiated. The numbers that emerged for the value of the fine-structure constant 2 2e /hc checked exactly with those found in precision measurement and so I knew I had the right picture of the aether. The aether charges were not electrons, as one might have hoped, but were charges having a mass a little greater than 0.04 of the electron mass. The immediate spin-off, however, revealed that the energy of each cubic cell of the aether had a mass-energy equivalent of about 413 electrons and I said Eureka to myself as here was evidence that a lepton pair, a pair of virtual muons, the heavy-electrons of particle physics, actually constitute the aether. The picture then began to form that these muons, so-called mu-mesons, being of mass intermediate the electron and the proton might account for the creation of primordial matter. So whereas I was aware of Einstein and the Special and General Theories of Relativity I was drawn into the struggle for acceptance of these findings, by having to face the attitude of a physics community that says You must be crazy to suggest revival of the aether with its three space-dimensions now that we all accept Einsteins theory and four-space.
28
Now, much of my published work on this theme is included or referenced on my web sites www.aspden.org and www.energyscience.org.uk so, before saying a little more about proton creation and gravitation, I will now just express a few thoughts concerning the more topical themes that are claiming attention. The Creation and the Death of Stars Cosmologists, lacking insight into the structure of the aether, have missed seeing the important analogy that can be drawn between the aether and the ferromagnet, namely its domain structure. Just as magnetic polarization is reversed in adjacent magnetic domains within iron, so the electric polarization is reversed in adjacent domains in space. The evidence comes from the sequence of geomagnetic reversals that have geological record in the Earths crust, evidence which tells us that periodically our Earth traverses along with the sun a space domain boundary, such boundaries being spaced at distances measured in hundreds of light years. At creation stars are born, one per domain, or possibly as twins, a binary pair, one pair per domain. Gravity in one such domain does not extend beyond the range of the domain boundaries and so it is only matter created in such a domain that coalesces to create the star or binary pair. The analogy with ferromagnetism prevails, because just as non-magnetized iron cools through its Curie temperature and the energy conditions favour onset of domain structure and the associated magnetism so the cooling of the universe and its associated space medium, the aether, assumed its domain structure with its associated gravitation. This is all explained and justified in Chapter 8 of my book Physics Unified on record on my website www.aspden.org and I see no need to repeat it here. Now, as to the death of stars, just consider the very rare event when a star, carried in a galactic orbit in which, like our sun, it makes a full revolution once every 270,000,000 years, just happens to traverse a space domain boundary with its orbital path just overlapping that boundary. The crossing would not be rapid, but could be quite prolonged with the star being partially in one domain and partially in the adjacent domain. Gravity does not act between matter in adjacent domains to hold the star together. It may even be anti-gravitational over a short range in its effect between matter in adjacent space domains. The result, I suggest, for such a rare happening is a supernova as the star blows apart. Fortunately, our sun has avoided such a traumatic event so far but it does have a slow traversal of space domain boundaries four times in its galactic cycle and so, as is of record, there is evidence in our Earths
29
geological structure of related traumatic events. J. Steiner in Geology, p. 89 (1973) writes: If Phanerozoic geological history incorporates any periodicities, they are of the order of 60 or perhaps 70 million years .... The galactic periodicity of the solar system is, however, approximately274 million years, representing the length of the cosmic year, or one revolution around the galactic centre. Apart from the pattern of geomagnetic reversals in the Earths history, what better indication can one have of a large scale cubic structure of space itself, meaning the aether? When, one must ask, will cosmologists wake up to the reality of the aether with its domain structure limiting the range of gravity? Dark Energy is now said to be one of the worlds greatest unsolved problems. It is discussed in John Vaccas book The Worlds 20 Greatest Unsolved Problems (Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 2005). Quoting from p. 134: A mysterious force called dark energy seems to be wrenching the universe apart. This is called the Big Rip .... Since 1998, dark energy has become one of the central and apparently unavoidable features of the cosmos. It has been the surprise question mark at the top of every scientists list. It undermines what physicists presumed they understood about space, time, gravity, and the future of the universe. .... Type 1a supernova serve as markers in space. New efforts by astronomers intend to harvest hundreds or thousands of supernovas, where in the past, astronomers could only base their conclusions on observing a few dozen of them. So, you see, here we are 100 years after Einstein came along and began to tell us about space, time and gravity, but having to admit that such teaching is now undermined! Nuclear Fusion Nuclear fusion is said to be the source of the suns energy. It is not! The reason is that physicists have ignored the fact that when hydrogen atoms are pushed into one another by gravity they ionize. This means that protons and electrons become separated. Then, since two protons experience a mutual attraction at a rate of gravitational acceleration that is 1836 times that which exists between two electrons, the inner ionized body of the sun must be in state of balance throughout as an excess of protons will create a repulsion exactly balancing the gravitational attraction. The sun will have about the same mass density throughout its whole form as one finds for an atomic
30
hydrogen gas in which the outer K-shell electrons of its atoms are in close contact. At 1.41 gm/cc this seems to be the case. This precludes nuclear fusion. So where does the suns energy come from? Well it comes from the process just described. Gravitation creates ionization by freeing the electrons of adjacent atoms as they crash into one another. Energy is radiated and the free electrons lose speed, but those electrons will, since only a small proportion are free at any instant, recover energy as they are recombine with a free proton to reform the hydrogen atom. The ultimate energy source is whatever it is that governs the quantum state of the electron in its motion around the hydrogen nucleus, the proton. The source of energy is the omnipresent something that regulates quantum activity. In other words the energy source is the aether, the aether that physicists say does not exist! The Big Bang Before astronomers began to probe that new notion they call the Big Rip, the universe was supposedly expanding as if everything began at a point in time and a point in space several billions of years ago. The only evidence in support of this is the red shift phenomenon, that is the observation that light from distant galaxies exhibits a lower and lower frequency the further remote the source. Where, one must ask, is the physics that explains the spectral red shift of light emitted by stars? Yes, the physics is there from that modification of Newtons law of gravity owing to retardation at the speed of light. This explains a small red shift attributable to radiation from a source of large mass such as the sun. However, the large red shift that implies an expanding universe is attributed to the Doppler effect. This involves the assumption that a light wave, in its passage through space, even after travelling for billions of years at the enormous speed of light does not really lose frequency but is only seen to alter its frequency because the frequency is referenced on a relatively-moving source. Somehow the mathematics of Maxwells equations suffices to assure physicists that electromagnetic waves travelling through interstellar space cannot suffer loss of frequency. They imagine packets of energy called photons travelling at the speed of light and talk about wave-particle duality. Yet when a photon sheds energy it sheds frequency as well. Physicists cannot say what a photon is physically - it merely has an energy quantum h, where h is Plancks constant and its frequency. So, logically, if there is nothing in space to intercept those photons, no energy can be shed and so the frequency is sustained.
31
Now just consider the alternative scenario, an aether that is trying to create matter but, having reached a state of equilibrium as between matter and aether energy, succeeds only in creating everywhere in space a very sparse transient presence of protons and electrons. We could call this missing matter or dark energy. It would obstruct electromagnetic waves by presenting a Thomson cross-section absorbing energy from the wave and then dissipating that energy by radiation so that it is absorbed back into the aether. If only we knew how the proton is created then we could estimate the rate at which energy is absorbed in its passage through space. So you see, proton creation and understanding the physics of the photon that determines the finestructure constant pose issues vital to our understanding of the universe. Such theory should explain the proton/electron mass ratio as well as the fine structure constant, both mere numerical quantities since no units are involved. My theory of the aether has delivered such results, but physicists in their wisdom regard such claims as merely the game of playing with numbers by pressing keypad on some electronic device. So they turn away and bury themselves in Einsteins theory as they dig their Black Holes and trace remnants of the Big Bang. The Hubble constant can be calculated using aether theory and without reference to the notion of an expanding universe, as I have shown elsewhere. See my paper The Steady-State Free-Electron Population of Space-Time, Lett. al Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252-256 (1984). The photon, by the way, does not travel at the speed of light. Rather it is an event in which that small 3x3x3 cubic group of aether particles spins to set up an electromagnetic wave and impart a related momentum to aether lattice structure. Where such waves are intercepted by matter that reciprocates by inducing a complementary photon spin in the aether, energy along with momentum is absorbed. The transient presence of quasi matter, the ongoing attempts by the aether to produce protons and electrons throughout space causes both energy and frequency to be shed by waves in transit. The process does not cause frequency dispersion and so explains the Hubble constant and the red shift phenomenon that has erroneously been interpreted as indicating an expanding universe.
32
The Creation of the Proton The proton is created from aether energy in the form of virtual muons and in a rather unique manner. Two muons of opposite polarity merge and, governed by the energy associated with that Thomson formula Mc2 = 2e2/3a, they come into surface contact and one of them immediately alters form (charge radius) to conserve the energy of the total pair, namely Mc2 = 4e2/3a. The charge that contracts alters its radius to a/2, half that of the virtual muon, and so doubles in mass energy, but there is then a negative electrostatic interaction energy that is exactly that of the single virtual muon and so energy is conserved overall in this process. Then, moments latter, this charge pair decides to shed energy and adjusts to a minimum energy state with the charge of radius a/2 keeping its form and the other charge expanding its radius until the energy of the combination is at a minimum value. Onward impacts of more and more muons separate these two charges by freeing the charge of smaller energy and forming a new much heavier charge form (denoted P) of even smaller charge radius in surface contact with that of radius a/2. The result is a system of three charges, which for proton creation involve two of charge +e and one of charge -e. But the governing criterion then is that P will be such that it is already paired in a minimum energy association with the charge of radius a/2 and the combined energy of the pair, allowing for their interaction energy, is less than that of P alone by exactly the amount of energy of that third charge. One then has a final state in which those three charges can merge to form a single charge version of P or revert back to the three-charge condition without loss or gain of energy. Thanks to that Thomson energy formula it so happens that this almost incredible scenario is actually possible with a uniquely valued odd integer input of virtual muons feeding into that original muon pair. The result is the form of matter we know as the proton and one can further see that it has features by which, when subject to high energy particle impact, it can exhibit a three-quark state. The authors aether theory allows the energy of the virtual muon to be calculated with high precision and consequently one can deduce the protonelectron mass ratio with the same high precision. The result is very slightly greater than 1836.152 and there can be no better testimony in support of the aether than this finding which is well within a few parts in ten million of the measured value. I note with some pride, pride I share with a colleague in advancing this theory, that when the leading experts, R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., F. L. Moore, D. L. Farnham and P. B. Schwinberg, involved in making such measurements reported in 1985 their findings in Int. J. Mass Spectrometry and Ion Processes, 66, p. 327 they stated:
33
The value that they [Aspden and Eagles] calculate is remarkably close to our experimentally measured value (i.e. within two standard deviations) This is even more curious when one notes that they published this result several years before direct precision measurements of this ratio had begun. They had measured the proton-electron mass ratio to within a precision of 41 parts in a billion and this measurement was reported some 10 years after we had presented the theoretical value derived from aether theory. Should a student of physics reading this seek to check the above claim it is a simple but interesting exercise to work out what that odd number is, but I will not make it easy by here presenting the value of the virtual muon mass indicated by my theory. Rather I leave that for the student to work out both quantities from that figure above for the proton/electron mass ratio. Then the reader can look up the full theoretical derivation by accessing, for example, my book Physics Unified that is presented in full on my web site www.aspden.org . The message is: Accept the aether is real and has structure and you can understand how matter is created - but ignore the aether and you live in ignorance! Determining G The next message is: Accept the aether is real and contains a system of electric charges that have a common circular motion which is shared by matter present and you will see the need for something that provides dynamic mass balance. That something is a system of gravitons and they are what governs G, the constant of gravitation. Ignore the aether and you have no way of understanding how G might be evaluated and so resolve the mystery of Unified Field Theory. Unlike electromagnetic force, which acts at right angles to charge motion, gravity is a simple direct inverse-square of distance force, as is electrostatic action. Yet we struggle and fail to forge a link between gravitation and electromagnetism. Can it be that what is seemingly impossible, mutual electrostatic action between matter that is uncharged electrically, is the true answer to the mystery of gravitation? Here I will show that there is a strong case in favour of this proposition. The result is a quantum theory of gravitation, a theory which requires us to recognize that there are two basic graviton forms that act in concert in setting up the gravitational action, gravitation not being a force which acts between particles of matter but a force which acts between gravitons present in the aether. By virtue of the induced association of gravitons in the presence of matter as needed to assure dynamic balance and their dynamic coupling,
34
that force of gravity acting on gravitons is effective between particles of matter. Gravity arises thanks to the existence of that charge continuum in space that eluded Samuel Earnshaw and its neutralization by a structured array of charges of opposite polarity and which governs quantum phenomena and determines basic physical constants. One then finds that continuum charge is displaced by the presence of a graviton population associated with matter present and here one discovers the physical basis of gravitation. Note now a key point at issue. Electrostatic force between two like polarity charges is repulsive but here we are concerned with charge displaced by the presence of gravitons and that implies the effect as if there were voids in a background charge continuum and so mutual attraction between the gravitons creating those voids as the enveloping charge seeks to spread by pushing the gravitons together. Another key point which needs consideration is the question of how a quantum theory of gravitation which implies a graviton form as a unit of gravitational action can account for weak gravitation forces that still depend upon G but arise from mass or its energy equivalent that is much smaller than the graviton mass. The answer to this is found by recognizing that gravitons, being leptons, can exist in charge pairs and can exchange energy as between themselves and another associated particle form. On a steady gravitational basis we find the taon dominates this action according to the charge continuum volume displaced but on a transient basis minor fluctuations in volume of a heavier graviton form cater for the balance. How then do those gravitons feature in the spectrum of particle physics? Research shows that they mainly comprise the taon - the mystery lepton particle that sits alongside the muon and the electron in the bottom line of the standard quark picture of the particle grid. As to that heavier graviton form it is somewhat elusive but has been detected at around 2.587 GeV in the particle spectrum and is best referred to as the Japanese H-quantum reported in 1971 by S. Hasagawa et al, (Prog. Theor. Physics, 47, 126). It exists in anti-particle pairs alongside two anti-particle taon pairs, meaning that there is one such heavy graviton for every two taon-gravitons. How is all this justified? Simply by derivation of G, the gravitation constant, in terms of the taon mass. Now here I cannot justify giving the full details of my aether analysis as of record elsewhere so I will simply summarize what is involved. Step 1: Determine , the charge density of the space continuum. Do this by delving into the quantum properties of space, as evidenced by the Bohr Magneton er, e being the charge of the electron. With r having the value h/4mec we then account for the photon in terms of spin of a 3x3x3
35
component of that structured charge array mentioned above. This gives us the equation: hc/2e2 = 144r/d where r is the orbital radius of charge motion, h is Plancks constant, c is the speed of light and d is the cubic spacing of those charges. Accordingly: = e/d3 We now know the value of because we can eliminate h/r and deduce that: mec2 = 72e2/d me being the rest mass of the electron. Step 2: For encouragement at this stage note that we could digress to find the ratio r/d simply by analysis of electrostatic interaction energy density of the space medium and arguing that it cannot be negative, thereby accounting for charge being displaced from sites at which they would be at rest and so determining r and telling us that the quantum underworld must have that jitter motion postulated by Heisenberg. The analysis is of early record elsewhere but first, by joint authorship with Dr. D. M. Eagles of the CSIRO National Measurement Laboratory in Australia, in a mainstream physics publication in 1972. It allows precise determination of the finestructure constant, a quantity explained by no other theory (Physics Letters, 41A, 423). Step 3: We now formulate the link with G in terms of the taon and the heavier graviton form, of masses m and mg and volumes V and Vg, respectively: %G(2m + mg) = (2V + Vg) Next we need to use again that crucial formula of J. J. Thomson that dates back to the pre-Einstein era : mc2 = 2e2/3a which applies to the electron and also relates the mass m of our two particles with their charge radius a and so their volume. This assumes that the charge e is distributed within the sphere of radius a so as to have uniform pressure or energy density. The volume to mass ratio of the two-taon and heavy graviton combination must match the corresponding volume to mass ratio for transient fluctuations in which a pair of heavy gravitons annihilate one another to share the volume of three such gravitons in a single charge. The same condition arises for the case where energy is exchanged between the field system of matter and the heavy graviton with, for such minor fluctuations, the preservation of gravitational potential overriding the need for perfect dynamic balance. In the latter case the slight expansion of graviton volume increases just enough to match the mass-energy added to the system of matter, thereby
36
keeping gravitational potential unchanged. The relevant volume to mass ratio which has to equal: (2V + Vg)/(2m + mg) is then: 3Vg/mg Since charge volume is inversely proportional to the cube of the related mass one finds from the above equality that: (mg/m)3 - 3(m/mg) -1 = 0 which, upon solution, gives: (mg/m) = 1.452627 This allows us then to write: %G = (3Vg/mg) Step 4: One can now evaluate G based on the measured value of the taon mass-energy, which is 1.781 GeV or 3485 electron mass units, to find that the heavy graviton becomes 2.587 Gev or 5063 electron mass units. Note that d is 72e2/mec2 and so is 108 times the electron charge radius, the latter being 5063 times the charge radius of the heavy graviton. Given that is e/d3 we then find that: %G = 4(e/me)/(108)3(5063)4 and, e/me being 5.272 esu/gm, this tells us that G has the value 6.67x10-8 dynes.cm2.gm-2. So-called Time Dilation One of the most puzzling aspects of conventional physics teaching concerns the notion of time dilation as introduced by Einsteins theory. The only experimental evidence in support of this theme stems from accelerating leptons, muons, to energies well in excess of their rest-mass energy. That evidence merely shows that the decay lifetime of such particles increases in proportion to energy. Now, if it were found that human beings live longer when travelling at a high speed, the medical profession would approach the problem by first establishing why it is that one dies naturally when living a life where one is not travelling at enormous speed. They might then infer a cause by extrapolating theory on the basis of that prior knowledge. So, I maintain that, until physicists can explain why a slow-moving muon, the mumeson, has a mean lifetime a little below 2.2 microseconds they should not enthuse on the subject of time itself passing more slowly, the faster one travels. If the reader thinks this muon lifetime phenomenon is proof in support of Einsteins theory, he or she needs to think again, after reading my paper explaining the phenomenon in terms of aether theory. This is to be found in
37
Lett. al Nuovo Cimento, 38, pp. 206-210 (1983) in its full text form on my website www.energyscience.org.uk . Note that the muon lifetime is limited by the virtual particle activity within the aether as muons that are part of that aether, in their random migration by creation and decay at the Compton electron frequency have a statistical chance of an encounter with the real muon as a target and this triggers its decay. The muon moving at high speed has its energy deployed statistically between different states and this makes it elusive and harder to hit as a target. My theory allows that microsecond lifetime quantity to be determined as a function of the evaluated aether constants and shows that lifetime does increase with speed in close accord with the relativistic formula, at least at very high speeds. At speeds around half the speed of light my theory gives a result that is a few per cent different from the relativistic value, so maybe one day experiments on muon lifetime at such lower values will prove me right. Conclusion Physicists, and notably V. F. Weisskopf (Physics Today, 69-85, Nov. 1981), have been puzzled as to the role played by both the muon and the taon, the heavy electrons of particle physics. As denizens of the aether their role is now quite clear. One accounts for the creation of the principal constituent of matter, the proton, whereas the other accounts for the force of gravity. So you see, we have here a Unified Field Theory, all because we have adhered to the belief in an omnipresent aether and have bothered to track back, check and correct two crucial steps taken in error in the 19th century by two physicists, Earnshaw in connection with his theorem for assuming that the aether constituted particle immersed in a void and Larmor for considering electron acceleration without an interacting electric field as its cause, thereby not seeing that an electron exhibits inertia because it seeks to avoid radiating its own energy. Here was the basis of E = Mc2 as we have seen above, all without any contribution from Einstein. As to Einsteins own insight into the physical cause of inertia, since my object in writing this text has been to challenge Einstein doctrine by showing the simple alternative physics that is based on 19th century teaching, I will add a few further comments here. It was in December 1954 that Einstein completed the 5th Edition of his book The Meaning of Relativity. Although he claimed to understand the basis of that formula E = Mc2 he did not see that the proper derivation of this famous equation is actually founded on the inertial property simply because an accelerated electrical charge will so react as to conserve its energy. In his book at page 100 one reads:
38
The theory of relativity makes it appear probable that Mach was on the right road in his thought that inertia depends upon a mutual action of matter. So even by mid-century, some 50 years after introducing a theory that is supposed to explain gravitation, the key question as to the physical nature of inertia had proved elusive. Relevant to this was the subject of Dennis Sciamas Ph.D. dissertation as recorded in the 1953-1954 Abstracts of Dissertations of the University of Cambridge. Note that Sciama was later the tutor supervising the research of the now famous Stephen Hawking. Sciamas dissertation was entitled On the Origin of Inertia and I read that a principal chapter of that work was: .. devoted to Einsteins work, which shows that inertia is connected with gravitation. However, as Einstein himself was the first to point out, general relativity does not fully account for inertia. Thus a new theory of gravitation is needed. I can quote this because, as I noted earlier, I was a contemporary with Sciama in my own Ph.D. research and my dissertation is included in that 1953-1954 set of abstracts. Surely, given that a new theory of gravitation was needed back in 1953-1954, why has the physics community chosen to ignore the overwhelming case concerning gravity, the aether and the derivation of the equation E = Mc2 as the physical foundation of inertia linked to energy conservation? My theory has the answers and is the long-awaited Unified Field Theory. Readers interested in knowing more about my research on this subject including full analysis of the aether structure and copies of, or references to, my published work should refer to my web site www.aspden.org . ****** This 38 page monograph was posted on the above web site on January 1st 2005. Hopefully it will serve as an up-dated introduction to my theory as a whole and particularly to my much longer work The Physics of Creation already of record on that web site several months ago. A few amendments to the latter are needed and so it will be revised in the months ahead.
PWECH1 COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[THE ELECTRON]
It is 33 years since I wrote Physics without Einstein and, not surprisingly, there are new perspectives that can now clarify some of the doubts raised by what I have written in that work. The Electron in Motion In chapter 1, as to the nature of the electron charge, it is stated that the electron has spherical form and shown on p. 12 that its inertia, in having a mass property determined by its intrinsic electric energy as divided by c2, is a physical manifestation of its reaction to conserve and not radiate that energy when accelerated. This proposition, together with its mathematical proof hold as firm as ever. The analysis is based on an electric field disturbance within the actual body of charge propagating at the speed c. That suffices to establish the derived relationship between mass and energy. The analysis does not depend upon the assumption of a finite speed of propagation in the free space region outside the charge's spherical boundary radius. Nor indeed do I see any basis for thinking that a magnetic field disturbance might be set up within that body of charge. I later came to accept that the electric field seated outside the charge of the electron is carried along with the electron as if part of a rigid whole, there being no electric field ripple set up in enveloping space by electron acceleration. It is as if the field we know as being attenuated with distance according to the inverse-square law is an instantaneous action-at-a-distance phenomemon, a feature now normally assumed in quantum theory but one which I was able to confirm once I discovered how Nature determines the Neumann Potential. See my paper [1988a]. This disposes of the dynamic electric field problem which I raised on page 6 of chapter 1. As to the question of raised on page 7 of whether magnetic field energy is a negative quantity in potential terms, this is really a question of how electric charge in motion interacts with other moving charge elsewhere. Here one needs to relate such motion to a common reference frame, the electromagnetic frame of reference set by the aether itself, meaning the crystal-like lattice array formed by the aether lattice charges, as discussed later on p. 96 in chapter 6. An isolated electron in motion is not interacting with other charge, because even though there are charges in the aether itself and an electron moving through the aether will disturb those charges by its electric field action, those aether charges in that lattice array define the electromagnetic frame of reference and so are not interacting with the electron in setting up a magnetic field. Though there are also virtual lepton charges in the fabric of the aether, the latter charges exist in oppositely-charged pairs and so the net effect of an intruding charge is zero. The mutual interaction of charges in motion is the subject of chapter 2, but, as to chapter 1 and the analysis on pages 6 and 7, since we rule out of consideration the electron having any dynamic electric field energy component and now rule out any self-excited magnetic energy component, the latter having been regarded as negative, we are left only with kinetic energy. Hence, as the onward analysis in chapter 1 shows, there being no energy radiation accompanying acceleration of the solitary electron, its intrinsic energy is conserved and energy is also conserved as between the loss of potential energy from the accelerating source and the gain of kinetic energy by the electron. It is appropriate here to explain that, though I rule out the possibility of an accelerated electron
25.4.2005
PWECH1 COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
radiating any of its energy, I do not preclude energy radiation by a concerted in-phase oscillation of a group of electrons. If one has a formula for energy radiation as being proportional to (ne)2, where n electron charges e, move together, the lack of a contribution by (e)2 to this formula by each of those n electrons, reduces the radiation to proportionality with n(n-1)e2. I am aware of the role this has in Thomson scattering of X-rays by electrons and the experimental support for the formula, but as far as I can judge, that experimental support is not sufficiently precise to distinguish n2 from n(n-1)2, though X-ray scattering has been used in the early days of atomic theory to give a rough indication of the number of electrons in individual atoms. Superconductivity With hindsight I now wonder why I included the section dealing with superconductivity in Physics without Einstein. It was, I presume, to underline the point I had just made in chapter 1 concerning the fact that an accelerated electron does not radiate its energy. There are numerous electrons colliding together and with atoms in the normal state of a conductor, whether or not it is superconductive, so the point I had to make holds just as well without reference to the superconductive state. In the event, however, superconductivity was later to become a very telling factor in supporting my aether theory, both in regard to what I came later to say on the subject of gravitation and the role of the 'supergraviton' and also on the theme of the way in which magnetic field energy is stored in the aether. In this connection I refer the interested reader to my reference [1989a].
The reader may now wish to return to the Contents page of Physics without Einstein.
25.4.2005
PWECH2 COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[MUTUAL INTERACTION EFFECTS]
The energy of mutual charge interaction Chapter 2 has dealt with the important topic of the mutual interaction of electric charges, meaning essentially the actions that depend upon charge motion. This is a very complicated subject and I need to qualify some aspects of what I stated in this chapter, which was written before I came to realize that the Coulomb electrostatic field action is an instantaneous action-at-a-distance, as noted in the commentary on chapter 1. So far as the mutual interactions are concerned there are, therefore, no field energy components of the kind EM as suggested on page 24 of chapter 2. They do not exist because the retardation speed parameter c is no longer a factor in the analysis of the electric field system. As stated in the commentary on chapter 1, one needs to relate the motion of interacting charges to a common reference frame, the electromagnetic frame of reference set by the aether itself. An isolated electron in motion is not interacting with other charge, because even though there are charges in the aether itself and an electron moving through the aether will disturb those charges by its electric field action, those aether charges define the electromagnetic frame of reference and so are not interacting with the electron in setting up a magnetic field. As to the mutual interaction of charges in motion, since we rule out of consideration the electron having any dynamic electric field energy component and have also ruled out any self-excited magnetic energy component to leave only its kinetic energy, one may now wonder how the mutual interaction is affected. Here, common sense, tells us that there can be no such thing as 'mutual kinetic energy', if only because the aggregate sum of any such energy will, in all probability, actually determine the local inertial frame of reference, as discussed in chapter 2. This then brings us to the result formulated in equation (2.6) on page 27 of chapter 2. Equation (2.5) is no longer relevant. We are left with the proposition that, though the aether charge displaced by field action cannot, of itself, set up a magnetic energy state, that aether charge in reacting can acquire kinetic energy (KR) and this, in being dispersed by pooling with the sea of energy of the aether, will, by equation (2.6), define a negative quantity (HM). This latter quantity is the magnetic field energy and it 'signature' is recorded in the orientation and scale of the state of motion of the aether charge. The onward discussion in chapter 2 brought to bear the extensive evidence supporting this, including magnetocaloric cooling and the g-factor analysis discussed on pp. 32-36. The law of electrodynamics This section of 'Physics without Einstein' at pp. 39-47 is the most important contribution of the work. The book was written to mark the event of getting my first major paper on this controversial subject published in a mainstream scientific periodical, this being mentioned at the end of that section. It was entitled 'The Law of Electrodynamics'.[1969a]. The law in its more general form, as derived in the book, pointed to anomalies on the energy front, anomalies which aroused my interest in the possibility of tapping energy from the aether. Note, on this latter theme, that I was also intrigued by the outcome of my discussion on
25.4.2005
PWECH2 COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
magnetocaloric effects on pp. 28-30 of the book. Using intense magnetic fields one might well be able to prove that we can cool the vacuum medium, the aether, to, as it were, temperatures below absolute zero. This would be extraction of energy from the aether from which the aether would recover to an equilibrium state by draining some of its surplus energy which is otherwise deployed in the creation of protons and electrons, a process which came to understand only some four or so years after writing 'Physics without Einstein' and which I discuss further in the commentary on chapter 7.
The reader may now wish to return to the Contents page of 'Physics without Einstein'.
25.4.2005
PWECH3COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[THE NATURE OF FERROMAGNETISM]
This chapter deals exclusively with the author's interpretation of the true cause of the ferromagnetic state in iron, nickel and cobalt. Its only relevance to the 'Physics without Einstein' theme is its historical connection with the author's research which gave reason for writing that book. My Ph.D. research at Cambridge had involved me in the experimental investigation of the anomaly by which iron cores in power transformers subjected to a.c. magnetization defied theory by generating excess heat. One aspect of that research concerned the effect of mechanical stress on ferromagnetic properties, including that mysterious loss. I backed that by my own theoretical analysis as to why iron, nickel and cobalt were ferromagnetic but copper, for example, was not ferromagnetic. I was very doubtful concerning electron spin as a primary contributor to the magnetic polarization of the ferromagnet, this having become the standard belief, one rooted indirectly in theory associated with Einstein's relativity. My reason, simply, was that it gave me no handle on which to grasp in trying to relate mechanical stress with electron interactions in adjacent atoms. In the event what emerged was what you see as chapter 3 of 'Physics without Einstein'. There were two major 'spin-off' topics that came from this effort. One, the subject of my 1971 conference paper presented at a meeting of the Magnetics Group of the German Physical Society held in Salzburg on March 29, 1971, and eventually, after several years, published in Speculations in Science and Technology [1978c], is the very important confirmation of my theme in this chapter 3, by showing how the apparent non-integer atomic quantization of magnetic polarization in iron, nickel and cobalt has in fact an integer foundation. This was important in the context of a mechanical stress theory for determining the threshold separating a ferromagnet from a non-ferromagnet and equally important in providing an explanation for the low anisotropy properties associated with magnetostriction. The other was something very important in the context of 'Physics without Einstein'. It was the fact I had to become wholly committed to the belief in a real aether when I made my discovery of my revolutionary explanation of the g-factor-of-2 phenomenon as not being due to so-called electron spin but simply being an orbital electron property, this being consistent with the ferromagnetic theory I had developed. The g-factor reaction had also to involve aether charge reaction to account for magnetic fields set up in vacuo. The 'spin-off' feature was that the structured model of an iron crystal I had used, with certain similarstate electrons of atoms moving in orbits in perfect synchronism, had taxed my mathematical skills in the days when numerical analysis implied use of slide rules and six-figure logarithmic tables but given me certain data. That data was relevant to the very physical model that, subject to simplification to deal with a simple-cubic form as opposed to body-centred cubic form, I was able to use as a model for the aether itself. It was so easy then to see how the aether determined the photon energy quantum, something closely related to the Bohr magneton quantum that featured in my theory of ferromagnetism. Indeed, I was overwhelmed at the speed at which my aether theory then developed. The subjects of chapters 4, 5 and 6 were the immediate follow-on from that major step in diverting my attentions from ferromagnetism and switching my interest to more fundamental theoretical issues, which were to include that law of electrodynamics, itself a key factor in making sense of the
25.4.2005
PWECH3COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
force balance in the ferromagnetic model I had been studying. Once into the realm of aether, which posed a challenge concerning Einstein's theory, and once focussed on the true version and very basis of the law of electrodynamic action, I naturally set my sights on gravitation, the theme of chapter 5.
To gain access to those chapters the reader may now wish to return to the Contents page of 'Physics without Einstein'.
25.4.2005
PWECH4COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 1
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[WAVE MECHANICS]
This chapter has shown how the aether gives basis for wave mechanics and quantum theory. In trying to interest the scientific community in aether theory I found that I was asked in a scornful tone the question as to whether I could derive the Schroedinger equation from my aether model. I was trying to get attention for my achievement in the theoretical derivation of the Planck constant h in its dimensionless composition as hc/2e2, but that achievement was brushed aside as being of no interest. So chapter 4 has concentrated on this one issue by introducing the author's interpretation of the true nature of the photon. This has led to the Schroedinger equation, the basis of wave mechanics, but it remains to complete the argument by showing how the actual value of that dimensionless constant is determined by the aether itself. That is a subject deferred to chapter 7. Chapter 4 ends with a reference to the anomalous behaviour of the electron, an anomaly concerning its g-factor, but not the g-factor-of-2 quantity discussed in chapter 2. Here I refer to the anomaly that is recognized by physicists as governed by Q.E.D., quantum electrodynamics. This latter anomaly was not well understood at the time 'Physics without Einstein' was written, but I had faced criticism also on this account. In trying to get a hearing for my theoretical evaluation of that dimensionless constant, I was told I could not hope to compete with the achievements of the QED method, which would prevail against any aether-based notions. Hence, I did try in 'Physics without Einstein' to set the stage for an attack on that problem. In the event I derived equation (4.21) on p. 77 of the book and used this later in chapter 7 to argue my account of the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron. However, I was destined to improve on this method some years later [1981c] and [1982b] and so advise the reader to be prepared to skip over the sections of chapter 7 that make reference to the quantity calculated in equation (4.21). I note that one of my problems in developing this aether theory over the years has been that of becoming ensnared by a theoretical feature that offers promise by giving good quaititative and quantitative results, only to find that as the years pass something far superior appears. This is disconcerting as it implies two possible explanations for the same problem, whereas one should be sufficient. In retrospect I am tempted to wonder in some such instances if both explanations are true and if Nature has evolved by adopting the physics of both because that gives the universe a more stable pattern. I will draw attention to an interesting example of this when I comment on the subject of the next chapter, chapter 5.
25.4.2005
PWECH5COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[GRAVITATION]
This chapter has shown how we can formulate a value of G, the constant of gravitation, in terms of a fundamental charge component of the aether, the graviton, as being that something in the aether that provides dynamic balance for the Heisenberg jitter motion of the quantum underworld. That is a step of paramount importance, but my commentary here is directed to that 'example' I mentioned in my chapter 4 commentary, concerning Nature's duality in regard to certain phenomena. It would hardly be possible to write a book having the title 'Physics without Einstein' and address the subject of gravity without at least including a non-relativistic explanation for the anomalous perihelion motion of the planet Mercury. Deriving an equation which explained that anomaly was, after all, the mainstay of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. Such an account has been included at pages 83 to 88. It was an explanation I had developed in the late 1950s and, indeed, it had already been presented in my booklet 'The Theory of Gravitation' which I published in 1960. It was a strong factor in support of my aether theory and it gave my confidence in presenting the 1969 effort under the title 'Physics without Einstein'. Now, if the reader were to compare this account with the one presented in my later book 'Physics Unified' (1980), it would be evident that I have discovered a different explanation for the perihelion anomaly, one which, by three-dimensional aether theory, gives precisely the same planetary orbit as can be derived by transposing Einstein's four-space result into three-dimensional form. Indeed, it was the trigger of getting that discovery published by the U.K. Institute of Physics [1980b] that caused me to publish 'Physics Unified'. The earlier theory concerned aether angular momentum as affected by planetary motion and the later theory concerned retardation of energy transfer as between sun and planet in causing the radial oscillation period of the planet to be very slightly different from the orbital period, thereby causing a slow but progressive advance of perihelion. Can it be that both theories are correct? If so, what would that tell us? We would, in fact, then find that the term R in equation (5.9) of 'Physics without Einstein', the 'radius of space-time lattice of the planet', meaning the extent of its aether system which shares the motion of the planet, is a parameter that is determined by the duality condition. If this is so then we have a physical reason which determines the boundary radius of an aether sphere nucleated by a planet. Note the discussion on p. 86 of 'Physics without Einstein'. We saw that to get the theory to fit with observation R for planet Mercury would need to be 10% greater than the physical radius of the planet. What determines that difference? Unlike the situation for body Earth there seems to be no data as to an ionosphere that I assumed might fix such a boundary for the Earth. So, logic says, in retrospect, that both theories hold and R is thereby determined as the value which gives the same perihelion advance on both theories. Needless to say, I am tempted to see how such an argument can be applied to determine the Earth's aether radius. Something must fix that radius and though one might say it is the boundary of solid matter, one has to keep in mind that stars have a gaseous form, and if we then wonder how the Earth's atmosphere determines the boundary, one is left to speculate with little or no foundation on which to build. Lacking better data I can but draw attention to the section on 'perihelion motions' in the later chapter 8 and also to p. 38 of my 1960 booklet where I endeavored to resolve this issue.
25.4.2005
PWECH5COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
Certainly, in the light of what I said there I can see no reason why the argument I put forward here cannot stand as a valid account. As it is I do not regard the anomalous planetary perihelion motion issue as one warranting the attention it has received from those who adhere to Einstein's beliefs. For my part I have set the stage for those who wish to take the argument further. All I say is that those who choose to research this topic should take note of what I said in my 1960 booklet 'The Theory of Gravitation' and merge that with the case I presented in the above-referenced 1980 Institute of physics paper. I hold firm to my belief that the role of the aether can in no way be ignored if cosmologists are to make sense of what they really can see as our universe.
25.4.2005
PWECH6COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 2
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[SPACE-TIME ANALYSIS]
This is the chapter which has introduced the aether in its full context as something we can decipher as to its structure and its quantitative properties. I have three points that, in retrospect, I need to comment on in view of the later development of this theory. Space polarization energy It is on page 111 that I refer to space polarization energy, knowing that the aether cannot adopt the state at which its electrostatic interaction energy density is at its absolute minimum, but positive, value. It simply has to involve some displacement from that truly level of energy and so it must possess what has now come to be termed 'zero-point' energy. The question is: "What determines that level of energy density?" I tried to answer this in 1969 in 'Physics without Einstein' by the analysis presented on pages 122-123. It was not until some years on that I discovered the true controlling factor. My book 'Physics without Einstein' had interested Dr. D. M. Eagles and from his base at the National Measurement Laboratory he set out to check my aether analysis leading to the theoretical evaluation of the fine-structure constant. I will not dwell here on the outcome of that exercise, save to say that by 1972 he and I had collaborated in publishing a paper [1972a] which resolved the energy priming problem. The least energy state had to be consistent with a resonance as beteen the electron and the aether particle that defined the aether lattice structure. It meant that there was a very slight displacement from the true zero-energy state and that displacement not only determined the zero-point energy density that can sustain electromagnetic oscillations but it determined the fine-structure constant with great precision. Derivation of Planck's constant On page 115 of 'Physics without Einstein' one finds that my best estimate of hc/2e2 in terms of my theory as it stood in 1969 was 137.038. I had no more to say on this at the time, given that the data I had available told me that this was precisely the measured value of that quantity. I was, of course, well satisfied and only became concerned when a specialist referee at the National Physical Laboratory in U.K. who had been requested to review my book for the Institution of Electrical Engineers, of which I was a Fellow, declared that the most recent precision measurement had changed the value of that constant to 137.036. There was nothing I could do. I was still holding faith with my theory. Some factor was at work which affected that priming energy, or 'space polarization energy', to use the term in my book, and I could but hope that the passage of time would bring the needed inspiration. As it was Dr. Eagles came onto the scene and a very rigorous evaluation of that energy and its bearing on the determination of the fine-structure constant was possible. It proved to be 137.0359148 but was then at the level where minor experimental factors could affect measurements anywhere but in free space well remote from any material object. Any onward challenge was then extremely unlikely. The theory was secure, but it has still to become accepted. The muon
25.4.2005
PWECH6COMMENTARY
Page 2 of 2
It was in this chapter 6 that I brought the muon or mu-meson into the aether picture. I had not intended that the aether theory I was developing should involve electrically charged energy quanta other than perhaps the electron, the aether lattice particle and something that imparted a mass property to what I called the 'contuuum', the G-frame medium and the electrical system that neutralized the aether from polarization by the charges of the lattice particles. The muon emerged on its own by virtue of a number 5062 derived from equation (6.67) on page 118. I had already by equation (6.63) on page 116 shown that the lattice charge had a mass that was less than that of the electron by a factor of 24.52 and I jumped to attention when I saw that that number 5062 divided by 24.52 gave a value between 206 and 207 electron mass units. This, I knew, was a pointer to the muon, an exotic mystery particle known from cosmic rays and a particle that has been dubbed 'the heavy electron', but a particle which physicists could not see had a role to play in the make-up of matter or the universe. So here, in this chapter 6, I saw my theory was leading me into the realm of particle physics, my stimulus being the fact that my theoretical derivation of G, the constant of gravitation, had given a formula (6.73) on page 121 of 'Physics without Einstein' that depended on the graviton being heavier than the electron by a factor of 5063. That compounded the mystery for a while, but it caused me to search for evidence in particle data tables in the hope of finding some clues that could help in this quest. The inescapable outcome from that 1969 period was that my interest had been aroused in the world of particle physics and, quite naturally, it caused me to develop a theme I had begun in my 1960 booklet 'The Theory of Gravitation', namely the quest to bring the proton somehow into the aether picture. Note here that, once I had decided that the Heisenberg jitter shared by matter and by the aether lattice charges had to be balanced dynamically by something in what I called the G-frame, I had to contemplate a heavy particle form in that G-frame, so as not to affect the result of my formal analysis of the fine-structure constant. The obvious choice was a particle having a mass of the order of the proton mass and, even in 1959, I thought I was making progress on that track, as is evident from page 27 of that 1960 work. However, I will say more about that in my commentary on chapter 7, but I give warning here that the reader should either skip over or just glance through what is said in pages 139-145 of that chapter in 'Physics without Einstein', because by 1975 I was destined to discover something that far outweighs what is there proposed, making it necessary to eliminate that analysis from further consideration. At best it presents an interesting example of how theory in physics can develop in a way which is so deceptive and misleading. For all I know it may have some significance in the context of another version of that duality issue I mentioned above as a quirk of Nature but I will not dwell further on that possibility.
25.4.2005
PWECH7COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 1
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[NUCLEAR THEORY]
This chapter 7 has brought Nuclear Theory into the aether picture by envisaging that the atomic nucleus of the higher order atoms has a structure conforming with the cubic form of the aether itself. This plus the relationship between the proton, neutron and deuteron are the primary contributions of this chapter. I need, however, to explain an important development since 'Physics without Einstein' was published. This, as is seen below, concerns the creation of the proton. I do not wish the reader to judge my theory on the basis of the account of proton creation presented in this chapter 7. It was remarkable at the time it was written that, for some 10 or more years to that time, I had felt certain that the radiation of the Bohr quantum of angular momentum played a role in determining the primordial combination of an electron (mass m) and a heavy particle (mass M). The mathematical analysis on p. 142-143 of 'Physics without Einstein' and Appendix II of that book, as well as the corresponding analysis at pp. 27-30 of my 1960 book 'The Theory of Gravitation' very clearly implied a value of M/m of 1,817.8. This is 1% below the proton/electron mass ratio and it seemed that a factor of the order of the fine-structure constant might be brought into play to account for the difference. In the event, however, with the passage of time I came to see that the proton had to be created from the muon field and that discovery is so remarkable it has to replace the theory offered in 'Physics without Einstein'. See my papers [1975a] and [1988c]. I note also that what is said in chapter 7 about proton spin, neutron spin, deuteron spin and electron spin is all replaced by the theory that accompanied and followed on from the above breakthrough. The key papers I later wrote on these topics are [1986a], [1986d] and [1988b].
25.4.2005
PWECH8COMMENTARY
Page 1 of 1
AUTHOR'S COMMENTARY
[COSMIC THEORY]
Given that the aether has been introduced to explain phenomena at the atomic and microscopic level the question of its role on a large scale comes into issue. Here, from the very early stage of development of this theory, I could see that one had only to ask the question of how a large sphere of aether set in rotation would respond given that sychronized co-ordination of its aether lattice particle motion to reveal a feature that proved its very existence. Hence this chapter 8 is important. A large sphere of aether, typically of the size of Earth, if rotating will develop a radial electric displacement about its spin axis. Conversely a radial electric field set up by a large spherical body of matter will induce spin in co-extensive aether. Thus one could explain how the Sun is created in a state of spin and why Earth has a magnetic field. In particular, without making further assumptions, the data already derived for the aether properties from analysis of the topics dealt with in previous chapters, notably chapter 6, could be applied here in chapter 8 to estimate the value of the geomagnetic moment. This result was a very convincing outcome of the theory. It had been the subject of chapter 5 in the 1960 booklet 'The Theory of Gravitation' and it meant that the theory could prevail over non-aetherial physical models. It has no rival in Einstein's theory and little more need be said.
This ends these chapter commentaries. The reader may now wish to return to the Contents page of 'Physics without Einstein'.
25.4.2005
by
HAROLD ASPDEN
Sabberton Publications P.O. Box. 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England Fax: Int+44-2380-769-830 ISBN 0 85056 023 3
8 HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents Section Title Introduction Concerning the Patent Rights Development Status: May 1994 APPENDIX I: Schedule of Patents APPENDIX II: 'Solid-State Thermoelectric Refrigeration,' IECEC paper: Atlanta, Georgia: August 1993 APPENDIX III: The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Operating Principles: October 1989 Report APPENDIX IV: The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Test Results: October 1989 Report APPENDIX V: The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Paper on Thermoelectric Power Anomaly: October 1989 Report page 1 2 3 13 17
26 41
55
APPENDIX VI: Thermoelectric Experimental Device Construction: Strachan: February 1994 62-71 8 HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2
POWER FROM ICE Introduction This Energy Science Report summarizes the development status of the StrachanAspden thermoelectric energy conversion technology as of May 1994. Onward research from that date is the subject of Energy Science Report No. 3. The basic invention is the brainchild of its coinventors Dr. Harold Aspden of Southampton, England and John Scott Strachan of Edinburgh, Scotland and it dates from their first meeting in Canada on the occasion of a New Energy Technology Symposium held in 1988 under the auspices of the Planetary Association for Clean Energy. In its conception, the invention merges the technical disciplines of magnetism (Aspden) and piezoelectricity (Strachan) in a structure which exploits, first and foremost, the thermoelectric properties of metal. In its onward development and promotion, the respective professional skills of the two inventors were brought to bear in laboratory assembly (Strachan) and patenting (Aspden). Geographic separation by 420 miles has precluded a close working relationship in pursuing this project in a normal technological development sense, it being a private venture by two individuals, each having other unrelated technical interests. In the event, what is an extremely important inventive contribution, that potentially can provide the non-pulluting refrigeration technology of the future, has remained undeveloped, notwithstanding some small external R&D funding that has been of assistance to Strachan. There are not, of record and suitable for issuance, any detailed experimental tests or results provided by Strachan. Almost all the documentary material that has been made available until now has been generated by this author (Aspden), mainly in a patent attorney or promotional capacity. Much of this latter information is the basis of this Report. One appended item that is new at this time is the account which Strachan prepared in February 1994 describing the polymer PVDF structure and fabrication of the first and third demonstration prototypes which he built. The issuance of this Report at this time follows the recent grant of the relevant U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336 dated February 22, 1994. The object of this Report, therefore, is to arouse interest in the Strachan-Aspden invention in those corporations having the necessary R&D resources or ability to fund such
2 R&D in academic establishment laboratories with a view to the disposition of the patents involved. Concerning the Patent Rights [Note added June 2003 when this Report is made available on the authors websites www.energyscience.co.uk and www.aspden.org . The comments about patent rights which follow no longer apply as the patents involved were not kept alive, owing to lack of interest by prospective developers having the necessary disposition to fund the onward research needed. However, for the record, the text below remains unamended from its initial form as published in 1994.] The schedule of patents relating to the Strachan-Aspden technology forms APPENDIX I. The author, in his Attorney capacity representing the proprietor interest in these patents, is empowered to negotiate options or outright assignment. Based on the introductory technical briefing offered by this Energy Science Report, and the information now being incorporated in further reports, the author also makes himself available for some limited consultation on onward development by those parties who enter into the necessary Agreements. The abstract and title page of the principal U.S. Patent, 5,288,336 is included in APPENDIX I and those interested in the detailed disclosure and claim cover will no doubt wish to acquire and inspect a copy of that published patent specification. Essentially, the details of the operation and technology underlying the invention can be understood from the descriptive material provided later in this report, but there has been a shift in emphasis as to this author's technical appreciation underlying physical functioning of the invention and this features in certain additional patent applications which have been filed and which, though listed in APPENDIX I, will form the subject of Energy Science Report No. 3. In order, however, to assist the reader who does inspect the primary U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336 and also U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 and seeks a simple insight into how this author now views the underlying physics, the diagram in Fig. 1 below may serve.
Fig. 1 Nernst EMFs induced in nickel by heat flow When a temperature differential exists in a thin film of nickel sandwiched between dielectric insulation in a parallel plate capacitor, the heat flow carried by electrons is
3 deflected by the strong polarization fields in the oppositely polarized single magnetic domains that bridge the film thickness. This, by the thermoelectric phenomenon known as the Nernst Effect develops an electric field polarization as shown by the arrows. It is orthogonal with respect to the direction of heat flow and the magnetic polarization. It may then be understood how a lateral oscillation of current flow through the capacitor can choose a flow path on successive half cycles so as always to transfer charge across the metal plate electrodes to draw power from an assisting EMF by avoiding the path obstructed by an opposing EMF. Cooling must then result as that power transfers into the external circuit. The dielectric insulation obliges the heat flow in the nickel to remain orthogonal with the current flow direction and also with the magnetic polarization which is necessarily in-plane in the nickel. Development Status: May 1994 [The figure references in this section apply to the patent specification drawings included at pages 7 and 8 of this Report] There were three techniques in the original conception of the invention. The common feature was the idea of using a capacitative coupling to block heat transfer between the hot and cold heat sinks whilst contriving thermoelectric energy conversion. Strachan advised that all three had been tested experimentally and were viable. The one ready for demonstration (the capacitor stack) was given preference for onward development. The strategy adopted was to file a first patent application showing capacitor use in the heat blocking sense (Figs. 1 to 4 of the 18 November 1988 patent filing same as those in U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085) and a brief disclosure of the stack (Fig. 4) but not disclose the detailed assembly of the stack. A second U.K. application filed 5 December 1988 added Figs. 5 to 8 and covered that detail and described the prototype version of the stack as I understood it at the time. In the event the capacitor heat blocking proved not to be of particular merit but we had a basic invention in the disclosure in that the confinement of heat flow to the bimetallic capacitor plates with transverse current oscillations gave remarkable results. The subjects of Figs. 1 to 3 were not developed further, even though they have merit. I persisted in securing patent cover in U.K. and U.S.A., the latter, as just indicated, being granted as US Patent No. 5,065,085. The patent cover which followed from the capacitor stack was adjusted and tailored to the diagnostic findings that emerged from the research on the second prototype and the international patent filing including US filing did not replicate the features of Fig. 7 or Fig. 8 or include the acoustic oscillation feature that was incorporated in the first prototype.
4 The First Prototype: September 1988 This was a capacitative polymer dielectric stack with bimetallic Al:Ni coatings and provision for acoustic oscillation of interleaved premagnetized magnetic recording strips (see Fig. 8). Strachan has, only in February 1994, and in preparation for a visit from overseas by interested corporate project engineers, documented the detailed constructional techniques of that first (and later third) prototype. This forms APPENDIX VI. Fabrication is very complicated and it is not suggested that the resulting devices did any more than prove that we have discovered an energy conversion principle that has very outstanding merit. The task ahead is to develop on the test findings of the much simplified second prototype. The Basic Principles and the Second Prototype: October 1989 This was the technology on which the multi-national patent filing was based, claiming the priorities of the 18th November and 5th December 1988. The principle is evident from the following diagram:
(a) Thermoelectric current flow: no transverse excitation
(b) Junction cooling on left with transverse up-current
(c) Junction heating on right with transverse down-current We are using a.c. with negligible I2R loss. The circulating current is that carried by heat flow (Thomson Effect - metals of opposite electrical polarity). (3) The dynamic a.c. current interruption increases the thermoelectric power enormously (avoids junction cold spot formation). At that time (October 1989), though the Nernst Effect was in mind and had been mentioned in connection with the disclosure in U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 and though nickel, a ferromagnetic substance, was one of the two metals in the test device, it was not then Note: (1) (2)
5 realised that the Nernst Effect might also play the key role in the functioning of that second prototype device. The October 1989 status is evident from the Test Report (APPENDIX IV). APPENDIX V provides a scientific analysis of the cold spot problem). The questions outstanding from those tests were: (1) What frequency could we reduce to and still get the high thermoelectric EMF? The cold spot theory implied that we could operate even below 1 kHz, but the capacitor coupling limited the transverse current and that suggested building a direct metal conductor coupling following contours of constant temperature - so as not to divert heat from the junctions. What thickness of metal film could we increase to whilst not losing efficiency? Note that the Thomson Effect circulation fixed the current that could flow transversely owing to the half-cycle cut-off. Which metal combination was optimum? What fabrication technique was best to ease manufacture and assure reliability? Why was it that we seemed to be getting more transverse current flow than the design capacitance of the stack implied from the voltages we measured?
(2) (3) (4) (5)
In the event, early in 1990, Strachan was obliged to abandon all work on the project and the development fell dormant. This was owing to business failure of the sponsors on an independent manufacturing venture but Strachan was then unable to demonstrate a working prototype and we were, in effect, then in a worse position than at our late-1988 start point. The 1991/1992 Scenario Not having the resources to set up an experimental programme myself, and especially as I had to sustain the costs of the patents I decided to publish in the hope of attracting interest from corporations. I had nothing to demonstrate. My effort to publish in the Journal of Applied Physics caused a referee to say 'publish but provided more detail is given as to actual construction of the device', but the Editor felt my amended paper did not go far enough in that respect and so that initiative failed. By year end 1991 I had an acceptance from a U.K. electronics magazine (the July 1992 article in Electronics and Wireless World) and had a paper scheduled for the 1992 International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference in San Diego. The publicity in U.K. attracted corporate interest, and Strachan then took the initiative and assembled the third prototype. The showing of that impressed a major U.K. company interested in new energy development and they provided new funding for Strachan for a period of 8 months.
6 I made sure that the demonstration was recorded on video and this has proved helpful in talks with interested parties. My personal objective concerning onward development has been to see the test device operate without reliance on the capacitor fabrication, either by an alternative conductive coupling between the bimetallic laminations or by magnetic inductive energy transfer, i.e. by intercepting the thermoelectric current by an inductive back EMF. By year-end 1992, after 4 months of the new funding, Strachan reported on a test whereby, given a temperature differential in the bimetallic lamination, the magnetic flux could be controlled at 20 kHz by an electric grid control. However, that research did not progress to his satisfaction and I have insufficient data for me to make sense of the outcome of the experiment. The funding for Strachan's research ceased at the end of April 1993.
9 The Aspden Experiment In September 1993 I decided to initiate my own small experiments, based on the approach I had been advocating, namely to build a magnetically inductive core system and feed in eddy-current heating to set up a temperature gradient in bimetallic laminations. The idea of this, regardless of application to refrigeration or power generation, was simply to have electrical control throughout the test and determine the relevance of the ferromagnetic property, metal thickness and excitation frequency. The outcome of the first experiment has been described in Energy Science Report No. 1 and further onward experiments will be described in Energy Science Report No. 3. However, some interesting problems have been encountered in the latter pursuit and the quest to operate in an all-metal high current mode with no dielectric laminations and capacitor drive, which is aimed mainly at solid-state electric power generation from input of heat at higher temperature than is normal where polymer dielectrics are used, may prove too demanding for this author's private research facilities. Accordingly, as a guide to readers interested in pursuing the alternative capacitor construction based on that simple Nernst Effect principle as mentioned on page 2, the following analysis is included. Capacitor Stack: Design Considerations Consider nickel film to have a thickness cm and the form of a 1 cm by 1 cm square. Assume a temperature difference of 1o C from one edge to the opposite edge and denote the specific thermal conductivity of nickel as K watt-cm2/oC which implies a throughput heat flow of K. This heat flow is heat input loss if we do not intercept the heat and deploy it into electrical output. The Nernst Effect has a coefficient for nickel which depends upon whether we use nickel I or nickel II, the latter being larger by a factor of nearly three. On the basis of the data of record from experiments by Zahn reported in Ann. der Phys. 14, 886 (1904) and 16, 149 (1905) on nickel we can reasonably assume that a 10 V per cm Nernst EMF is set up at right angles to the heat flow for each degree C temperature drop per cm. It follows that the heat flow can be intercepted and deployed into output electrical power if we can provide for a transverse flow of current I amps without there being heat flow in that same transverse direction, with I given by the equality of 10I and K. We see that the thickness makes no contribution to the heat to electricity conversion efficiency. This thickness of the nickel merely has to be small enough to assure the single
10 domain condition, say no greater than 50 to 200 microns depending upon the crystal size in the nickel. The task is to secure the equality of K and 10I, meaning that with the 1 degree C per cm gradient and K of the order of unity, I has to be 100 mA per sq. cm of capacitor area to get optimum operation. A higher temperature gradient requires a proportionally larger current flow. The design consideration then centres on the a.c. operating frequency and capacitance of the structure. If the dielectric thickness is of the order of 10 microns and the dielectric constant is 10, both of which are demanding design parameters, then a capacitance of the order of 1 nanofarad applies to the 1 cm. square nickel plate electrodes used and operation at about 16 kHz will give a current of 0.1 mA per volt. It would need 1,000 V across that 10 micron dielectric to give the 100 mA current requirement. This is voltage stress requirement is too high and, also, there is another problem governing the combination of design parameters. This is that, if the thickness of the nickel is so much greater than the thickness of the dielectric, then the current 'sees' more a flow through the main surface of a ferromagnetic film and less the transfer of distributed charge on the surfaces of a dielectric. This can make the current bunch up by a pinch action in that 'negative' resistance flow path through the metal and, to avoid this, the dielectric has to be thicker than the nickel. The design therefore proceeds by first deciding the operating limits on the voltage of a resonant capacitor stack using the inductance of the flow through the nickel in combination with the capacitance of the stack to determine that frequency. This sets the thickness of the dielectric. The nickel, if deposited on a substrate dielectric can be quite thin, say 5 microns, and it is this requirement for thin dielectric larger in thickness than the nickel, rather than the domain size factor, that obliges use of even thinner nickel films. Note that the target of a 100% energy conversion efficiency then will depend primarily upon the scope for increasing the electric breakdown strength of the dielectric used, assuming simple metal parallel plate capacitance. Alternatively, in order then to bring to bear a suitable combination of parameters that allow moderate voltage gradients in a dielectric whilst allowing the current throughput to be adequate at a reasonable frequency, the way forward is to incorporate in the design the technology of electrolytic capacitors. This, as this author sees the situation, is what Strachan did in building his prototype device using a PVDF polymer dielectric and it follows from this preamble discussion that those best able to develop the subject technology are those corporations who are already manufacturers of electrolytic capacitors. Given then that the Strachan device did perform as a cooling device and as a heat pump able to convert heat into electricity one sees the prospect of developing a thermal
11 electrolytic capacitor that will convert heat to electricity or serve as a Nernst Effect heat pump with no Carnot limitation on performance. The reason for this non-Carnot limitation is discussed in Energy Science Report No. 3, but it amounts to the observation that, with heat carried by electrons, the deflection of those electrons by a magnetic field occurs to bring them to thermal rest (effectively zero temperature K) as they transfer energy to the capacitor, followed by their recovery of heat by cooling the substance of their metal host. Carnot efficiency referenced on zero Kelvin is 100% as far as heat/electricity conversion is concerned. It then needs little imagination for any enterprising research organization to see that such technology, if proven in this particular respect, can provide a complete answer to the world's future energy needs in that, by arranging a conventional Carnot-limited heat pump in back-to-back operation with the Strachan-Aspden non-Carnot-limited heat pump, and deploying atmospheric sources of heat one can generate electricity. Hitherto the non-Carnot-limited conversion of heat into electricity has been elusive but it is possible in that it already occurs in practice in one half of a thermocouple circuit but there is there the concomitant requirement that the electricity has to close the circuit through the other thermocouple junction which makes the reverse conversion. All that this Report is suggesting here is that the evidence from the transverse-toheat-flow current excitation of a heated nickel-electrode capacitor shows how we can intercept the energy and make the non-Carnot-limited conversion without paying the full price of the reverse conversion at ambient temperature. The 'lower' temperature conversion occurs inside the metal as electrons are deprived transiently of their thermal energy. It occurs at positions in the metal where there is only one prevailing temperature. There is no way that Carnot criteria can apply unless there are two temperatures associated with that event and the only temperature that can differ from that prevailing in the metal is the temperature resulting when the electrons give up their thermal energy by being deflected into the charged condition at the interface surface of the nickel and the dielectric. That temperature has to be lower than the ambient temperature of the metal and the electron can only recover equilibrium and carry heat forward if it then takes heat away from the crystal body of the nickel. Given that the ferromagnetic plate electrode is the seat of the action associated with the Nernst Effect it may seem that there is no need to provide the bimetallic structure of the Strachan-Aspden embodiments. However, it is important to see that there is a two-fold benefit from the use of bimetallic laminations. Firstly, the second metal helps to spread the charge trapped at the interface between the metal and the dielectric and this allows it to participate more fully in the two-way oscillation of current flow. Secondly, the second metal brings to bear the Peltier Effect and this can help to sustain temperature gradients which activate the cooling. Note here that the first and third Strachan-built prototypes had an intrinsic design symmetry and an input current oscillation developed the cooling action with no input temperature gradient.
12 In other words, the use of bimetallic plate electrodes meant that the back-to-back action described above was at work in those devices. This Report, therefore, highlights the importance of the Strachan-Aspden invention and hopefully will serve to excite the interest of those corporations having the resources needed for its onward development. Energy Science Report No. 3 will be issued when this author has completed some further experiments and, in the meantime, some of the findings will be available in confidence to sponsors. The APPENDIX sequence which follows comprises items written at different times as this project evolved and there are a few published articles and papers that are not included owing to the length of this Report. It is believed, however, that what is described or identified in this Report will serve as a guide to would-be researchers who wish to become involved in this subject and should suffice as full information about the invention. The prospective importance of this technology is so great, having regard to the need to avoid the pollution problems of existing refrigeration and energy generation technology, that it is hoped that others will take this project forward on their own initiative. Should any such researcher make progress in this regard, leading to demonstrable devices confirming the viability of the technology, then, so long as this author has control of the patent rights involved there is scope for merging interests in a joint venture. So far as the availability of rights under the patents is concerned, enquiries from corporations are invited but no licence deals can be entered at this time as the object is to sell the patents outright as a total package, which means that licence dealings will be for the purchaser to determine. This does not preclude an immediate undertaking in the nature of an option by which some nominal funding will secure a would-be developer, who already commands the necessary research facilities, an interest in the rights whilst evaluating the invention based on prototype building and testing. Enquiries concerning the patent rights should be directed to me and enquiries concerning availability of Energy Science Reports should be directed to Sabberton Publications (see address below). 18th July 1994 DR. HAROLD ASPDEN c/o SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS, P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB, ENGLAND. FAX: Int+44-23-8076-9830. TEL: Int+44-23-8076-9361.
13 APPENDIX I Schedule of Patents Patent applications listed as 1-10 below all have the title: "Thermoelectric Energy Conversion" and all were filed naming H. Aspden and J. S. Strachan as co-inventors. Dr. Harold Aspden purchased from Strachan-Aspden Limited all rights in these applications on 12th January 1992. This company, registered in Scotland, was dissolved in July 1992, as it had become more expedient to operate from a company, Thermodynamics Limited, registered in England at Dr. Aspden's address. 1. U.K. Patent Application No.:8,826,952 Date of Filing: 18th November 1988 Grant as U.K. Patent No:2,225,161 2. U.K. Patent Application No.:8,828,307 Date of Filing:5th December 1988 [This served only as an international priority document for listed applications 3-4 & 6-10 below.] 3. U.K. Patent Application No.:8,920,580 Date of Filing:12th September 1989 Grant as U.K. Patent No:2,227,881 4. European Patent Appln. No.:89,311,559.2 Date of Filing:8th November 1989 Published Specification No:0369670 Countries designated: Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Spain, France United Kingdom, Italy, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Sweden [Presently pending] 5. U.S. Patent Application No.:07/429608 Date of Filing: 31st October 1989 Grant as U.S. Patent No:5,065,085 Date of Grant:12th November 1991 6. U.S. Patent Application No.:07/439,829 Date of Filing: 20th November 1989 Grant as U.S. Patent No:5,288,336 Date of Grant:22 February 1994
14 7. Japanese Patent Appln. No.:1-299481 Date of Filing: 17th November 1989 [Presently pending] 8. Canadian Patent Appln. No.:2,003,318-5 Date of Filing: 17th November 1989 [Presently pending] 9. Australian Pat. Appln. No.:44771/89 Date of Filing: 17th November 1989 Grant as Australian Pat. No:622,239 10. Eire Patent Appln. No.: 3677/89 Date of Filing: 17th November 1989 [Presently pending] ************ The following patent rights are currently in process. With the exception of the application identifying Thermodynamics Limited as applicant (sole inventor J. S. Strachan) all these are registered in the name of Dr. Harold Aspden as applicant and sole inventor. Dr. Aspden is empowered to negotiate rights under patents owned by Thermodynamics Limited. 11. U.K. Patent Application No:9,212,818 Date of Filing:17th June 1992 Published Specification No:2,267,995 [Presently pending] 12. U.K. Patent Application No:9,302,354 Date of Filing:6th February 1993 Applicant: Thermodynamics Ltd. [Presently pending] 13. U.S. Patent Application No:08/018281 Date of Filing:16th February 1993 [Presently pending] 14. U.K. Patent Application No:9,321,036 Date of Filing:12th October 1993 [Presently pending] The above is the status as at 18th July 1994.
17 APPENDIX II 'Solid-State Thermoelectric Refrigeration' [This is the text of a paper submitted to IECEC by H. Aspden and J. S. Strachan, a summary version of which was presented in person by Dr. H. Aspden at their 28th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference held in Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.A., August 8-13, 1993.]
This paper reports progress on the development of a new solid-state refrigeration technique using base metal combinations in a thermopile. Thermoelectric EMFs of 300 V per degree C are obtained from metal combinations such as Al:Ni, assembled in a thermopile of novel structure. By providing for thermally driven Thomson Effect current circulation in loop circuit paths parallel with the temperature gradient between two heat sinks and also for superimposed transverse current flow driven through a very low resistance path by Peltier Effect EMF, an extremely efficient refrigeration process results. With low temperature differentials, one implementation of the device operates at better than 70% of Carnot efficiency. It has the form of a small panel unit which operates in reversible mode, converting ice in a room temperature environment into an electrical power output and, conversely, with electrical input producing ice on one face of the panel while ejecting heat on the other face. An extremely beneficial feature from a design viewpoint is the fact that the transverse excitation is an A.C. excitation, which suits the high current and low voltage features of the thermopile assembled as a stack within the panel. A prototype demonstration device shows the extremely rapid speed at which ice forms, even when powered by a small electric battery, and, with the battery disconnected and replaced by an electric motor, how the ice thus formed melts to generate power driving the motor. The subject is one of the two innovative concepts which were the subject of the paper No. 929474 entitled "Electronic Heat Engine" included in volume 4 of the Proceedings of the 1992 27th IECEC. The technology to be described is seen as providing the needed answer to the CFC gas problem confronting refrigerator designers. From a conversion efficiency viewpoint this
18 device, which uses a solid-state panel containing no electronic components and a separate solid-state control unit which does contain electronic switch and transformer circuitry, outperforms conventional domestic refrigerators. Since it has no moving parts and contains no fluid, its fabrication and operational reliability promise to make this the dominant refrigeration technology of the future. However, the scientific research and development of the underlying principles have a compelling interest and pose an immediate challenge inasmuch as recent diagnostic testing has pointed to a feature inherent in the prototype implementation that has even greater promise for future energy conversion technology. This paper will address the subject in two parts. Firstly, the prototype will be described together with its performance data. Then, the ongoing development arising from the new discovery will be outlined. General Operating Principle The research was based on the use of a commercially available dielectric sheet substrate which had a surface layer of aluminium bonded to a PVDF polymer film by an intermediate layer of nickel. This gave basis for the idea of applying a temperature differential edge-to-edge to promote thermoelectric current circulation by differences in the Peltier EMFs at the opposite edges of the film. However, the nature of this material, which was intended for use in a piezoelectric application and so had a metal surface film on both faces, gave scope for crosswise A.C. excitation, as if it was a parallel plate capacitator. Of interest to our research was the question of how the transverse A.C. flow of current through the bimetallic plates would interact with the thermoelectric current circulation. Our finding was that the underlying D.C. current circulation which tapped into the heat source thermoelectrically was affected to an astounding degree once the A.C. excitation was applied. Whether we used frequencies of 500 kHz or 10 kHz, the thermoelectric Peltier EMF generated by the Al:Ni thermocouple was of the order of 300 V/oC, which was 20 times the value normally expected from D.C. current activation. It may be noted that, with the thermoelectric aspect in mind, the PVDF substrate film used was made to order, being specially coated with layers of nickel and aluminium to thicknesses of the order of 400 and 200 angstroms, respectively. This was intended to provide a better conductance matching for D.C. current flow in opposite directions in the two metals, it being optimum to design the test so that heat flow from the hot to the cold edges of the film would, by virtue of the Thomson Effect in these respectively electropositive and electronegative metals, suffice to convey equal currents in the two closed path sections without necessarily drawing on the tranversely-directed Peltier EMF action.
19 It was hoped that the latter would contribute to the A.C. power circuit by a push-pull oscillatory current effect whereby heat energy and A.C. electric energy would become mutually convertible. A full explanation of the commutating effect obtained by combining matched current flow of the transverse A.C. and the in-film circulating D.C. is given elsewhere (Aspden and Strachan, 1990 and, Aspden, 1992). However, Fig. 1 may suffice to represent schematically the functional operation. Fig. 1(a) shows how bimetallic capacitor plates separated by dielectric substrates are located between hot (T') and cold (T) panel surfaces with electrical connections at the sides of the panel. Some of the plates are floating electrically, being coupled capacitatively in series, whereas the connections linking an external circuit through an SCR oscillator switch circuit form a parallel-connected capacitor system.
Fig. 1. Thermoelectric Circuit Fig. 1(b) shows how D.C. current circulates in two bimetallic plates with a matching superimposed transverse A.C. current.
20 Fig. 1(c) applies when the A.C. current flow is in the upward direction. The point is that, in alternate half cycles of the A.C., the current flow operates to block the D.C. flow at one or other of the thermocouple junctions whilst segrating the Peltier heating and cooling on their respective sides of the panel. This has several very interesting consequences. Firstly, it is found that the Peltier EMF is directed into the A.C. circuit, which being transverse to the thin metal film, is a low resistance circuit with high but virtually loss-free capacitative impedance. Secondly, by diverting the electric power generated thermo-electrically, the D.C. current flow in the planes of the metal films was virtually exclusively that of heat-driven charge carriers. The current was sustained by the normal heat conduction loss through the metal and so did not detract from thermoelectric conversion efficiency by drawing upon the generated electric power. Thirdly, and most unexpectedly, it was found that the current interruption precluded the formation of what we termed 'cold spots' at the Peltier cooled junctions. These latter spots arise in any normal thermocouple owing to concentrations of cold by Peltier cooling in a way which escalates so that the junction crossing temperature of a current is very much lower than that of the external heat sink condition. This stifles the thermoelectric power in the D.C. thermocouple and it was our discovery that the cyclic interruption of the flow by the transverse excitation technique accounts for the transition to the very high 300 V/oC thermoelectric power. The latter has been observed consistently in all three prototypes built to date and in diagnostic test rigs using the Al:Ni metal combination. Fourthly, however, the eventual testing of operative devices, though performing overall within Carnot efficiency limitations, awakened special interest because there had to be something most unusual about the temperature profile through the device if the best performance measured was to be bounded by the Carnot condition. Our research is now casting light upon that latter aspect and may herald a major breakthrough in energy conversion technology generally. However, even without the latter, the technology as developed to date does already justify commercial application in refrigeration systems and that is the primary focus of this paper. Development History The project has been slow to progress from its inception. One of us, Edinburgh scientist, J. S. Strachan (formerly with Pennwalt Corporation) assembled the device as a small flat module with 500 layers of bimetallic coated PVDF film. It was formed in a 20 by 25 series-parallel connection array which was a design compromise to enhance the capacitor
21 plate area, whilst matching the A.C. excitation voltage and the current rating to the switching circuitry and dielectric properties of the PVDF. The device performed remarkably well when first tested, without requiring transitional stage-by-stage development to overcome problems. This had the effect of putting in our hands an invention which worked better than we had a right to expect but left us at the outset not knowing precisely how the different elements of the device were really contributing to the overall function. More important, however, though the thermoelectric operational section of the device was at the heart of the action, the implementation which used the PVDF dielectric and a capacitative circuit posed problems that were seen as formidable but yet were only peripheral to the real invention. There was also some doubt as to whether the properties of the PVDF had a direct role in the energy conversion. There was difficulty in planning in cost terms the onward scaling-up development, owing to the perceived problems of switching high currents at the necessary voltage level and frequency. Commercial pressures and the limited resources involved in what became a privately sponsored venture to develop the invention, combined with the barrier posed by the switch versus thermoelectric design conflict, halted R & D and led, sadly, to the project falling into a limbo state. This was until interest was aroused by the publication in the latter part of 1992 of the above-referenced 27th IECEC paper (Aspden, 1992) and by the article in Electronics World (Aspden 1992). Sponsorship interest in the R & D concerning heat-to-electricity power conversion has now revived, led also by a demonstration made possible by the building of a third prototype which incorporates 1,000 PVDF substrate thermocouple capacitor plates and which provides the following test data. Refrigeration Performance Data All three prototype devices built to date exhibited a remarkable energy conversion efficiency. They all operated with different switching techniques and different design frequencies. The first prototype was dual in operation in that it was bonded to a supporting roomtemperature heat sink block and the application of ice to its upper face resulted in the generation of electricity sufficient to spin an electric motor. Conversely, the connection of a low voltage battery supply to the device resulted in water on the upper surface freezing very rapidly. Had this first prototype been assembled the other way up it would have been easy to use calorimeter techniques and measure heat-electricity conversion in both operational modes. As it was, an attempt to chemically unbond the device from the heat sink resulted in corrosion damage which destroyed the device.
22 The second prototype was built, not for self-standing dual mode operation, but expressly to test the heat to electricity power generation efficiency with variable frequency. It was not self-oscillating and, as it did not function in refrigeration mode, it offered no test of refrigeration efficiency. It gave up to 73% of Carnot conversion efficiency in electric power generation with room temperature differentials of the order of 20o C. The recently constructed third prototype is superior in its electronic switching design and works well in both electric power generation and refrigeration modes. There is, however, a circumstance about its operation which means that, for this particular demonstration prototype, according to its intrinsic magnetic polarization state, it works more efficiently in one or other of its conversion functions. This particular third prototype operated with higher Carnot-related efficiency in the electric power generation mode than in the refrigeration mode. Also, for the same reasons, and an additional factor concerning the power drawn by the electronics and impedance matching internal load circuitry, the overall external efficiencies are very much lower than can be expected in a fully engineered product implementation. The refrigeration performance data presented below is, therefore, a worst-case situation and will, without question, be improved upon in the months following the date when this text is prepared. The device included an SCR switching circuit which was self-tuning and ran as an oscillator powered from electricity generated from melting ice in power generation mode or drawing on a battery supply in the refrigeration mode. However, the power taken up by this circuitry was factored into the overall performance, meaning that the thermoelectric core of the device had to be functioning at higher efficiency. Because the electric demands of the circuit were high in relation to the small demonstration thermoelectric core unit to which it was coupled. The active heat sink area of the device was about 20 sq. cm and a typical test involved a frozen block of 6 ml of water. A test performed after the lower heat sink had settled to a temperature of 25.6o C involved pressing the block of ice in a slightly melting state onto the upper heat sink with a polystyrene foam pad. The output voltage generated was fed to a 3 ohm load. It took 9 minutes for the ice to melt, during which time the measured output was a steady 0.67 V. These data show that a heat throughput of 3.7 watts generates electric power of 0.15 watts with temperatures for which Carnot efficiency is 8.6% This indicates performance overall of 47% of the Carnot value. It is noted that the 73% value obtained with the second prototype applies to a device which did not incorporate an oscillator demanding power but had simple electronic switching controlled by, and drawing negligible power from, an external function generator. To test the refrigeration mode, 3 ml of water was poured into a container on the upper surface of the device and a battery supply of 7.2 V fed to the SCR resonator with a limiting
23 resistor now switched into circuit to protect the SCR during its turn-off. This resistor reduced the efficiency further. The circuit drew 6.3 watts and the water froze in 73 seconds. Since convection was minimal the water closest to the surface froze first and this immediately formed an insulating barrier which would mean operation thereafter at a significant subzero temperature at that heat sink during most of those 73 seconds. However, the overall temperature difference ignoring that temperature drop in the ice was 26o C, associated with a cooling power of 13.7 watts for an electric power input of 6.3 watts. This represents a coefficient of performance of 2.17 or 21% of Carnot efficiency. Cooling action at below minus 40oC has been demonstrated. Based on such worst-case data, which neverthless applies to a simple solid-state device and compares well with the coefficient of performance data of domestic refrigerators, it can be assumed that the technology is capable of meeting production requirements of nonCFC refrigerators and domestic air conditioning equipment. Outlook following Breakthrough Discovery Diagnostic test work has proved that the device operation is independent from the piezoelectric or pyroelectric properties of the PVDF substrate used. Given that the action is truly that of the Peltier Effect, there should be current circulation in the bimetallic thin film productive of magnetic polarization. By detecting such polarization as a function of the applied temperature differential one can verify this situation. It is to be noted that our early research had shown that the thermoelectric EMF could, under certain circumstances, be greatly affected by the application of a magnetic field to the thermocouple junctions. Accordingly, the tests aimed at sensing thermoelectricallygenerated magnetic field effects had a particular significance. Furthermore, we had some interest in the Nernst Effect by which a temperature gradient in a metal in the x direction, with a magnetic polarizing field applied in the y direction can develop electric field action in the mutually orthogonal z direction. It has become, therefore, a subject of research interest to examine how a bimetallic interface subjected to a transverse magnetic field and a temperature gradient in the interface direction affects the circulation of thermoelectric current between the metals. What we have discovered that is of great importance to the development of the solidstate thermoelectric refrigerator is that the setting up of a temperature gradient in the bimetallic interface plane between two contiguous metal films will produce a magnetizing field which readily saturates the metal if ferromagnetic. Thus the nickel film in the prototypes tested becomes strongly magnetized in one or other direction according to the direction of the temperature gradient. When this magnetic field is considered in the context of the Nernst Effect it is seen that it can lead to a transversely directed EMF governed by the product of the temperature
24 gradient and the strength of the magnetic polarizing field. This tranversely directed EMF then contributes a bias active in the individual metal and, being in the same transverse direction, supplements or offsets the Peltier EMF in the prototype implementations. Remembering then that the heating and cooling actions in the operation of the prototype devices are governed by current flow in metal which is, adjacent the respective heat sinks, in line with or opposed to the action of an EMF, one can see how something new has appeared on the technology scene of thermoelectricity. By using heat to generate current circulation, which in turn generates a magnetic field to provide ferromagnetic polarization, a powerful Nernst EMF set up in the metal can act as a catalyst in supplementing the junction Peltier heat transfer action associated with EMF across a metal interface. This may well be the action which accounts for the very high thermoelectric conversion efficiency we have measured. In order to quantify this as it may apply to the prototypes we have built, note that a 400 angstrom thickness of well-magnetized nickel subjected to a temperature drop of 20oC across a metal length of 2.5 mm, implies a Nernst EMF of the order of 6 mV across the 0.04 micron nickel thickness. Though small, this is significant alongside the Peltier EMF across a junction, but the really important point is that this Nernst EMF is set up in the metal and not across a metal junction interface. In that metal, owing to the free-electron diamagnetic reaction currents within the nickel and around its boundary, which offset in some measure the atomic spinpolarization of the ferromagnet, there is then scope for some very unusual thermodynamic feedback effects. Those diamagnetic reaction currents which are themselves powered by the thermal energy of the electrons have a strength related to the magnetic polarization and so exceed, by far, the thermoelectric current flowing across junction interfaces. The heating and cooling processes transfer power between the heat sinks in proportion to current times voltage and the in-metal action within the nickel could therefore generate very significant thermal feedback, thereby greatly enhancing the efficiency well beyond that of the normal thermoelectric bimetallic junctions. This action only results where one of the metals is ferromagnetic and the configuration of the device is such that an applied temperature gradient promotes internal circulation of thermoelectric current around a closed circuit able to develop a magnetic field in the nickel directed transversely with respect to the temperature gradient. Conclusions The exciting prospect for future development of refrigeration techniques centres on the possibility that the feedback process can be greatly enhanced by using thicker metal films. It is hoped, therefore, that the research reported here will soon advance to probe the limits of efficiency that are possible with this new solid-state refrigeration technology.
25 In this connection the truly exciting prospect arises from the possibility that the efficiency barrier set by the Carnot criterion can be penetrated. To understand this, note that the Peltier EMF on the hot side of a thermocouple is proportional to the higher temperature T' and that at the cooler side is proportional to the lower temperature T. For a given current circulation the heat energy extracted is proportional to T and the net input of electrical power is proportional to T'-T. This is the reason why the coefficient of performance has a Carnot limit of T/(T'-T). Now, if there is a thermal feedback action that is regulated by a Nernst EMF and we can contrive to assure that the forward transfer of heat arises from a uniform temperature gradient in the ferromagnetic metal, then the Nernst EMF is the same on both sides and the amount of heating on the hot side is, in theory, exactly equal to the amount of cooling on the other side. There is conservation of energy with negligible net energy input but heat transfer from the cold to hot heat sinks and this implies a very high coefficient of performance not temperature-limited according to the Carnot requirement. This, therefore, is the challenging possibility that looms in sight and is heralded by the rather fortuitous discovery of the surprisingly high performance characteristics of the Strachan-Aspden base metal thermoelectric power converter. The Strachan-Aspden device uses what the inventors see as conventional physics, albeit with the innovation of combining transverse A.C. excitation with D.C. thermocouple excitation. However, it does seem that in some curious way the device happens to have features which bring some new physics to bear. By producing a thermally-driven current crossing a strong magnetic field in metal the Lorentz forces on that current develop a transverse reaction EMF in that metal. The combination of that transverse Nernst EMF with a circulating current confined within the metal can, it seems, operate to transfer heat thermodynamically, working through the underlying ferromagnetic induction coupling in the metal. This is somewhat analogous to the way heat energy is somehow diverted into electricity in being routed between the hot and cold heat sinks in a conventional Peltier thermocouple circuit. It does, however, introduce new physics to the technology of refrigeration and offers great promise. References Aspden, H.; Strachan, J. S., European Patent Application No. 0369670, 1990. Aspden, H., SAE Technical Paper Series No. 929474 1992. Aspden, H., Electronics World, July 1992, pp. 540-542.
26 APPENDIX III The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Operating Principles [October 1989 Report] The object of this Report is to merge a review of the status of the project at the time the primary research was abandoned in 1990 with an evaluation of the design options for taking the project forward. Appendix III, together with IV and V, comprise extracts taken from an earlier Report dated 23rd October 1989 and prepared when the project was most active. These provide background information. ********** INTRODUCTION Imagine a panel fitted like a sheet of glass into a window frame but serving as a silent solid-state heat engine which uses electricity to cool the room in summer and heat the room in winter with the high efficiency of a heat pump. Imagine the same panel fitted into a glazed enclosure designed to trap atmospheric radiation to develop a temperature difference across the inner and outer surfaces of the panel and using the trapped heat to produce electricity. The Strachan-Aspden invention provides the technology needed to fabricate such a panel and brings with it a quite interesting challenge. This challenge is a design problem. The task is that of deciding between a mode of construction that has been tested in prototype form or one that needs some research in advance of development but should prove superior from a commercial viewpoint. The task is to scale down an internal operating voltage and increase internal current flow coupled with conversion to a pulsed d.c. mode of operation rather than having a resonant circuit sustaining a.c. oscillations through the dielectric of a capacitor. The R & D activity had just begun to address this problem when the Scottish smallbusiness entrepreneurs who undertook initial development deserted the project as their other business ventures failed. This has meant that an invention which could make a major contribution in the effort to free the world from polluting energy technology became virtually dormant. The merit of the invention can be judged from one simple technical fact. Operating from a room temperature source of heat and melting ice the tested prototype device was able
27 to generate electricity at close to the Carnot efficiency limit by a technology utilizing the thermoelectric power of base metals at a rating equivalent to 20 kw electrical power output per kg of metal in circuit. In a non-developed hand-fabricated form, the device performed at 73% of Carnot efficiency. This is not optimum performance and is far from exploiting the full design potential. The invention opens up a wholly new field of technological opportunity. It arises from a major scientific breakthrough which involves a totally unexpected discovery. In original conception the invention aimed to use the properties of a dielectric film as a barrier to heat loss by thermal conduction and the bimetallic coating on the film as a thermocouple circuit to convert heat into electricity. In reality it was discovered that the transverse oscillatory current excitation of a thermoelectric circuit produced an astounding effect on the thermoelectric power of the base metal combination. 1989 RESEARCH PROGRESS REPORT [This section is copied from the 23rd October 1989 report] "The plan during 1989 was for Strachan to engage in detailed research and onward development of the technology involved with a view to consolidating the patent position by year end. The research phase has not been without its traumas, essentially for two reasons. Firstly, there was a set-back in that to perform certain tests on the prototype device aimed at measuring efficiency at an elevated temperature it had to be detached from its heat base. Secondly, in attempting this using a chemical solvent to separate two parts, the chemical found its way into the main structure which, lacking in foresight on this possibility, had not been sealed against such contamination. This upset its operation; it was a lesson learned, but at that stage a set-back to the development plan. It was not then possible, without rebuilding, to really get the full measure of the performance properties needed to comply with the initial programme. The question at issue was one of controlling temperature differential on a sustained basis with measured heat throughput rather than monitoring a small piece of ice as it melted by sucking heat from the environment, some of which was being intercepted to produce electricity in transit through the device. Even before this set-back many experiments on components were performed to test operative features in isolation, with the early recognition that something totally unexpected was involved. A very substantial increase in thermoelectric EMF per junction, far in excess of reference data indication, had been achieved thanks to the particular operating technique adopted in the prototype. However, in spite of these progressive steps, the onward development necessitated a firm measure of the minimal operating efficiency of the basic
28 device and, though the eventual products will be far easier to assemble, a small panel was made which closely conformed in design with the original but included certain modifications excluding what by then had come to be regarded as possibly non-essential features. This was a gamble, especially as the construction was very intricate and time-consuming when done by hand, with ongoing circuit tests during assembly to assure proper current distribution and unifomity of response. However, in the event, the device, once completed, did perform with equal or better results than the original version. Happily, in confirming the new design assumptions made during the first months of 1989, the tests on this second device proved to be a major step forward and justified the filing of a third patent application in September 1989. The second set-back proved how wise it was to have held back on early publication. The onward research investigations showed that what had been a primary design feature intended to block heat loss and so improve efficiency was not directly effective in that role, at least in the way we intended. Indeed, a fortuitous discovery had been made by proceeding on that assumption and the phenomenon involved had had the same effect, but not for the reason first believed. Instead of physically obstructing heat flow through the device, as had been intended, the operative technique actually converted almost all the heat into electricity before it reached the point of no return and so allowed very little to cross by thermal conduction and so escape as waste. It was only after this discovery was made and an understanding reached concerning the process involved that it became possible to begin to consider disclosing to the scientific community, not just what had been achieved, but why it works so well. This disclosure is being made now that the initial applications for foreign patent rights have been registered and the purpose is expressly to attract interest from those who have the resources to help in the development of this new energy technology. It is only by such shared action on an equitable commercial basis that the benefits of the Strachan-Aspden invention can make their full contribution in helping to reduce the world's energy pollution, whilst conserving the chemical qualities of fossil fuel resources for future generations." The above text, quoted from the 23rd October 1989 report was prepared as a confidential document. The sponsors used the report to try to attract investment in their overall business interests and shortly thereafter ceased to fund R & D on this invention. Apart from initial costs of overseas patent applications, the funding that had been provided had been mainly that needed as salary by Scott Strachan whilst involving him as a consultant on other projects. As yet, therefore, this important energy invention has not had the benefit of serious development funding.
29 The research effort up to October 1989 had concentrated on simplifying the assembly of a prototype test device using the bimetallic coated film which could also serve as a capacitor dielectric. The immediate objective was to measure the heat-to-electricity energy conversion efficiency and explore the design criteria involved. The inventors were, however, mindful that the principles of operation of the device did not really depend upon capacitative operation and the current limitation which that implied. It was deemed possible to extend the technology to structures which involved an all-metal through-circuit for electrical power and some plans were made for building such all-metal structures for bench testing. Had the research been active in 1990 this alternative would have been thoroughly tested so that a choice could have been made as to the best mode of implementation in a production assembly. It is noted that no formal product design proposal, with costing that could be used in a business plan, was drawn up in the 1989 period. Strachan was engaged on the preliminary functional testing to assess the performance and determine the optimum techniques and choice of materials. Without this information, one could not price either the market value of a product or its manufacturing cost. Even now, product costing is not really possible until the through-metal-circuit R & D investigations have been completed. The fact that a 20 kw rate of electrical power generation can be delivered by 1 kg of metal, drawing on a temperature differential of 20o C, is the best indicator that it must be possible to build an operational unit that can be costed low enough to justify a very large sales volume. The real question now concerns the best configuration of the metal used and the best choice of metals.
THE STRACHAN-ASPDEN INVENTION

[The section in quotes is copied from the 23rd October 1989 report]
The following is a technical description of the principles underlying the StrachanAspden invention written on the assumption that it would form the basis of a lecture by Harold Aspden to an audience who would later witness a demonstration of the operational device by Scott Strachan. "Before outlining the technical nature of our invention there is one very significant point that I think is worth registering at the outset. The test device on which our company was founded used the thermoelectric properties of contact between two base metals, aluminium and nickel, to produce electrical power from a low grade heat source. A temperature difference of 20 degrees relative to room temperature was sufficient to produce a steady power output of one fifth of a watt per cubic millimeter of metal in the thermocouple circuit. Scaled up, that is 20 kw per kg of metal. It did this with an efficiency that was well
30 above 50% of Carnot efficiency for this temperature range. This is as good as internal combustion engine performance where the fuel burns at more than 2,000 degrees. This is an invention which should have been made 50 years ago as part of the solution of the electronic age. As to the patentable merits of the invention, it has been said that even a simple invention can be judged highly if 'a long felt want' is satisfied. No one can deny that we need a breakthrough in the pollution-free energy field and what I have to disclose is not quite so simple. The device is essentially a flat panel that can be fitted like a window or used as a heat exchange interface in an engineered installation to convert heat energy into electricity or to use electricity to cool one face of the panel and heat the other face. It is simply a panel with an electric supply lead. All that there is between the two faces of the panel is a laminar structure of metal with some insulation, together with a small electrical transformer and an electronic control unit connected to the supply lead via a switch. What is special, however, and what causes this device to be a revolutionary breakthrough in energy technology, is governed by a combination of two special features. These we have called: (1) DYNAMIC EXCITATION FEATURE (2) TRANSVERSE COMMUTATION FEATURE There is also a third feature which has been used in the prototypes to enhance efficiency even further, but which will only be used in very special products. This is termed: (3) THIN FILM ENHANCEMENT Basically, we are talking about a thermoelectric system using either the Seebeck Effect or its converse, the Peltier Effect. By connecting different metals in an electrical circuit and positioning the respective junctions on the hot or cold side of the panel, the passage of D.C. current is related to the thermodynamic effects. Energy can be converted in this way, as is well known, but not, until now, with an efficiency that has such overwhelming implications in the field of energy technology. The thermocouple working in Seebeck mode operates to extract heat from one junction and inject heat at the other junction. The balance of energy is electrical in the sense that an EMF or voltage is set up at the cooled junction and this can deliver output power in the electrical circuit, provided it is smaller than the back EMF or reverse voltage at the heated junction.
31 In efficiency terms, the operation is governed by the fact that the heat absorbed or produced at a junction is proportional to the junction temperature measured on the absolute scale, that is referenced on -273 degrees centigrade. Therefore, if one junction is at -3 degrees centigrade (270 K) and the other at 27 degrees centigrade (300 K), we can produce 300 units of electricity from the cooling effect at the hot junction but have to give back 270 units of electricity by heating the cold junction. The net gain is electricity, in theory, could be 30 units of electricity for the price of a 270 unit thoughput or 300 unit input of heat energy for these low temperature conditions. These high numbers of heat energy units should not be regarded as energy waste. They relate to what is called 'enthalpy', which is a measure of heat content referenced on 273 degrees centigrade below zero and even ice has an enormous heat content on this basis of reference. What has just been described is the so-called Carnot efficiency. It is 10% for the 30 degree temperature differential considered. It works either way, in the sense that if electricity is supplied rather than produced, the input of 30 units of electricity can cause a transfer of 270 units of heat from the outside temperature source at -3 degrees and heat a room to 27 degrees. This is the Peltier mode of operation and it provides a tenfold gain on the use of the electricity in an electric heater, assuming full Carnot efficiency. Operating at 50% of Carnot efficiency, a 10 degree heating can be achieved with only 7% of the power needed by an electric convector or radiator. The reason we do not see such Peltier heat pumps used on a large scale for domestic heating or power generation purposes is, very simply, that it has not been possible to achieve an adequate level of performance relative to the Carnot limit. Technically, the obstacle has been the need to find materials which can be used to form thermoelectric junctions having a high Peltier coefficient. This is the factor relating the power conversion at a junction with the amount of current passing through. It is measured in millivolts at room temperature. The dilemma facing this technology is that if base metals such as copper, iron, aluminium etc are used to form junctions, the EMFs involved are very small. However, the electrical conductivity is good and this helps to reduce losses. Unfortunately, in such metals good electrical conductivity goes hand in hand with good thermal conductivity and then we lose heat by leakage through the metal circuit between the hot and cold junctions. For base metals this has been seen as a 'no win' situation, because efficiencies of the order of 1% of Carnot efficiency are representative of practical performance. For these reasons, the attentions of the last half-century have concentrated on special metals, alloys, and semi-metals or semi-conductors. The price paid for accepting poor electrical conductivity of perhaps one thousandth that of copper has been rewarded by a much reduced thermal conductivity and a very much increased thermoelectric power. The EMF involved is typically in excess of 200 microvolts per degree with a Peltier coefficient
32 of 60 millivolts at room temperature. Such devices are useful for special applications, where small current throughput and low efficiency are of no consequence, but their general use as Peltier heat pumps or electric power generators has been limited. A typical state-of-the-art power generator using junction materials formed from alloys of bismuth, tellurium, selenium and antimony has a design specification that recognizes a maximum operating efficiency of 22% of Carnot when opeating with a high temperature differential of 300 degrees using a source at 600 K. The electric power produced, assuming perfect accord with the design specification, is of the order of 0.1 kw per kg of metal used to form the thermoelectric junctions. Practical applications depend upon the energy throughput rate as well as efficiency and what is being offered by the Strachan-Aspden technique is so far ahead of state-of-art technology on both these counts that one must wonder how the technology could have gone so far adrift in missing the real potential of the Seebeck effect. Some words from the book 'Direct Energy Conversion' by Professor Stanley Angrist bear upon this: "At the time of Seebeck's work, the only devices available for producing electric current were extremely weak electrostatic generators. Fifty years passed before steam engines drove electromagnetic generators. It was, undoubtedly, electromagnetism that caused succeeding generations of physicists and engineers to lose interest in the curious effects of thermo-electricity. The only widespread use of the effect was in the measurement of temperatures by means of thermocouples. It is difficult to say how the history of electrical engineering and electronics would have developed had Seebeck's discovery been widely employed." Those researching this field today seem to have been attracted by the empirical discovery of new materials and have gone astray in not researching the basic question why metal junctions have such low thermoelectric power. This is very curious, bearing in mind that classical thermodynamics theory tells us that the theoretical power of base metal combinations is of the same order as that of these special materials. I must admit, however, that though, with hindsight, we can bring this problem into focus, we did discover the solution only when we were performing diagnostic tests on our principal prototype. In short, we had built something that worked too well and we were wondering why. The point rests on the question of whether the metal used increases in electrical conductivity or decreases in conductivity as temperature increases over the operating range. In base metals conductivity decreases with increase in temperature. This means that at the
33 cooled junction the decrease in temperature improves conductivity. Now, if the electric current flowing through the junction is uniformly distributed this will simply mean that the junction has a uniform cooling across its interface. However, if, as occurs in electrical discharges in gases, the flow tends to be in short-lived filamentary surges, there is the real possibility that a current could develop a non-unifom pattern of cooling. A current flow concentrated at one position would form a 'cold spot' in the junction interface. The electrical conductivity there would increase and so the current would favour that path of least resistance and become locked on the cold spot. This could drive the temperature so low that the effective temperature governing Carnot efficiency is not what we see from the external actions. In other words, owing to the increase in electrical conductivity with drop in temperature, the thermoelectric power falls far below the theoretical potential of the metal junction. There is therefore an enormous loss of efficiency when base metals are used in thermocouples in what has been conventional technology. Why does this not affect the special materials as well? The answer is tha such materials do not have the same temperature characteristics. The p-type alloy bismuthtelluride (25%) with antimony-telluride (75%), and n-type alloy bismuth-telluride (75%) with bismuth selenide (25%) have, for example, electrical conductivities which reduce the temperature if operated above 300oC. Such a temperature characteristic means that cold spots cannot form. Therefore, if we want to use base metals, with high energy throughput, the only way we can hope to get high efficiency is by somehow preventing the cold spots from forming in these materials. This is exactly what we achieve by the DYNAMIC EXCITATION FEATURE. Its effect is to increase the thermoelectric power of an aluminium-nickel couple from 17 microvolts per degree to a value well in excess of 300 microvolts per degree. Since this factor operates as a squared effect, because it drives proportionally more current and puts proportionally more voltage behind it, the electric power becomes hundreds of times greater than expected on conventional design criteria. This, therefore, is a major advance because it allows us to use basic metals with high capacity for delivering current, rather than expensive compositions with very limited energy throughput capacity. What is the DYNAMIC EXCITATION FEATURE? In simple terms, this is a technique by which, instead of causing a steady D.C. current flow through the junctions, we interrupt the flow several thousand times per second in such a way that the current flow through the cooled junction relocates rapidly and before the non-uniform temperature or cold spot condition can develop. The advantage is that we get the kind of thermoelectric power (i.e. voltage) from aluminium-nickel junctions that is available from bismuth-telluride, but, for comparable dimensions, the higher electrical conductivity of the base metal device allows more than one
34 hundred times as much active power (wattage) to pass through. This takes us well forward technologically, but the TRANSVERSE COMMUTATION FEATURE which will now be described advances performance even further, so far in fact that we can trim back our design objectives on efficiency to simplify the manufacture and so reduce the cost of this technology. The conventional design of a thermoelectric device involves having two distinct junctions between the two metals, one junction being at a higher temperature than the other. The metal between the junctions merely serves as a conduit for electric current and, unfortunately, provides a channel for heat loss by thermal conduction from the hot to the cold junction. Rather than trying to develop special materials which facilitate flow of electric current but obstruct heat flow, we followed another route. We also had in mind that a really good commercial device could hardly take in heat and produce electricity if the materials were not good conductors of heat. After all, the heat has to get into the device before it can be deployed into electrical form. Our device uses two metal layers which interface over the whole distance from the hot side to the cold side. We then set up a thermoelectric current which it drives around the closed circuit formed by the interfacing metal layers. We accept the full measure of heat conduction through the metal by allowing it to travel through the full length of the metal layers. However, note that the route taken by the heat is never further away from a junction interface than the thickness of a metal layer. This means that the heat has repeated opportunity to be effective in generating electric power as it progresses along the junction interface. This is a feature vital to success. Unlike the conventional themopile where, once clear of the hot junction, the heat travels to the cold junction to be dissipated, we ensure that it has repeated 'bites of the cherry', as it were, en route to that destination, with the effect that very little even reaches the point midway where the current flow reverses. By 'reversal' is meant flow from metal B to metal A, whereas initially it was flowing from metal A to metal B. This feature has a remarkable effect on efficiency because virtually all the heat supplied is converted into electricity. The $64,000 question, however, is how we intercept the electrical energy flow around the closed loop circuit formed by the two contacting metal layers and so gain access to that electricity before it is all dumped back into heat over the interface area where the thermoelectric current flow reverses. This is where the 'transverse' excitation aspect of our invention holds the key to a successful energy converter. As can be seen from Fig. 1, we stack bimetallic layer upon bimetallic layer to build a stack between a hot surface and a cold surface and the external current flow involves a transverse current flow through the whole stack.
35
Fig. 1 The point then to keep in mind is that at the interface between the two metals forming each layer there is a thermodynamic effect causing a voltage to act from metal A towards metal B and this voltage varies across the layer according to the local temperature. It is greater, the higher the temperature. Because of this there is an imbalance of voltage from point to point in the heat flow direction across the contact interface in each layer when a temperature differential exists between the side faces of the stack. This imbalance causes current circulation in the sense shown in Fig. 2, where one layer is presented in enlarged form.
Fig. 2 All this does is to cool one side and heat the other, with the result that the metal conducts heat from the hot side to the cold side. However, now suppose that we provide a channel for transverse current flow up or down the stack. This means current flows transverse to heat flow but, in this layered arrangement, it augments or opposes the thermoelectric current as it traverses a junction, depending upon the direction of flow of the transverse current. The channel for this transverse current is assured if there is good interface contact between all metal layers in a stack formed by metals A, B, A, B, A, B etc in sequence. Owing to the symmetry of the system a current travelling right in metal B will have to overcome the same potential barrier or back EMF at the cold junction whether it goes up or down the stack. However, we cannot have some contributing to tranverse current flow by going up the stack in one part and elsewhere having some going down the stack. Either the current all goes up or all goes down or there is no transverse current flow at all and the thermoelectric current flow is everywhere confined to its own bimetallic layer. The current will take the path of least resistance, or will it? If there is an external resistive load connected in the transverse current flow path, then the easier route for current will be the closed circuital track shown in Fig. 2. Some small amount of current should flow either up or down the stack, because the external circuit offers a supplementary route for
36 current. However, this will not give us scope for causing cyclic interruption of the primary junction current, nor will it give access to any real power output. Indeed, without the dynamic excitation, the voltage driving the circuital current in Fig. 2 is very low. Nevertheless, the circuit is a bistable system and how it behaves when relying solely on the thermoelectric voltage produced by the heat input is not the same as its response when a voltage surge up or down the stack governs the action. Given a trigger effect which causes a transverse current surge up or down the stack, the junction current can be interrupted by a fast cycling switch in the external circuit and, once this happens, the full high powered thermoelectric action comes into effect, but this is a condition only effective if the transverse current is strong enough to exceed the normal steady state junction current. Given some intrinsic inductance or capacitance to sustain transverse voltages which carry the action through the zero current transient states, the device can become locked into the dynamic excitation mode to deliver an electrical current powered by the full thermoelectric action. In this mode the current flow is represented by the snaking flow shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3 The device actually works and exhibits extremely high efficiency in converting heat energy into electrical power output. Indeed, the capacitative versions of the device which have been constructed use bimetallic layers less than 0.1 micron in thickness (one micron is a millionth of a meter) and 300 such layers of one square cm area interleaved with 28 micron thick dielectric could generate 300 milliwatts of electrical power using just over one calorie per second of heat input at 40 degrees Centigrade and output at 20 degrees. This is quite remarkable, bearing in mind that even these temperatures and their differentials are so low. It is even more remarkable when one realises that the power generated is at a rate in excess of 20 kilowatts per kilogram of metal used to form the thermoelectric circuits. This capacitative device does, however, make use of the enhanced electrical conductivity of thin films, which accounts for the very high efficiency obtained. To bring the design parameters into perspective it is useful to consider a formula for the figure of merit Z normally applied to thermoelectric systems. This is presented in Fig. 4.
37 Z ' 2/K
FIGURE OF MERIT Z TRANSVERSE COMMUTATION FACTOR THERMOELECTRIC POWER (VOLTS/DEGREE) SPECIFIC ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY (MHO-CM) THIN FILM ENHANCEMENT FACTOR THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY (WATT-CM) K
Fig. 4 This formula, when multiplied by the operating temperature, in absolute degrees Kelvin (say, 300 at room temperature) is a measure of the potential electric power generated as a ratio of the heat conducted from the hot junction to the cold junction and so wasted. This assumes operation with a low temperature differential and allowance has to be made for the duality of the metal paths, which are in parallel for heat flow and in series for electrical current flow. This tends to reduce the ratio by a factor of 4. Also, the potential electric power output depends upon the load resistance as related to the intenal resistance of the device. All in all, therefore, to build a viable thermoelectric power converter the Seebeck coefficient has to be as high as possible. The Strachan-Aspden devices tested so far are offering values in excess of 300 microvolts per degree centigrade using base metals for which the bulk specific electrical conductivity is in excess of 100,000 mho-cm and the specific thermal conductivity about 2 watt-cm. On these figures, at the temperature of 300K, the formula gives near unity ratio of electrical power to thermal power lost. However, the Strachan-Aspden technique earns its qualities by virtue of the factor and also the factor . These are the coefficients representing the effects of the transverse commutation feature and the thin film feature, respectively. Each of these factors is a unit of magnitude giving ten-fold benefit. The electrical conductivity of a thin film of a few hundredths of a micron thickness can be more than 10 times greater than the bulk value. Such film was used in the main prototypes tested. We did not measure the factor , because the bimetallic thin film material was available commercially with a rated electrical resistivity of 0.1 ohm per square. It comprised thin film layers of aluminium of 0.02 micron thickness and nickel of 0.04 micron thickness. Knowing the bulk values of as given by reference books, the value of was estimated as being about 10 from these data. Concerning the factor , this represents the repeated 'bites at the cherry' effect as heat gets repeated opportunity to convert into electricity as it is conducted into the device. For conventional thermocouples where the temperature drop between junctions is linear, is
38 unity. However, we had a system in which the temperature was changing much as depicted in Fig. 5.
Fig. 5 The dotted line represents the linear temperature profile and the curve the profile we are exploiting. is a measure of the conventional temperature gradient of the dotted line as a ratio to the minimal temperature gradient midway between the junctions. The latter is a measure of the heat energy going to waste and the much larger gradient of the full curve at the hot junction is a measure of the heat energy entering the device before conversion into electricity. Because the midway gradient is much lower than the linear case, we have a high factor and because it is very much lower than the input temperature gradient we have a very efficient device capable of taking in far more heat than a conventional device. I believe that I have said enough to outline why the Strachan-Aspden thermoelectric power converter works so well. The ongoing research relates to how far we can compromise on the thin film factor with a view to using thick metal layers and relying exclusively on the factor of the transverse commutation feature. Unquestionably, our primary products will use the dynamic excitation feature to get the advantages of power from base metals, but we foresee also the use of special metals as well, coupled with designs based on the factor. I should like to end by describing how, even before we filed our first patent application or got involved commercially, we got a measure of the factor applicable to our first demonstration device. Very simply, we had built a small panel having metal faces and layers of thin metal film rnning from face to face but embedded in an insulating dielectric. Looked at in the direction of heat flow, the metal and dielectric were side-by-side, with the metal presenting a cross-section amounting to about one five hundredth of that of the insulator. Such a device, therefore, was not, in thermal conductivity terms, a through-metal conductor. To get a measure of its properties, we put an ice cube of standard size on the upper metal face and attached the lower face to a commercial heat sink base at room temperature. The ice melted, partly by heat absorbed by air convection from above, partly by heat loss by thermal conduction through the intervening insulation and partly by heat conduction through the metal. It took in excess of 20 minutes to melt completely. This was with the output leads from the device unconnected, that is, on open circuit. I knew from a test at home that such an ice cube on a metal work surface took about 5 minutes to melt and took 30 minutes on a Formica-topped kitchen table. The point of interest then was that when the
39 same sized ice cube was used on the device with the output leads connected to an electric motor or a resistor load, the time of melting reduced to between 3 and 5 minutes. The motor stopped running, of course, soon after the ice had completely melted, but the message from these very simple measurements was clear testimony of a very high internal efficiency in the generation of electricity from heat. There being no independent electrical power supplied to the device and the ice being the only perturbing influence, the connection of the electrical load had diverted more than 80% of the heat energy around the wired load circuit and this was via a capacitance. That 80% and more of power was electrical power and most of the other 20% of heat conduction was seemingly unnecessary loss because much of it was due to extraneous convection or heat conduction through what was unnecessarily thick dielectric insulation. It was from such a very simple test that we knew the factor had to be 10 or more, but we were carried along by that empirical performance and, may I say, that was so high that, for a time until we could make more precise measurements, mainly of temperature, we thought we had achieved the impossible, by going above 100% of Carnot efficiency. As it is today, in our best performing thin film prototypes we still have difficulty measuring just how close we are to the ultimate Carnot efficiency. Concerning thick film designs, which do not have the high thin film conductivity feature, our research is progressing in sustaining the themoelectric voltages achieved by the DYNAMIC EXCITATION FEATURE and exploiting the gain by the use of the TRANSVERSE COMMUTATION FEATURE." ********** Concerning the latter comment about thick films, this was a theme which this author (H. Aspden) urged at the time (October 1989), but this was shortly before the R & D funding ceased and the test facilities closed when the other business interests of the sponsors failed. This author did, independently, seek to experiment with a small test unit in which thin nickel plates plated on both sides with copper were bonded into an integral assembly for resistance testing. It did not function as hoped when subjected to a small temperature differential. However, this was a first attempt at a time when thoughts were on the collapsing sponsorship and it later became evident that the test external circuit facility used lacked the necessary current capacity to cope with current oscillations at the requisite frequency and strength.
40 The test apparatus used was also unable to sustain a significant temperature gradient in the metal owing to metal thickness being too large and it had, at the time not occurred to this author that it would have been better to drive a moderate current oscillation through the structure and look for a cooling effect attributable to the Nernst action. Evenso, in this latter regard, the nickel sheet material used in these experiments would, with its copper plating, have posed the same problem that has now (1994) been encountered in a much larger test device, namely the fact that a multiple bimetallic interface in a series circuit can, without an initial temperature gradient to prime the action, avoid the Thomson Effect current diversion and thereby generate junction heating that is not segregated from the Peltier cooling. The author's current research which will be described in Energy Science Report No. 3 is now directed along a track which aims to overcome these particular problems in an effort to avoid transverse current excitation through a dielectric medium whilst constraining heat flow to be transverse to the current and EMF attributable to the Nernst Effect.
41 APPENDIX IV
The Strachan-Aspden Invention: Test Results [October 1989 Report] This report is a copy of the TEST REPORT presenting the status of the Strachan-Aspden Energy Converter project on 19th October 1989, as included in the 23rd October 1989 document. Introduction The device tested was built expressly to verify design criteria, essentially to check that we were right in eliminating certain design features present in the first demonstration device. The tests confirm our theoretical assumptions. In order not to alter too much in this stage of development, the same commercial bimetallic coated dielectric was used and the same physical dimensions of the thermocouple junction interfaces. These are not optimum, particularly concerning thickness of metal layers and possibly concerning choice of the actual metal combination as well as the length dimension between the thermal surfaces. However, whereas the operating frequency was 500 kHz with the first device, the present device runs at 18 - 25 kHz, depending upon load and voltage output rating. Such frequencies impose design constraints, which will not be a problem if we can build a noncapacitative device now predicted as a possibility using the verified design principles. The primary objective of the tests reported here is not to see whether the efficiency of the device assures its commercial viability as it stands, because we can certainly design to achieve a far better power rating and a simplified technique of fabrication. The objective is to measure the efficiency of the device for operation over a moderate range of ambient temperature, with atmospheric, geothermal and waste heat in mind as energy sources. The measure of efficiency and study of factors affecting efficiency are vital to projecting commercial applications and designing products for manufacture, especially concerning the Peltier mode for refrigeration and cooling and also for conjecturing products which store electrical energy as heat and regenerate electricity. The use of plastic film as a substrate for the bimetallic layers has limited the temperature range of the particular device
42 tested. Also, owing to the specific form of the electronic switch system built for the device, tests in the refrigeration (Peltier) mode did not prove viable for reasons in no way related to the device structure and measurements of efficiency of Peltier mode operation have been deferred. An overall performance figure, allowing for all circuit losses and output voltage transformation, which can be relied upon for conversion of heat to electricity with temperature differentials as low as 10 to 30 degrees Centigrade is 70% of Carnot efficiency. The Structure of the Test Device The device is constructed from 300 layers of 28 micron thick high dielectric constant plastic film as a substrate for sputtered junctions of two layers of metal, nickel and aluminium. Each layer had a width of 3 cm and a length of 0.25 cm, the width dimension and edge forming the surface interfacing with the heat exchange surfaces. The aluminium film was 0.02 micron thick and the nickel film 0.04 micron thick. These 300 layers therefore defined 300 junctions each having exposure to a hot and a cold face of the panel form of the assembled device. These were divided into 20 groups of 15, each group comprising 3 sub-groups of 5 layers. Each such sub-group is bounded by a layer of copper as an electrode for wiring the device into the chosen series/parallel configuration. Thus, in effect, there were 15 layers stacked to form a series capacitor unit and 20 such units were wired together to form a parallel connection of the capacitor units, ultimately having connection to an external circuit by two supply wires. The copper electrodes were narrower than the junction length to reduce their thermal conduction contribution to the heat path. The entire stack of 300 junction layers was bonded on to a ceramic powder composition base to give good heat coupling but to ensure electrical insulation from the heat sink base an upper aluminium sheet was bonded by an electrical insulating heat sink compound to the upper surface of the stack to form the other external heat surface. When a temperature differential is set up between these external heat surfaces there is a thermoelectric charging of each junction which contributes to the energy storage in the capacitor stack. Indeed, as a function of the temperature differential, the capacitor so formed has a greater effective capacitance than would be expected purely from calculation based on the dielectric constant and dimensions of the assembly. Typically, the capacitance can be of the order of 1.5 microfarad for this very compact assembly. The thermoelectric current acts to sustain the recharging of the stack as it is systematically charged and discharged by a fast operating switch unit. For the test to be
43 described this unit comprised five electronically controlled switches operating in parallel expressly to ensure that there is a minimal loss of electric potential, inasmuch as the EMF of a mere 15 junctions was being switched. The control of this switch bank involved a frequency generator input of negligible power. Note that it was a specific feature of the first prototype test device that it included a self-activated oscillator for switch control powered by the electric signal generated by the device. The action involved, therefore, can be seen as one involving deploying thermoelectric power into the charging of the capacitor stack and then, as fast as possible having regard to the recharging speed, transferring the stored energy to an output circuit by a cyclic switching operation. Subject to the capacitative delays and charge storage aspects, the action can also be seen as one involving circulating thermoelectric currents in the bimetallic layers with a superimposed transverse current flow through the capacitor. A high Q transformer winding is intermittently connected to the stack via the switches. This presents a low impedance into which the capacitor stack drops its thermoelectrically acquired charge. The secondary winding of the transformer then transforms the resulting voltage to a value which matches well with the load, both to give suitable measurement voltages and also to ensure that the load seen by the stack has a sufficiently low impedance to draw out the charge quickly. Note that the device has its own internal resistance and the load resistance has to draw most of the power. Measurement Criteria The device tested is a flat square metal-faced unit which has a pair of electrical input/output leads. Given a temperature differential across its metal faces an electrical power output is available. In terms of the heat input, this electrical output depends (a) upon the internal design structure of the device (which cannot be varied as part of the test) and (b) upon the manner in which the load circuit is electronically controlled. The latter control, though as just described working successively to charge and discharge the capacitor form of the device, also implements what we term 'dynamic current excitation' and this greatly enhances the power output. The A.C. power supplied is converted to D.C. and smoothed for measurement. The performance depends upon matching the load with the device to secure optimum output. Basically the test to be reported is very simple. By feeding in a sustained amount of heat, controlled by electrically powering a small resistor in a liquid heat bath, the task is to reconvert some of that heat back into electricity as D.C. in an output load at a steady voltage and current. This will give basis for precision tests on power in and power out, but to assess the result obtained it is important to have a very good measure of the temperatures of the two metal faces. The temperature measurement poses problems, because, firstly, we must beware
44 of any non-uniformity of temperature across the operative surfaces and, secondly, we must know the extent, if any, of any interference caused by the measuring device or probe. Earlier test results had been clouded by the problem that the bounding 1 mm thick aluminium plate was not able to buffer the heat distribution to assure a uniform temperature, given a concentrated heat source (electrically energized carbon resistors) on the external face. For this reason the initial measurements on the device described, which were unreliable in ranging from 50% to 100% of Carnot efficiency, according to test conditions, have been repeated using a stainless steel can containing water heated internally by a chain of four 10 ohm resistors. This can was specially built with a flat lower surface able to interface well with the heat surface of the device and was mounted thereon using heat conducting paste. Also, the whole structure was housed in a close fitting heat insulating container. The temperature measurements involved calibrated platinum resistance probes registered by a digital voltmeter and were from time to time confirmed with an alcohol thermometer. Peripheral Test Information It was not part of the test reported here to repeat certain experiments that were made in the earlier development stages. Nor could we measure directly the thermoelectric EMFs in the sections of the stack built into the device. During construction it was part of the discipline of the assembly procedure to test each part-assembly of five junction layers to verify insulation and be sure that it was performing with the power of 2 millivolts per degree Centigrade when subjected to dynamic excitation. Any that did not match the uniformity requirements were rejected. However, as will be seen, the test data do tell us that this thermoelectric EMF is at work in the operating device because the output EMF from a stack is measured and the voltage at the output terminals is roughly equal to the internally produced thermoelectric EMF times the measured efficiency relative to the Carnot limit. This also means that the current output as a measure of junction current relates by this total thermal power to the potentials active at the junctions and so gives a measure of the thermoelectric power in the device. This thermoelectric power is the crucial factor in our onward design of any products. It was 400 microvolts per degree Centigrade per junction pair in the above device and this applied to the thin film (0.02 micron aluminium on 0.04 micron nickel) assembly. The two metals had no intervening metal; they were vapour deposited. In contrast, earlier tests had shown that a stack of metal plates of iron and nickel of sub-millimeter thickness with
45 soldered junctions gave a thermoelectric power per junction of 118 microvolts per degree centigrade with dynamic current excitation. Given that we can reasonably expect iron and aluminium to present similar thermoelectric action when forming junctions with nickel, the question we need to resolve is whether that gap between 118 microvolts and 400 microvolts is due to the thin film aspect in the vapour deposited case or the adverse effect of the intermediate solder in the thick film test case. The most important test data of interest, therefore, at this time and before products are designed and manufacture evaluated, are (a) the actual efficiency for limited ambient temperature use of the device already constructed, and (b) the thermoelectric power of a thick metal junction assembly with no solder connections. This report addresses the first of these issues and the next report will deal with our findings on the other question. The onward test programme must relate to the factors such as optimum film thickness and dielectric thickness in the vapour-deposited/capacitor system or thickness of a thick film version, optimum electronic design and excitation frequency as well as waveform profiles, choice of metals, structural dimensions (panel thickness) and electrical insulation/heat conducting spacing material at the interface of the external metal surfaces and the junction assembly. The Test Data These tests were performed independently by Scott Strachan and Harold Aspden during different periods in October 1989. The Strachan tests were performed between 10th October and 12th October. The test results obtained by Aspden on 17th and 18th are those listed in Tables II and IV. The test apparatus is as shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1
46 Application of heat energy is via the medium of heated (or cooled) water in a container on the upper heat exchange surface and use of a commercial heat sink base at room temperature replicated conditions which would apply to production devices. The cold underside can be considered to be at an even temperature because it is mounted on a massive heat sink with a recognized high heat dissipation capacity. The water heat sink provided a uniform temperature interface and this temperature was measured by a commercial platinum resistance temperature probe calibrated to give a measure of temperature via a digital voltmeter. A similar and separate heat probe was used to measure the temperature on the surface of the base heat sink. Owing to heat transfer through the device, albeit mainly via the electrical conversion route, as Peltier cooling occurs at one face and Peltier heating at the other, it is inevitable that the actual temperatures at the working interfaces of the device will be slightly lower than the hot temperature measured and slightly hotter than the cold temperature measured. This means that the true efficiency relative to Carnot will be just a little greater than that calculated using the measured temperatures. No allowance is made for this in the test data, because the temperature drops involved would be present in an engineered installation and so the test results give an overall measure of effective efficiency which can be regarded as representative of commercial conditions. Preliminary Tests The following tests were conducted under steady-state conditions, that is, the rate of heat input was pre-set and temperature readings as well as electrical power output readings were made only after the system had stabilized. TABLE I
TEST No. 1 2 3 4 5 HEAT INPUT Volts Amps Watts 6.64 9.16 0.179 0.244 OUTPUT TO 1 OHM Volts Watts TEMPERATURE EFF. T' 33.8 40.4 47.5 53.4 62.2 T 20.0 20.6 20.8 21.0 23.0 % 30 56 73 64 44
1.19 0.125 0.016 2.23 0.280 0.079 3.34 0.450 0.202 4.25 0.520 0.270
11.22 0.298 12.60 0.337
19.00 0.530 10.07 0.720 0.518
**************
The above readings were the first set of readings to be made on the device under proper laboratory test conditions using electronic test circuitry that was designed to operate
47 essentially with power output voltage above 0.3 volts, which is a nominal threshold for effective operation of the germanium diodes used to rectify an A.C. output. For this reason, attention centres on tests No. 3 and 4. Concerning test No. 5, this fell short in measuring true efficiency for reasons to be discussed below, owing to a heat dissipation problem which set in above 55 degrees Centigrade and upset the measurement on the input side. Immediately, however, one can verify the design assumptions by considering the ideal 100% of Carnot condition if applied to test No. 3. This would require all the heat energy input at the hot side to convert to electric power given by Ni, Where N is the number of junctions (300), is the Peltier coefficient and is the temperature of the hot junction in Kelvin (320). With as 400 microvolts per degree, this gives an input power of (38.4)i watts. Now, i is the junction current and we regard this also as external current, subject to allowance for the series/parallel junction combination and the transformer ratio. In effect, therefore, the 100% of Carnot situation can only occur if the heat power supplied at 320K is precisely such that it is 3.34 watts, which corresponds to a junction current of 87 milliamps. This flows in each of 20 parallel circuits to suggest a total current of 1.74 amps would suffice to carry all the heat input through as electricity. This checks with the measured current of 0.450 amps if allowance is made for the 5:1 transformer ratio. In fact, this measure is 2.25 amps compared with 1.74 amps needed for 100% efficiency and this is 77% agreement (cf. the 73% of Carnot efficiency measured). This is very good agreement, also bearing in mind that the 400 V/K thermoelectric power can be effectively diminished by parasitic current flow owing to the 20 parallel-connected circuits in the device and may need some offset for the partial action of the component added by the Thomson effect. The latter does not contribute to the Peltier heating and cooling at the junction proper, but does drive current as part of the thermoelectric power. The measurements of current output in relation to heat input fit remarkably well and confirm the high thermoelectric power, of 400 V/K, that had been measured on a test basis as each five-junction part-assembly was built into the device. It had been foreseen from theory that about 260 V/K would be true thermoelectric power and about 170 V/K could be due to Thomson effect. Therefore, a 60-70% effciency factor might imply a measured output voltage of the order of 250 V/K. In test No. 3 the 0.450 volts came from a 26.7 degree differential and 15 junctions in series with a 5:1 transformer ratio. This works out as a junction EMF of 225 V/K. Concerning the drop of efficiency as more heat is fed into the device (test No. 5) it is found that the apparatus begins to lose heat from evaporation as bubbles form around the heater. This loss of heat is such that the apparent performance drops appreciably with increasing temperature. However, this is an artefact of the way in which the heat input is measured by the electrical heating of water. Evaporation on the input side of the device
48 cannot be a fair factor in the test, which is only viable provided bubbles are not formed in the test heat input source or the latent heat carried away by those bubbles is somehow accounted for. Load resistance versus internal resistance The value of the load resistance, given a variable heat input rate, is an important consideration. The heat input determines the operating temperature and this, in its turn, determines the output EMF. The load resistor and this EMF determine the current output, but for optimum operation it is necessary for this current output to be the full junction current. It is possible for some junction current to be internally diverted by closed loop circulation between the metals forming a bimetallic layer. Such circulation would transfer energy from the hot to the cold junctions without the Carnot component being diverted for use in the external load circuit. However, the test bears out an assumption which emerged in the development of the 'cold spot' theory of the device. The expectation from this was that, at least when operating in the Seebeck mode under test, the dynamic current excitation developing the enhanced thermoelectric power would drive the junction current exclusively through the external circuit. On this basis, the only load matching consideration is how the internal resistance of the device relates to the load resistance in contributing to ohmic losses. For the 1 ohm load condition of test No. 3 we can interpret the output of 0.450 volts as a measure of 0.090 volts on the input side of the 5:1 transformer. This is the output of 15 junction pairs and, for the temperature differential of 26.7 degrees, it implies that a thermoelectric power of 225 V/K has reached the load circuit. Bearing in mind that a 400 V/K thermoelectric power is known to be potentially active and that the 1 ohm load is a 0.04 ohm load on the input side of the transformer (owing to the squared effect of the 5:1 transformer ratio), this suggests that the internal load resistance is 0.03 ohms if there is no loss of potential. A value of 0.02 ohms is calculated from knowledge of the resistance of the commercial material used to build the device (see comment on this which follows) and this is probably the true value. Such resistance applies if virtually all the external current is flowing by snaking action through the thermoelectric junctions with very little internal closed loop flow detracting from that performance. These considerations tend to confirm the design assumptions used. The internal ohmic heat loss is then estimated from the measured external current 0.450 amps, which scales to 2.25 amps for the input side of the transformer and this current in 0.02 ohms implies an ohmic heat loss of 0.10 watts. This can be reconciled with the 0.202 watt output with an estimated 70% of Carnot efficiency, much as is deduced for test No. 3, especially as some of the ohmic heating at 0.10 watts is available for regeneration of electricity.
49 This discussion really aims to assess the scope for increasing efficiency further by future design which reduces internal resistance, it being important to understand the factors affecting performance in the design under test. It now remains to reconcile the relatively low efficiency of test No. 1, for example, with that of test No. 3. This is easily explained simply because the germanium diodes used in the bridge rectifier connected to the transformer output absorb energy, becoming good conductors only as the forward voltage across them rises above 0.3 volts. This will present no problem in production thermo-electric devices because many more junctions than 15 will be connected in series and this will result in high performance relative to the Carnot limit, even with the low temperature differentials represented by test No. 1. However, in the verifying tests to be reported below, this will be checked in view of the importance of applications working with quite low temperature differentials. Calculation of internal resistance The efficiency necessarily depends upon the internal resistance of the device. This may be calculated approximately using the fact that the 0.1 ohm per square specification of the bimetallic layer arises from parallel flow through 0.2 ohm per square of nickel and 0.2 ohm per square of aluminium. The device involves series flow through 300 bimetallic layers of width 3 cm and length 0.25 cm, but the current will not follow the longest route. This is somewhat less than 0.03 ohms per layer. The layers were connected 15 in series and 20 in parallel and this implies a total internal resistance somewhat less than 0.75 times 0.03 ohms or, say, 0.02 ohms. This is the value estimated from the measurement data reported above. Verification Tests These tests were performed by H. Aspden on 17th and 18th October. The first set of tests reported in Table II concentrated on the peak range of efficiency indicated by Table I. It was found that even a small change of heat input rate meant waiting for between 20 and 30 minutes to secure temperature equilibrium. The latter is vital to proper measurement of temperature. The temperature readings are believed to be correct to within 0.05 degrees Centigrade and, as far as can be judged, any error from making measurement at a surface point slightly offset from the actual operative thermal interfaces would mean that the efficency values obtained are 'worst case'. It is, therefore, felt that the efficiencies now registered are reliable in indicating what can be achieved in a commercial installation. TABLE II
TEST No. HEAT INPUT Volts Amps Watts OUTPUT TO 1 OHM Volts Watts TEMPERATURE EFF. T' T %
50
6 7 8 9 10 11 9.50 0.253 2.40 10.00 0.266 2.66 10.50 0.279 2.93 12.00 0.318 3.82 13.00 0.345 4.48 14.00 0.371 5.19 0.300 0.090 0.340 0.116 0.375 0.141 0.490 0.240 0.545 0.297 0.565 0.320 41.9 42.8 45.1 49.4 54.0 55.0 18.6 18.8 19.3 20.2 20.6 20.9 51 57 59 69 65 59
These tests reported in Tables I and II are characterized by the use of electrically heated water as the thermal input source, as opposed to an electrically heated metal interface. The object was to get more uniformity of temperature and so a precise indication of the true temperature. However, above 55 degrees Centigrade the water loses heat rapidly owing to vaporization and then the measure of heat input rate fails to indicate true efficiency. The tests certainly reveal that efficiency of heat to electricity conversion of 70% of the Carnot level is a reasonable expectation with temperature differentials in the 30-40 degree range close to ambient conditions, but this is further supported by the tests in Table IV. Based on test No. 10 a check was made of the effect of changing the dynamic excitation frequency. The operating frequency for the data in Tables I and II was 18 kHz. This had been chosen for optimum tuning of the circuits. As might be expected, there was a drop off in efficiency with reduction of frequency. The data given in Table III apply. TABLE III
TEST FREQ. THERMAL INPUT No. kHz 10 11 12 18 14 10 Watts 4.48 4.48 4.48 POWER OUTPUT Volts Watts 0.545 0.297 0.530 0.281 0.495 0.245 ************ TEMPERATURES T' 54.0 54.0 54.0 T 20.6 20.6 20.6 EFF. % 65 61 53
This test does not mean that the frequency has to be of the order of 18 kHz to obtain the highest efficiencies from the dynamic excitation. It is just that the capacitor structure of the particular test device with its transformer inductance and self-inductance has an optimum switching frequency. A problem ahead is to assess the best frequency for dynamic excitation giving the highest thermoelectric EMFs and then design the device so that the capacitance and inductance match this operating frequency.
51 The next set of experiments involved a change in the transformer from the one used in the above tests which had a 5:1 ratio to a new one with an 8.5:1 ratio. This required a 25 kHz excitation frequency for best response, owing to the change in inductance on the primary side. The object of this change was to explore the loss of output power for very low temperature differentials, which loss resulted from a threshold cut-off in the germanium diode bridge rectifier circuit used to produce smoothed D.C. from the transformer output. The problem faced was due to the A.C. output waveform being of the form shown in Fig. 2. As the signal amplitude increases, more and more of the signal rises above the operating threshold of the diodes and, to get a realistic efficiency measure, substantially all of the signal has to lie above the threshold.
Fig. 2 The sole purpose of the following tests in Table IV was to check to be 100% sure that we still have an efficient converter using the temperature differentials of Test No. 1. This test has given 30% of Carnot efficiency with a 13.8 degree differential but the output voltage was below the diode threshold for a significant part of the dynamic excitation cycle. By stepping TABLE IV
TEST No. 13 14 HEAT INPUT Volts Amps Watts 8.48 6.20 0.226 1.92 0.168 1.04 OUTPUT TO 2 OHM Volts Watts 0.400 0.080 0.255 0.032 ************* TEMPERATURE T' 38.3 32.8 T 18.8 18.8 EFF. % 66 67
the voltage output up by the greater transformer ratio, a greater portion of the signal becomes effective in overcoming the bias in the diodes. These data clearly show that the comparable results for tests Nos. 1 and 2 suffer from the diode cut-off, that the problem has been easily overcome by output circuit redesign and
that efficiencies of 66% plus relative to the Carnot level are to be expected as the operating norm of the Strachan-Aspden converter, even when the temperature differential is only a few degrees. Tests using iced water It was possible to cool the heat sink base by immersion in a tray of iced water and hold the upper heat surface of the device at ambient temperature. The results (power output for a given temperature differential) were fully in accord with the performance just reported for similar small temperature differentials. The ice test of the first prototype device holds up in that electricity can be produced by melting ice. Such tests, however, do not give a measure of efficiency because the rate at which the ice is melting is difficult to measure. However, the efficiency must be as indicated in the tests of this report, because the device and its circuit only 'see' temperatures at the working heat surfaces. Conclusions The tests reported above are definitive tests on a Strachan-Aspden device using thin film thermoelectric techniques with dynamic excitation and transverse commutation in a capacitative assembly. The tests aimed at determining efficiency. The efficiency results were typically 6570% of Carnot level for differentials of temperature in the ambient range. The power rating measured in heat throughput rate was 2 kilowatts per square meter for a 20 degree temperature differential. The corresponding electric power generation with this very low temperature differential is 80 watts per square meter. However, efficiency, rather than throughput power, was the purpose of these tests and it is important to remember that the working metal involved in the test device is interfacing over only one part in 1000 of the total area of the heat input surface. As we adjust the metal film thickness relative to the dielectric and conceivably eliminate the dielectric, the full design potential can be exploited. It is such that the technology of the device can cope with any practical level of heat input per unit area that available heat sources (or heat transfer materials) can supply at the operating temperatures specified. Concerning tests in Peltier mode, meaning input of electricity to cause heat transfer between the heat surfaces, this was not possible with the specific design of excitation control circuitry of the device just tested. The first prototype incorporated a self-tuning circuit which could adjust to give the best dynamic switching rate. Such tests will be performed but until they have been performed either on the subject device or other implementations we cannot pronounce on the efficiency for Peltier mode operation. Our feeling is that it will be high, but perhaps not as high as for electrical power generation in Seebeck mode. However, high efficiency is more important for electrical
53 power generation applications and an outlook of 70% of Carnot with more expected from production designs is very good indeed. Footnote Much of the research effort between February 1989 and July 1989 involved efforts to fully understand the relative roles of the factors which contributed to the working of the first prototype. It was a set back that an attempt at partial reassembly of that device to test efficiency had caused its destruction by internal shorting owing to chemical penetration. However, the new device, built in July-August 1989 period and modified according to the results of that research, now verify the design assumptions and have yielded the efficiency data. Thick-metal-film test converters are now under construction and once the tests on these are complete we will be in a position to project how best to proceed to a product stage. Our patent position has been brought into line with these recent findings so that our main international cover will relate directly to design variations centred on the structure incorporated in the test device discussed in this report. Such cover also caters for what is expected to be a successful outcome on the thick-film embodiments. H. Aspden: 22nd October 1989 ************ The above test report describes the status of a research test at a time when the interest centred on measurement of efficiency. In the diagnostic research phase which followed it was realised that there was a gain in performance that came from the Thomson effect driving current along the thin film by heat action. One did not need to generate electricity to sustain the full measure of current flowing and thereby eat into some of the useful power generated. The problem, however, with the capacitative device was that the transverse current carried through the capacitor stack which was powered directly by the Peltier EMF was no doubt a distributed current across the section of the stack. In this case the capacitor implementation must involve joule heating owing to some current flow in the thin section of the metal film, as allowed for in the above analysis. However, then the current traversing the junctions in the transverse direction is not concentrated at the edges of the bimetallic layers, as it could be in a modified noncapacitative implementation. The actual efficiency of the capacitor device found under these circumstances is quite remarkable and is at the limit of the what is conceivable from Peltier action owing to the temperature profile across the junction interface. Bear in mind that the temperature governing the Peltier action is not exclusively that at the
54 edges. This suggests that there is some other action involved in the device which contributes to enhancing the efficiency. Research into this question points to a thermal feedback effect connected either with the Nernst Effect or with free electron diamagnetism, meaning a thermodynamically powered gyromagnetic reaction set up in conduction electrons in metals in opposition to the magnetizing effect arising from the Thomson effect circulating currents in the metal films. The updating of this research report will therefore need to examine the theoretical factors involved and the very different design considerations which apply if one makes connection between the bimetallic films by metal conductive edge contact only, without the circuit path being through charge oscillations in a capacitor dielectric. Such a report update also may need to include an examination of the research implications if one designs the converter to over-excite the thermal feedback action, assuming that such an action is really adding to that efficiency. In principle these later developments point to a very much greater performance potential, having regard to the fact that we are exploiting temperature gradients in metal with transverse current excitation and not a power current flow through metal directly between junctions at different temperatures.
55 APPENDIX V The Stachan-Aspden Invention: Thermodynamic Power Anomaly [October 1989 Report]
D.C. THERMOELECTRIC POWER ANOMALY The Strachan-Aspden invention shows that thermoelectric EMFs far greater than are expected from conventional textbook data are effective with A.C. operation. The reason for this needs to be understood in order to give one a measure of confidence in advancing the R & D effort needed to exploit this newly-discovered phenomenon. The following scientific paper, which has not been published elsewhere, deals with this question. ABSTRACT The discrepancy between the theoretical and measured thermoelectric power of bimetallic thermocouples is explained on the assumption that current flow across the junction occurs in filamentary surges which concentrate the heating and cooling effects and so distort the effective temperature differential. The basic theory used conforms with that of more classical treatments, inasmuch as modern theory has adapted to cope with semiconductor materials which exhibit temperature effects quite different from those found in base metals. ****** The theoretical thermodynamic value of the Peltier coefficient is shown by Ehrenberg [1] to be: ( kT n) )log( ) e n (2)
where k is Boltzmann's constant, T is the junction temperature, e is the electron charge and n', n are the population densities of the free electrons in the two metals forming the junction.
56 The thermoelectric power of an individual junction is the same expression without the T term, being an EMF per degree of temperature. In Table III of this Ehrenberg text [1] a tabulation shows the measured values of the thermoelectric power for various base metals referenced on the metal sodium. The data show that the discrepancy between the caluculated and measured values is a factor of 15 for Ag and Au, a factor of 21 for Cu, 51 for Al and 6 for Ni. Ehrenberg also deduces theoretical values for the Thomson coefficient, which makes an additional contribution to the thermoelectric effect and is a function of the rate of change of free electron density with temperature. Ehrenberg does not compare theory and experiment in this case. In view of the potential benefits of efficient thermocouple devices in refrigeration avoiding the use of polluting CFC chemicals, there is now a pressing need to understand the fundamental reason for this discrepancy. The following investigation is part of an ongoing commercial research study into this problem, which has already revealed techniques by which to close the gap between the calculated and measured thermoelectric power, particularly for an Al-Ni thermocouple. Equation (4) is derived on the thermodynamic assumption of a thermal pressure balance as between electrons in both metals. If, as with certain semiconductor thermocouple junctions, there are positive (p) and negative (n) charge carriers in the different conductors, the Peltier coefficient need not depend upon the ratio of carrier densities. If p-n annihilation occurs at one junction and p-n creation at the other, the current-related thermodynamic energy exchange is more consistent with a thermoelectric power corresponding to a Peltier coefficient of 3kT/e. Upon annihilation, for example, two carriers merge, each transferring its individual thermal energy 3kT/2 into electrical power, and so developing a net EMF E related to an energy Ee equated to 3kT. For the Al-Ni combination, using equation (4), Ehrenberg [1] assumed a carrier density ratio of 21, which gives a logarithmic factor of 3.04. This implied a thermoelectric power of 265 microvolts per degree centigrade. Since then, however, carrier polarity data for the Hall effect, as revised, suggests that the Al-Ni thermocouple may have a thermoelectric power related to the p-n condition, which coincidentally gives virtually the same value. Thus, the very substantial discrepancies between observation and theory noted by Ehrenberg still apply, even for this Al-Ni metal combination. It is possible that, though a predominant free electron population exists in a metal conductor, the electrical conduction properties are not, at every instant, related to the shared action of all the electrons. Imagine, for example, that the charges carrying current tend to concentrate their ordered motion collectively into a transiently relocating filamentary in-line flow through the conductor. This filament, which may comprise short and transiently discontinuous current elements, corresponding to charge concentrations, breaks up to be
57 replaced by another such filament elsewhere so that, on average over a period of time, the flow appears uniformly distributed across the section of the conductor. In a sense, this physical picture is easy to justify because the electrons following at speed in the same direction along a common line, one behind the other, are less likely to be scattered by collisions. Of course, such speculation has little value unless supported by tangible evidence. Force-free vortex filaments which appear on a nanosecond time scale feature in plasma research [2] and have led to analysis of the density and velocity distribution profiles of electrons and positrons in filaments [3]. However, so far as solid conductors are concerned, this filamentary action is not something that can easily be established. It may emerge from research into the properties of 'warm' superconductors or from research on the thermoelectric anomalies under discussion. Firstly, with the plasma aspect in mind, it is known that the arc discharge in mercury arc rectifiers develops discrete cathode spots on the surface of the mercury pool. This means that the current divides into separate flows. These spots meander around but there is some mechanism by which the discharge breaks into discrete filaments of the order of 15-20 A in strength, as if this represents some critical current factor defining a single current filament. Secondly, extensive researches by Hildebrandt [4,5] have shown that current as high as 30-40 A will divide between two separate anode-cathode discharge paths, with anti-phase modulation at a period of 15 ns, and that this effect is not caused by resonant circuit properties but is an inherent property of the conductive medium. Thus, in a plasma at least, this is consistent with a preferred filamentary current state in which the carrier flow is involved in what may be termed an 'inverse avalanche effect' as the conduction action concentrates into fewer carriers in a filament with a 15-20 A critical maximum current for continuous in-line flow. It is now noted, without particular elaboration, that if a train of electrons form in line at equal spacing and move together to convey current along that line, then, if each one steps forward to the position of the electron ahead at the Compton electron frequency, the current carried is 19.79 A. This is simply ec/c, where e is electron charge in coulombs, c is the speed of light and c is the Compton wavelength. This is such a basic physical quantity that we must indeed by very attentive to any scientific phenomenon which happens to point to a 20 A current threshold. It suggests a limiting value for the amount of current which can flow in a single filament. It suggests that current may be conveyed even through metal conductors in a burst mode in which it involves short filamentary current elements having a 20 A intensity over lengths reduced as necessary in proportion to the average current flowing through the metal.
58 More important, however, is the fact that such a current with electrons really in line at spacings as close as their classical diameters would imply a velocity of electron motion in the current direction of the order of the Fermi velocity of an electron gas. We assume this is possible, notwithstanding the classical Coulomb repulsion effects, embracing to some extent the idea that what is involved is electron displacement from electrically-neutral sites, as if electrons alternate with positive holes or as if electrons and positrons moving in opposite direction somehow carry the current. This proposition then suggests that a Fermi velocity, which is not a function of temperature, in some way powers the action. For a given metal this means that the electron speed along a filament is constant and that filaments of lower current strength than 20 A either comprise electrons or holes at proportionally greater spacing or what are, effectively, short discontinuous filamentary components. Possibly, filamentary vortex loops of circuital current may form, occasionally opening up to carry current forward through the conductor before reforming as closed loops. Conceivably, therefore, even in a metal containing a high free electron density, the current flow might, at any instant, be carried by but a few of these electrons and even, given a relatively few mobile carriers, allow the positive 'holes' to make a current contribution by favouring a flow route which causes some ordering and displacement of the holes to set up current filaments nucleated by positive charge carriers. Now consider such a current filament as traversing a bimetallic junction interface in a thermocouple. The Peltier heating or cooling will be concentrated in an extremely small spot defined by the zone taken up by the filament. Thus the temperature of that spot, which determines the Peltier coefficient cannot be the mean temperature we measure for the junction interface as a whole. Depending upon the relaxation time needed to cause the filament to relocate, the effective temperature active in determining thermoelectric power can be very different from that assumed. A concentrated cooling effect at a spot in a junction interface must increase the electrical conductivity in the region of the spot and this alone could develop a crossing point of least resistance, which would tend to keep the current trapped in that position. An exception to this can be expected in certain semiconductors and alloys over temperature ranges for which resistivity may decrease with increase in temperature. Indeed, such materials tend to be those used in advanced thermocouple research, which itself implies that here lies the weakness of normal metals from the viewpoint of their application to thermocouples. The Peltier coefficient is measured by supplying a controlled amount of heat to a junction cooled by the Peltier effect, based on a technique developed by Calendar [6]. For Peltier cooling the governing equation is easily formulated as:
59 )i ' x 4Kx 2 (3)
This merely represents the gradient of temperature with spherical symmetry with respect to distance x from the point of action, given that K is the heat conductivity (assumed the same for both metals). is the thermoelectric power (volts/oC), ' is the absolute temperature and i is the mean current. When solved this gives: ' o & )i/4Kx (4)
The minus sign would be replaced by a plus sign if the current direction corresponded to Peltier heating. We define a mean least value of x as xo and, for ease of rough calculation, estimate this as the distance from the centre to the side of a square area of a cross section of filament. Thus, assuming N electrons per unit length of filament with n as the electron density: n ' N/(2xo)2 (5)
We further equate the energy of self inductance of the filament with the kinetic energy of the electrons, so that: 1 2 1 Li ' (N)( mv 2) 2 2 (6)
where L is the standard calculable inductance 0.5x10-7 henries per metre, m is electron mass 9.1x10-31 kg and v is electron speed. From (7) and (8): i/xo ' v (2nm/L) (7)
60 The temperature difference between the mean junction temperature o and the temperature ' is then 'i/4Kxo and, putting this in (5) gives: /x ' (xo/x 2)(o&)) (8)
The actual temperature effective at the junction, and the mean junction temperature, change and so scale in proportion. indeed, from (6): )(1 % i/4Kxo) ' o (9)
From (9) this becomes: o/) ' 1 % (v/4K) 2nm/L (10)
This means that this expression represents the factor by which the measured thermoelectric power or Peltier coefficient will underestimate the true value which really governs the thermodynamic action. It is believed that v is independent of temperature, as already stated, and that it is also independent of current strength, inasmuch as N is the variable corresponding to effective current. We may use Fermi-Dirac statistics to estimate v, but the result is much the same if we appeal intuitively to the threshold current condition I = ec/c and estimate v as given by equation (8) when N is 2.66 1014 per metre. This corresponds to a line of electrons spaced by their classical diameter, as calculated using the formula of J. J. Thomson, a saturation condition that is relevant because the diameter was calculated by J. J. Thomson by equating kinetic energy with electromagnetic energy in the magnetic field. It is found from this that v is 284 km/s. To estimate the factor (6) insert typical values for copper, eg. n = 1.3 1029/m3 and K = 400 watts-m/oC to find that the factor becomes: 1 % 0.12 (11)
if is expressed in microvolts per degree C.

61 Writing now the measured thermoelectric power as , we know that the factor just deduced is /, so that if is 144, as calculated by Ehrenberg for copper at 17o C, the measured value of which we 'think' is a measured value of does, from (13), work out at 7.9. Somewhat similar results apply to Ag and Au, which have smaller n value and so a similar theoretical value, but much the same K value. Note that equation (13) based on n being 60% that of copper and being 100, say, gives as 9.7. Ehrenberg gives, for Ag, Cu and Au, experimental values of that range from 6.9 to 7.2 microvolts per degree C, whereas the theoretical values range from 99 to 144 per degree C. This, therefore, is fairly well in line with the interpretation offered here. Considering aluminium, for which referenced on sodium, in theory, is 183, n is greater than for copper by the factor 1.6, K is measured as 210, and as measured is 3.6 in the same units. The same argument leads, via equation (12)) to an equation (10) factor 1 + 0.29 or a theoretical value of 3.4. Thus, even for aluminium, for which the thermoelectric power discrepancy between textbook theory and experiment is a factor of 51, we see that the interpretation provided here reduces the discrepancy to a point where theory and experiment are virtually in full accord. It is submitted that the filamentary current proposition discussed is highly relevant to thermoelectric action. As intimated above, commercial research aimed at reducing and, indeed, virtually eliminating the discrepancy in practical thermocouple circuits is proving successful. The secret is to use a.c. to prevent cold spots from forming and so choking off the thermoelectric power, this being a d.c. current symptom peculiar to metal thermocouples as opposed to semiconductors. REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] W. Ehrenberg, 'Electric Conduction in Semiconductors and Metals' (Clarendon Press, Oxford), pp. 21-23 (1956). D. R. Wells, IEEE Trans. Plasma Science, 17, 270 (1989). V. Nardi, Phys. Rev. Lett., 25, 718 (1970). J. Hildebrandt, Physics Letters, 95A, 365 (1983). J. Hildebrandt, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 16, 1023 (1983). H. L. Callendar, Proc. Phys, Soc. Lond., 23, 1 (1910).
APPENDIX VI
62 THERMOELECTRIC EXPERIMENTAL DEVICE CONSTRUCTION The following is a copy of a text written by John Scott Strachan dated February 9, 1994 transmitted to U.S. researchers and project engineers as briefing material for non-confidential discussions held in Edinburgh, Scotland later that month. It contains details concerning Strachan's fabricaton of the original test device of which this author had no prior knowledge and it is evident from this information that there is no easy and immediate route to developing this technology using the methods adopted by Strachan. This will therefore explain why Strachan has switched his attentions to other projects, leaving this author to pursue this thermoelectric research along lines closer to his own original perceptions of the invention which avoid use of PVDF substrate film. ****** Strachan's account dated February 9, 1994: The original device discovery happened accidentally and was the result of the construction of an ultrasonic lithotriptor. At the time Dr. Aspden and I were discussing the concepts of thermoelectricity and were trying to conceive methods of reducing the thermal wastage in such devices. I had constructed a few experimental samples but with little success. At the same time I was working on an idea for a sonic 'laser', a device to progressively amplify a travelling wavefront in a transducer with a view to creating a high intensity ultrasonic pulse from a low acoustic impedance. The goal was to produce an intense compression pulse from a low acoustic impedance source for the delivery of a focused shatter pulse in kidney stones. The resultant 'sonic laser' units were to be placed in an array which would allow phase steering of the wavefront and the changing intensity in three dimensions to produce a versatile triptic pattern. This would allow the destruction of stones down to 1 mm in size with very little heating of the surrounding tissue. The further advantage of the low impedance of the source would be the ability of the array to 'listen' to the shattering of the stones and intelligently follow the crack growth with the peak intensity of the wave. Had the project been successful it would have reduced the treatment time for gall and kidney stones by a factor of ten or more and the lithotriptor itself would have had a market value of more that $100,000. The device consisted of several stacks of high k PVF2 in a column, with an electronic circuit set to trigger a compressive pulse in phase with a pulse travelling through the stack, in order to synchronise the circuit and cope with the variations in acoustic impedance of the
63 adhesives. I interleaved the PVDF layers with layers of recording tape. Thus, as the compressive wave passed through the stack, the motion of the recording tape could be detected in the next layer as a fluctuating voltage. As such, it could be used to trigger the next pulse in perfect phase, since the speed of the electromagnetic signal allowed advanced warning to the trigger circuit of the approaching acoustic wave. It was a really neat idea and I was very proud of it! The device worked well for brief instants but kept blowing the drive circuit. This seemed to occur when the stack was touched on one side. Since I had been thinking about thermoelectric devices and the stack resembled vaguely some of the ideas I had of trying to create a capacitatively-coupled thermopile (later it was proved that such a thing is inherently impossible)*, I wondered if there might be a thermoelectric explanation for the stack's strange behaviour. The construction of the stack was as follows. Materials: (a) (b) (c) (d) 28 M PVF2, (D33 = 27, k = 18) having bimetallic coating of Ni and Al (Ni = 2200 angstrom, Al = 800 angstrom) and a resistivity less than 0.1 ohm per square. BASF metal recording tape poled manually in line with the long axis. ZAP ethyl cyanoacrylate adhesive (formula unknown).
One strip 2.5 mm x 2.5 mm x thickness resonance 2MHz PZT 5a lead zirconate ceramic with silver electrodes. __________________________________________________________________ * This statement with its brackets is made in the February 9 1994 account by Strachan but the 'impossibility' relates to a thermopile involving only the Peltier Effect because the 'proof' amounts to saying that as much electric charge flows in one direction as in the other and so must cause at least as much heating at either junction as cooling. This has now to be viewed in a different context because the Thomson Effect introduces bias as between the junctions of each thermocouple pair and once the Nernst-Ettinghausen Effect becomes operative, particularly where one or both metals are ferromagnetic. [This footnote by H. Aspden]. 10 layers of super-hard acrylic machined to a thickness such that the acoustic delay is equal to a half wavelength at the resonant frequency of the ceramic strip. A suitable material is available from Aerotech Laboratories in California.
(e)
64 Unfortunately, I do not have a detailed specification on this as the material I used was part of a free sample sent to Dick Ferren of Pennwalt Corporation. The sound velocity in PVF2 is 2.2 mm per s. The BASF tape and the PVF2 were then treated with a 2% solution of tetra butyl titanate in petroleum ether to improve bonding. This process must be carried out in an arid atmosphere and then the surfaces should be exposed to a humidity of 100% or greater at a temperature of 40oC. The process is extremely tricky since, if moisture is present before the evaporation of the petroleum ether, the titanium will not bind through the metal layer on to the PVF2 or mylar. This can be diagnosed by the white powdery appearance of the surface. If successful the surface will exbibit a slight iridescence. Once the petroleum ether evaporates and the iridescence is present the exposure to humid atmosphere takes place. This will sometimes produce a slight trace of the powdery surface but this may be washed off in petroleum ether or toluene. DO NOT USE ISOPROYL ALCOHOL!!! Cyanoacrylate will not polymerise in the presence of protons, i.e. at any pH below 7 the surface of PVDF will release free protons in the presence of isopropyl alcohol and thus prevent secure bonding. The titanate layer helps to maintain a surface pH above 7 in a moderately dry atmosphere but can not fight the catalysis of the propyl groups in the alcohol.
Fig. 1 Layered composition of laminate formed The greater the care taken at this stage, the more chance of success later. Every single strip should be examined before lamination for any signs of wear on the surface or any trace of white titanate. Failure to do this will virtually guarantee delamination the instant any voltage is applied. This process is time consuming and the several thousand strips will take several weeks to laminate, even working ten to twelve hours a day. But skimping the preparation means that there is no chance of creating any percentage of intact stacks and the entire effort will be entirely wasted. The lamination jig surfaces should be positively charged PTFE. The layers may be added one by one for a period of time equal to one quarter of the
65 anaerobic cure time of the ethyl cyanocrylate. Then a press is applied at a pressure of between 1 and 6 tonnes whilst an ammonia atmosphere is blown past the stack to catalyse curing. Then the process is continued. Time is the main enemy. Since each layer must be examined and the quarter cure time is typically 30 seconds, this is a very intensely stressful process. I managed to complete only one stack on the first day and had scrapped nearly a thousand layers in the process. Practice improved the situation. The PVF2 and the BASF tape were laminated together layer by layer to reach a thickness of 0.55 mm, i.e. half at 2MHz. This process was repeated until a large number of stacks were produced. Next a 5,000 volt supply was connected across each stack and those that vaporised were discarded. A suitable breathing apparatus should be worn during this process since the fluorine gas emitted as the PVDF breaks down is highly poisonous. It is also corrosive and so the entire process should be carried out at a suitable location and well away from glass, since the hydrofluoric acid will cloud the glass, making you unpopular with your colleagues! The percentage of stacks that break down depends on the defect density of the original PVF2. That percentage depends on whether a gel colloid or suspension process was used during polymerisation. The use of gel tends to leave micro bubbles of gel in the PVF2, reducing the breakdown voltage. The surface chemistry of a poled polymer is a constant problem since the creation of compound acetates with various metals can occur with very little encouragement. The passing of a current through the cyanocrylate often starts a cascade catalysis which, once started is unstoppable. This is worst with copper where even a few seconds of current will produce a sufficient 'seed' to result in the total acetisation of the metal within a month or so. With nickel the process is less easily turned on since a sulphate must exist before the process starts. The initial test voiltage does not usually initiate a corrosion and so the elements may be stored anaerobically and aridly for an indefinite period. Once the elements are subjected to operational voltages or are even accidentally squeezed, which produces enormous voltages in local areas, a gradual decay of metal begins. This will begin in spots surrounding any nonpolymerised cyanocrylate. Such spots exist since, even with all the precautions described, certain free H+ ions will be present preventing polymerisation. This is why such care MUST be taken. The metal layers can disappear in just a few hours if the defect density in the bonding layers exceeds 2 per cm2. The reduction in decay time is exponentially proportional to defect density. The remaining stacks were now measured for electrical conductivity and those that showed a resistance of greater than 0.001 ohm from side to side were discarded. The apparatus for measurement of the resistance is designed to cancel the apparatus resistance. The electrodes of the apparatus were a pair of steel slip gauges. This is needed in the ultrasonic device to prevent the waveform from distorting. In the thermoelectric application this stage-by-stage testing is even more critical since it defines both the electrical and thermal conductivity of the stack.*
66 Those elements discarded for resisitivity reasons were reground on the edges with a fine diamond wheel in liquid nitrogen to improve flatness and were set aside for an attempt at a slightly thinner stack. (As it happened these discards were lost and only found again at the end of last year [1993] when they were used to construct the third thermoelectric demonstration device.) The original batch was divided into several sets of 50 elements. Each element was coated with Emmerson and Cumming silver loaded epoxy and bonded to a thin copper or silver strip, top and bottom. Silver is preferable to prevent the production of copper acetate from the cyanoacrylate but I did not have a large quantity of this and by this time was pretty impatient to see if the device would produce the high power ultrasonic pulse I hoped. Each element was then laminated to a layer of hard acrylic half thick as shown in Fig. 2 below.
Fig. 2 Composition of bonded element ___________________________________________________________________ * Emphasis here added by H. Aspden, this being the first reference to the thermoelectric properties and much of the foregoing description having concerned the fabrication of a structure intended to withstand mechanical oscillations at acoustic frequencies. The thermoelectric application requires the nickel and aluminium layers to remain intact and in mutual interface contact and does not require those metals to be as thin and fragile as they were in the process described by Strachan. [This footnote by H. Aspden]. These elements were then assembled as shown in Fig. 3, with the ceramic driver at one end. Each element was then connected by its electrodes to a drive circuit. The ceramic transducer bonded to the end of the stack was connected to be pulsed by a conventional driver. As the wave passed
67 through the stack an electromagnetic signal from the moving magnets triggered the pulses through the stack in a cascade. By adjusting the
Fig. 3. Final stack assembly threshold of the trigger circuit, the frequency could be tuned to match the oncoming wave. Thus, even though the delay through the stack was inconsistent due to the variation in the bonding thickness, the cascade of pulses could always be kept in phase with the advance of the compression wave. A straightforward sequential delay could not do this, which was why other attempts at 'sonic lasers' had failed to produce the expected amplification. Everything worked fine except that as soon as the stack was moved, almost as soon as it was touched, the drive circuit would blow. This was surprising since this was no wimpy drive and had the capacity to deliver more than a joule per pulse. But closer examination revealed that the circuit was not blowing in the 'ON' cycle but in the 'OFF' cycle. A sector of the stack was connected across an oscilloscope and the waveform in Fig. 4 was observed when a thermal gradient was across the stack while only noise was visible in the absence of the gradient.* At first I naturally assumed that this pulse was a high impedance phenomenon, but I had to wait for a couple of days to investigate since it had blown the oscilloscope. ____________________________________________________________________ * Emphasis added by H. Aspden.
68
Fig. 4. Spike voltage waveform produced by thermal gradient A charge amplifier arrangement with a virtual dead short was now attached to the sector of the stack and the waveform had the shape shown in Fig. 5. Note that both of these measurements are of a sector of the stack not connected to the drive circuit.
Fig. 5. Thermally developed spike voltage with circuit protection This was very surprising. Clearly the spikes carried a lot of current and in fact even the impedance of the charge amplifier was too high to discharge the spike before it was driven off. As lower and lower impedances were tried it was eventually possible to discharge the spike in the 200 ns of its duration and get a measure of the number of joules involved. This turned out to be broadly proportional to the temperature differential across the stack and reached a peak at about 0.05 of a micro joule at about 70o C temperature differential. The lithotriptor circuit was redesigned to short out the stacks behind the wavefront but even the VMOS kept blowing in the 'OFF' state now, as the voltages were just too high. This was bitterly disappointing since the acoustic energy in the pulse from a single full
69 25mm stack was truly immense and the full array would have been capable of pulverising a 10 mm stone to dust in a few seconds without the sharp edges in the remnant rubble that cause much trouble in laser lithotriptors. By this time, however, high power lasers were already beginning to fall in price and it seemed as though the window of opprtunity for the device was closing. I had reported the thermoelectric effect to Dr. Aspden at this stage and I had suggested that perhaps the pyroelectric and thermoelectric effects were interacting in some way. Dr. Aspden was sceptical and proposed a number of alternatives. I built some devices using diode arrays as disclosed in an early patent* but my experimental technique was appalling and so I cannot rely on the measurements made on the device. The exact number of layers in each stack in the device tested to obtain the above signal waveforms is not known, since the acoustic thickness was all that mattered, but a fair estimate would be about 20 - 30 layers. Thus the assembly would represent 20 series stacks connected in parallel when connected as a finished assembly. For the thermoelectric application I rewired the stack to produce a standing wave rather than a travelling wave and set up the circuit with a combination tuning transformer, thus creating a stack consisting of a combination of serial and parallel connections in a series resonant circuit with the stack and with an omnitron SCR. The circuit configuration is as shown in Fig. 6.
Fig. 6 Series-parallel connections of laminar stack
* This is the subject of U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085, whereas the later prototype laminar stack thermoelectric devices became the subject of U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336.
70 [Footnote by H. Aspden] ________________________________________________________________ Off voltage was now less of a problem since the actual rising edge of the spike would turn on the CRS before the junction blew, but even so the resonant circuit meant that flyback voltages were still dangerous in the OFF condition. Keeping the output of the transformer coupled to low impedance prevented this from being terminal. The amount of energy in each pulse is difficult to explain since the capacitance of the stack as measured by a bridge was far too low to account for the energy magnitude of the pulse. The combination of pyroelectric behaviour and thermoelectric behaviour seems to combine with either a sudden increase in the effective capacitance or perhaps a brief conductive phase through the PVF2. The resulting stack was connected to an input circuit and to an output path via a transformer and then through a rectifier circuit. The rectifier circuit should use very low voltage drop diodes to reduce voltage drop losses. The rest of the story is well known* but a few points are worth making. The first and third prototype devices produced a reversible effect, ie. the provision of high energy electrical pulses to the stack resulted in the appearance of a dramatic temperature differential across the stack. The second device, built without the magnetic interface strips, did not do this and also was incapable of self-driving through an SCR. The electrical efficiency was measured accurately in terms of the transfer of heat and the electrical output of the device but the amount of breakthrough from the external drive circuit was ignored. Were the measurements valid?** As I recall several results were surprising but were explained away by some fancy footwork from Dr. Aspden. The third device did indeed produce a reasonably impressive thermoelectric efficiency as a generator but detailed analysis of the measurements of the device as a heat pump show that its performance is nowhere near as efficient as would be expected. While this is explainable to some extent from the predicted behaviour of the protection circuitry, the fact remains that as a heat pump the device performs no better and perhaps worse than several commercially available heat pumps. What if the discrepancy between the thermoelectric generator effect and the heat pump effect is the result of a transient electrochemical effect? The chemical interaction of cyanoacrylate and metal is already known to be charge sensitive and is very temperature sensitive. This is a __________________________________________________________________ This is a reference to the information which has been published by articles, conferences and patent specifications in endeavouring to promote interest in the Strachan-Aspden invention. ** Underlining by H. Aspden. This is a surprising statement. The tests in question are the subject of Appendix IV already presented. As stated on page 42 we used a function generator to provide an input signal to regulate electrical power delivery in pulsations at the control frequency. The signal input of a few volts was fed through a high-valued resistor so that minimal input current could 'break through' to feed power into the output circuit from the function generator. It would seem therefore that Strachan here is registering his own
71 personal reservations about the high operational efficiency of that now-defunct tested device. [Footnotes by H. Aspden] major nightmare for me. What if, in fact, all we have is an endothermic electochemical reaction? Several gels exist that freeze when subjected to an electrical current. And a lot of those are acetates! The electrical generation effect is even more common. The current device is now inert but it is likely that not all elements will have decayed. I am now dismantling the device and will attempt to recover as many elements as possible. I would propose the best use that could be made of these is to distribute them to various laboratories that propose to attempt to construct a device.
[End of Strachan's February 2, 1994 Communication]
*******************************************
Concluding Comment
It has become clear, and especially in the light of the above-stated position taken by Strachan, that ongoing experimental research on the phenomenon underlying the Strachan-Aspden invention will need to be undertaken by Strachan's coinventor, myself, as author of this Report, in following my own different convictions concerning base metal properties when activated thermoelectrically using a.c. However, I can but hope that research interests of those having the appropriate academic or corporate affiliations who come to read this Report will see the merit in the Nernst Effect interpretation of the tranverse a.c. action, as described in the initial commentary of this Energy science Report No. 2, and will undertake their own investigations in pursuit of this new technology. The outcome of my own efforts will be reported in Energy Science Report No. 3.

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1997
Contents Section Title PART I: Introduction The Impossible Dream? Review of the Nernst Effect The First Strachan-Aspden Invention Conclusion PART II: Introduction Preliminary Observations Solid-State Magneto-Hydrodynamic Power Skin Effect Segregation The Magnetic Inductively-Coupled Device Nernst Effect in Relation to Eddy-Currents Experimental Invesigations Discussion Appendix I ***** page 1 3 7 13 15 16 16 21 25 26 30 33 36 38

Introduction This Energy Science Report is one of a series concerned with new energy technology and the fundamental energy science that is involved. In this series of ten such reports this is listed as No. 3. Its first version was dated June 4th 1994 but made available in confidence only to sponsors interested in funding development. It concerns onward progress on the project of the StrachanAspden invention, the subject of Report No. 2. The invention as demonstrated proved that it was possible to take energy from melting ice and run an electric motor by tapping into the heat flow drawn from the prevailing ambient background as it migrated through the device to reach and so melt the ice. The device was remarkably efficient, also in its reverse operation mode, in which it froze water upon input of electricity. The invention is seen as the basis for future non-polluting refrigeration and noiseless airconditioning as well as providing a solid-state, maintenance-free technology for generating electric power. At the time the initial version of this Report was written the author was intent on pursuing the research himself, co-inventor Scott Strachan having abandoned further work on the project. For some mysterious reason all of the operative devices he constructed had worked well for a period of months but then deteriorated rapidly and ceased to function. As this author saw the problem, a funded university project and even corporate research involvement committed to discovering the reason for this failure was needed, given the importance of the underlying discovery. In the event, though corporate interest had been aroused, that interest depended upon the sustained ability to demonstrate operation. Scott Strachan reverted to his research pursuits on laser devices, whilst this author, whose primary interest concerned power generation by a new type of magnetic motor was diverted by success in August 1994 in winning a U.K. government research award on that latter project. In these circumstances at this time, October 1996, the author is endeavouring now to complete both this Energy Science Report No. 3 and also Energy Science Report No. 9, which relate, respectively, to the thermoelectric project as now seen in retrospect and the status of the research on the motor. Admittedly also the author has been stimulated into completing this Report No. 3 by the very recent publication of a book entitled The Coming Energy Revolution by Jeane Manning (ISBN 0-89529-713-2) Avery Publishing Group, Garden City Park, New York. It was at pages 124-128 that there was reference to the Strachan-Aspden device. Reference to that book will show that I had speculated that it might be a combination of heat and vibration that had progressively affected the device's electrical storage capacity and so interfered with its operation. However, as this Report will explain, I have now formed a different opinion, based on some of my early background research experience with ferromagnetic steel laminations that are tough enough to withstand such effects. Much of what I am now introducing in this Report will explain why any bimetallic laminar structure involving a ferromagnetic substance must have a tendency to polarize magnetically when
subjected to periodic temperature changes and that is, in my opinion, the true cause of failure in the three Strachan-Aspden devices tested. To remedy the defect all one then has to do is make provision for `degaussing' the bimetallic laminar structure. The bimetallic feature is an essential limitation in the claims of the main U.S. patent on this device (U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336). The reason is that it expedites the entry of heat into the body of the device and that can make a very substantial difference by reducing its physical size for a given power output. Hopefully, with this insight for solving our earlier problem now put in proper perspective, the publication of this Report will rekindle interest in corporate and academic laboratories who will now see purpose in mounting research to apply this technology commercially. In this regard the author, who will be 69 years of age before year end 1996, will be able to act in a consultancy capacity and assist in such endeavour. Rather than making this work a complete rewrite of the original 1994 version of Report No. 3, it is intended, following this brief introduction, to present as PART I an informal overview of the underlying invention and suggest a new way by which the technology can be harnessed. Furthermore, since the author now knows why the original devices failed after a few months of operation and since the remedy is so very simple, that will be explained at the outset. Part II of the Report will be the more formal account of the technological subject matter as contained in the 1994 version. The latter has not been edited, save in that its list of contents has been merged with those of PART I and it will seem incomplete. It was the version in note form which was intended to brief would-be sponsoring research interests. It left open questions which the onward experimental research would need to resolve. It will, however, serve a purpose and though much of the material will no doubt need to be discarded in the light of developments it will, it is hoped, inspire effort to explore different options until the best solution is found. *****
PATENTS
As part of this Introduction it will be helpful to summarize the patent position as it stands at the time this Report is published (namely in February 1997). For cost reasons during our period of concern about overcoming the defect encountered, certain patent applications, particularly in Japan and Europe have been abandoned. However, with confidence restored, the following patents are now to be regarded as available for acquisition by parties interested in developing the technology for commercial application. This Report, together with Report No. 2, plus the patent specifications identified below and some further patents that will be listed only on request, constitute the briefing material which is available. Enquiries of a commercial nature concerning the patents should be addressed to Dr. Harold Aspden, Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England, the publishers of this Report. U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 U.S. Patent No. 5,288,336 U.S. Patent No. 5,376,184
PART I
The Impossible Dream? I am going to describe something which physicists will declare to be impossible and then I am going to explain in simple scientific terms why I believe many of those physicists will see the need to retract and pay attention. I am a physicist myself, by professional qualification and by vocation, with an academic research background in electrical engineering, though my working career has been in that field of corporate management concerned with inventions and patents dealing with technology rooted in electronics and magnetism. I would not therefore be writing the words which follow without being sure of my ground. Imagine that in your dreams you catch a glimpse of a house of the mid 21st century and notice that in its cellar there is a rather curious elongated structure that you can best describe as pipework. You suspect it is a heater or air-conditioning unit. The owner of the house explains its function and how it works. Firstly, the main pipe section is composed of steel or nickel, according to whether the air flow through it is hotter or colder than the exposed outer surface of the pipe. Peripheral to the pipe is a unit described as a pump. It is a heat pump, a mid-21st century model. It does what heat pumps are supposed to do and does it rather well. It is quiet and efficient. It requires an input of electricity and it pumps heat. It can pump 100 joules of heat between two temperatures, one ambient and one 30 degrees C above or below ambient, and do that with an intake of 15 joules of electricity. Physicists know that is possible because it fits within the Carnot efficiency limitations imposed on heat engines and knowledge of 19th century technology explains how it works. It is very familiar territory to those expert in thermodynamics. Now, about that pipe. Here again, in history, going now into the latter part of the 19th century, there was the discovery of a phenomenon by which heat flow through a metal could generate electricity. Assuming the heat flow was through the walls of a long pipe, it needed a magnetic field directed along the length of the pipe to promote the setting up of an electric field, or EMF (electromotive force, otherwise expressed as a voltage), the latter being directed at right angles to both the magnetic field and the direction of heat flow. So, you see, if we magnetize the pipe along its length any heat flowing through its pipe walls, that is between its outer surface and its inner bore, will set up circulating electric current inside the pipe. Now, if you use your imagination, you can see that here is something physicists discovered over one hundred years ago (in 1886), a fascinating way in which to convert heat into electricity, but if you, the reader, are a physicist, have you ever heard of this before? I know about it because it was mentioned at page 592 of a book I was given on 20th December 1945 because I had won that year's `Physics Prize' awarded at my school. The few words on that page 592 did not refer to tubes of circular section. They referred to experiments on metal sheets, but I knew how to roll a metal sheet to form a tubular pipe and so here was a book I have had in my possession for more than 50 years and it told me that it had been known for some 60 years before then that heat could convert directly into electricity merely by flowing through metal!
Of course, now assuming you, the reader, are an engineer, you will say that electric current flowing in the pipe is not doing anything but turning back into heat, so there is a no-win situation. On the other hand, if you are a physicist, you will say that it is a thermoelectric effect and such effects are notoriously very weak and so can offer nothing of practical importance. However, that book of mine that I won in 1945 included a table of data, backed by references, which showed that at the dawn of the 20th century it was known that in steel as much as 16.6 volts could be set up by a temperature gradient of one degree C per cm if the magnetic field strength was 10,000 gauss. That magnetic field is less than half of the saturation field strength in steel. In nickel the direction of the electric field is reversed, but the voltage induced can be as high as 35.5 volts in such a field, though that is nearly double the saturation condition of nickel. Either way, whether we use steel or nickel, we are involved here with the prospect of generating 16.6 volts per cm. of path within a steel or nickel pipe magnetized close to saturation, given a heat flow rate through the section of pipe corresponding to a one degree of temperature drop per cm. It never occurred to me when I first came to browse through that book given to me as a school prize that it contained technological information of such importance to the world's energy future. Instead, I became indoctrinated in the principles governing physics, which say that it is impossible to convert heat into useful work except in compliance with the laws of thermodynamics. A pipe with one degree temperature difference between its outside and inside could not be even one per cent efficient in converting heat into electricity according to those laws. I am now a wiser being and it took me nearly half a century to acquire that wisdom and become a law breaker. One cannot argue with the facts of Nature and it was to be experimental discovery that obliged me to shift my ground, realising that Nature herself has not seen fit to comply with the wishes of whoever decided to formulate that Second Law of Thermodynamics. You see, when heat flows through metal it is carried by electrons in the main and some is transferred by atoms vibrating into one another. Those electrons, which are shed by atoms, get deflected by a magnetic field and can get reabsorbed into other atoms part way along their journey through the metal. Once locked inside an atom the electron can even migrate back in the opposite direction to the heat flow. After all, there is no net current flow in the heat transport direction, so the electrons have to go the other way too. However, in the latter motion they are paired with an atomic nucleus and so the magnetic forces acting on them are unable to move charge laterally with respect to magnetic field and heat flow. It is as if the electrons are girls in a barn dance and can go one way freely but, in migrating the other way, they have to hold hands in swinging around a boy, but they can progress from boy to boy transferring their hand hold. In their forward free motion they do not bang into the wall at the end of the barn, because some boy or other captures them and sets them into the sequence of their reverse motion. So those heat-carrying electrons seldom travel all the way through the pipe section before shedding their heat and producing that lateral EMF. To comply with the Second Law of Thermodynamics they all need to go from the higher temperature towards the lower temperature at the pipe surface, but they are not completing that journey. They never see the lower temperature. Instead, they are deflected to confront a back EMF and it absorbs their energy very efficiently, indeed with a near-to-100% efficiency. There is no such thing here as the physicists `Carnot' criterion. All there is is a temperature gradient governing the heat flow rate. So our mid 21st century homes will have pipework in their basements which use nickel or steel pipes and be designed to have heat flowing through their pipe walls. How then do we provide that heat input? Well, you have been given the answer to that question, we use the heat pump accessory already mentioned. We feed in 15 joules of electricity to generate 100 joules of heat
flow through the pipe walls and we convert most of that 100 joules into electricity which we use to supply the 15 joules input and to deliver the rest to meet our domestic needs. There is energy conservation because there is net cooling in that basement appliance and we will need to let heat flow in from the atmosphere somehow to keep the balance, but the result is a cold basement and a warm house or an air-conditioned cool house with a hotter climatic condition outside. If you see this as `perpetual motion' and so impossible then stay in the 20th century and skip the future, because you choose to ignore what Nature has on offer. If you are shaking your head, as an engineer, and still thinking about how that electric current circulating around the tubular pipe form can get out and into your wire circuits then read on. First, let me go back to those school days of mine once again. I was taught physics at a time before our student-time absorbing computer age began and so could learn a little more about oldfashioned subjects, such as ships having magnetic compasses and why ships needed `degaussing'. I want you to imagine that steel pipe mentioned above as being, in effect, a ship structure during fabrication. I was told that when a ship was made it would tend to become magnetized because of the hammering and rivetting on its steel plates which vibrated the magnetism in the steel to cause it to turn into the direction of the Earth's own magnetic field. The ship became weakly magnetized, enough to affect the reading of a ship's compass and that magnetism could not be eliminated. One had to compensate for it in some way by putting magnets close to the compass. Furthermore, my school years of learning physics being World War II years, I was told that the magnetism of a ship could attract magnetic mines set floating on the sea by the enemy and so the ship had to be `degaussed' by using currents flowing around parts of the vessel. Yet, when I took up my Ph.D. research (1950-53) on the subject of how there were anomalous excess losses occurring in electrical sheet steels as used in power transformers, I directed much of my attention to examining how mechanical stress affected those losses. I can say, quite categorically, that my research experience assured me that mechanical stress and vibrant stress would reduce, rather than increase, residual magnetism. However, I was not sufficiently enlightened as to question what I had been taught and it was of no importance to me how ships became magnetized during construction. Indeed, nor was I sufficiently enlightened at that time as to see the connection between my research and page 592 of that school book I mentioned. I went through three years of Ph.D. research on the subject of anomalous eddy-current loss in electrical steel, losses involving heat generation, without it occurring to me or the professorial supervision I received, that heat itself could be a regenerative electrical factor in enhancing those losses. There were two dominant factors, not mentioned as such, but inherent in our instinct by training, namely that in the absence of both a bimetallic structure and a temperature differential there could be no regenerative effects and, further, that any strengthening of a magnetic field meant enhancement of resistivity. As a result the whole emphasis of interest was centred on how waveforms were distorted during the alternating cycles of magnetization, owing essentially to nonuniformities attributable to the domain structure inside a magnetic material. Here the lay reader should understand that inside nickel or iron there are everywhere regions fully magnetized to saturation and all we do when we `magnetize' is to turn some of those around in their direction of polarization. This is why it makes sense to imagine that vibration can produce magnetization. However, I am now suggesting here that the ship lying in its fixed position relative to the Earth's magnetic field during its construction is far more susceptible to the effects of temperature changes than to workmen's percussion tools banging on the ship's bodywork. Heat flow through
its steel plates, transversely with respect to the Earth's magnetic field, will set up current flow around the body section of the ship. This will itself set up a magnetizing field along the length of the ship, one way as the ambient conditions warm up and the other way as they cool down. Each day there is a cycle of change and it becomes interesting to ask if this thermal cyclic can build up the gradual magnetic polarization of the vessel. At this point I will jump way ahead to refer to our invention, the Strachan-Aspden thermoelectric device. It was demonstrated repeatedly by using ice to cool its working surface and deliver electrical output and then by putting in electrical power to show the equally-amazing rapid regeneration of ice on that same surface. Internally the device operated by electrical current oscillations at quite high frequencies but these were not oscillations of the magnetized state. However, by its nature the device would be subject to some magnetic changes as the temperature cycled. Now presumably it takes hundreds of days of climatic heating and cooling before a ship acquires its full measure of magnetization. Equally, it would seem that a hundred or so sequential cycles of heating and cooling between the temperature of ice and a warm room occur before the evident deterioration of the operation of the Strachan-Aspden device is registered. Accordingly, I make the observation that it would seem that the thermal cycling is a factor which polarizes its magnetic state. Comprising, as it does, a thin film ferromagnetic material (nickel), its full polarization would destroy its operability. The principle on which it works requires the domains in each nickel layer to be fairly equally apportioned as between one orientation and the opposite orientation, because the transverse current flow, which is a.c. seeks passage through one or other form of polarized domain according to its flow direction. It chooses the one offering negative resistance and if such passage is denied then there is no regenerative conversion and simply loss. By considering the problem of ship's magnetism one can then understand our problem with the Strachan-Aspden device, the subject of Energy Science Report No. 2 and Part II of this Report No. 3. It needs little imagination to see that, just as for the ship, we simply need to provide for that `degaussing' process. How to implement this effectively will depend upon the specific assembly plan for the main thermoelectric devices, which will need some adaptation to incorporate the controlled degaussing feature. In the development stage, if not in the final product, the incorporation of some diagnostic sensing circuitry which can be used to monitor the unwanted polarization will be necessary to provided the feedback control which keeps the device in a healthy state. Such issues are matters for consultation with commercial developers who decide to exploit this thermoelectric technology and will not be addressed in this summary Report. However, concentrating on the underlying function of the thermoelectric power generator, let us go back to our mid-21st century house and that pipework in the basement. We still need to explain how it produces electricity that we can extract and use. One initial question that will interest some readers is how this topic relates to that reference I made to something that eluded me in my years of Ph.D. research. I was researching the question of why eddy-currents in electrical sheet steels could generate as much as six times the loss expected from accepted theory. It did not occur to me that heat flow from the steel laminations could regenerate EMFs that would cause the current to be far greater than the value determined by resistance and normal Faraday induction. My research clearly demonstrated that the loss anomaly was progressively eliminated as the steel became more and more polarized. By this I mean the ratio of the actual eddy-current loss to the theoretical loss. In other words, it was the fact that the magnetic domain regions in my transformer steel provided a optional current path through the metal, one that is obstructive for thermal reasons and one that aids current flow, also for thermal reasons, that created the anomaly.
It vanished once those domains had been polarized so as to eliminate enough of those that aided current flow. So, if our mid-21st century basement air-conditioning unit is to generate a net output of electrical power, we must avoid that regenerative eddy-current syndrome in its pipework. We do that by laminating the pipe assembly and avoiding its closed conductive sectional form and the laminations are provided, not because we seek to use alternating magnetic induction, as in a power transformer, but rather because we want to set up the non-linear thermal gradient and avoid a mismatch of thermally-induced EMFs which would otherwise promote unwanted current circulation. The circumferential magnetic field effects are thwarted by introducing a break in the circuit path and tapping off the current flow by diverting into a battery which becomes charged or into a load circuit such as a motor or an electric heater in another room. Hopefully, given a modest pipe radius plus a high enough heat throughput rate we should be able to develop a normal cell voltage for this purpose. Given a steel pipe of radius 5 cm. and wall thickness 1 cm. with a 20,000 gauss magnetic flux density along its length, one degree C of temperature drop between its inner and outer surfaces corresponds to a thermal induction of 1,000 V. That, at least, is the theoretical result using empirical data for the relevant thermoelectric coefficient as listed in that book mentioned above. I have verified the source data by tracking back to the original research reference [H. Zahn, Ann. der Phys., 14, p. 886 (1904) and 16, p. 148 (1905)]. Of course, working with a 30 degree C air temperature difference, it is unlikely that even a one degree C drop of temperature through metal can be set up, owing to the limited heat transfer rate across the pipe surface, but one fiftieth of this seems not unreasonable in a thick-walled pipe giving 20 volts output from each pipe section. Six sections connected in series would deliver 120 V d.c. Such, at least, is the prospect ahead and I would urge interest in this subject by those having a corporate interest in developing new technology for the world's energy needs of tomorrow. Now, the above pages have been written without referring to any supporting illustrations because I wanted the message in my words to register. The diagrams now follow and then the remainder of this Part I discourse will deal with two separate topics. The second of these is more specifically concerned with the use of bimetallic thin film layered structures of the kind which featured in the main Strachan-Aspden invention, the subject of US Patent No. 5,288,336. The other topic deals with a theme which has been left aside so far, namely the subject of the secondary, in fact the first Strachan-Aspden invention, as disclosed in US Patent No. 5,065,085. The latter invention will be addressed first, but after the pictorial review. Review of the Nernst Effect Referring to Fig. 1, if heat flow in a metal is depicted by the wavy line, and dT/dz represents temperature gradient, with B representing a magnetic field in the x direction, then there is an electric field of strength E in the mutually orthogonal y direction, given by: E = N(B)dT/dz Here N is the Nernst coefficient and it may be positive or negative, according to the choice of metal. In a sense this phenomenon is akin to the better-known Hall Effect, where a field E is generated in the y Figure 1
direction by the passage of an electric current in the z direction, given a magnetic field B in the x direction. In the Hall Effect we know that the power transferred to that E field arises because the current overcomes a back EMF, the magnetic field B being a mere deflecting agency, just as a railroad track deflects a locomotive but does no work itself. Energy is conserved at all times. However, in the case of the Nernst Effect, although there is also energy conservation, we are setting up an electric field which can deliver electrical power output and the heat input is the only energy source available. The Hall Effect, apart from some small resistance loss, is 100% efficient and, since the Nernst Effect is concerned with temperature gradient, rather than absolute temperature, we have a straight analogy with the Hall effect and so can expect that near-to-100% conversion efficiency. There are only two problems. One is understanding why electricity is generated with no electric current in the heat flow direction and the other is in devising a physical structure that will let heat flow one way while we take off electric current delivered by that E field in a direction at right angles to the heat flow. Heat conduction and electrical conduction tend to share a common path! To resolve the first problem, note that it is well accepted that most of the heat conducted through a metal is carried by electrons. The magnetic field will surely not act on heat as such. It asserts forces on the flow of free electrons carrying that heat. Note that I have used the word `free', because electrons can move through metal in two ways. They can travel freely with little restraint or they can migrate as members of the electron families seated in the outermost shell of the atoms comprising the metal. The electrons in the latter state will, as they move from atom to atom, be subjected to the usual deflecting magnetic forces, but they are held in their quantum states by the succession of atoms in their path and those forces so far as they arise from their transfer from atom to atom are thereby absorbed by the crystals forming the solid body of the metal. Imagine, therefore, that the free electrons transport heat in the z direction and that that heat has the form of kinetic energy which is used, upon deflection in the B field, to stack the electrons up sideways in the x direction against the back EMF of the resulting E field. There will be some back EMF set up in the z direction as well and this must encourage the bound atomic electrons to migrate from atom to atom against the z-direction heat flow. The net result is the slowing down of the electrons carrying heat and the transfer of that heat energy into electric potential that allows the E field to deliver power. The full line (curved, with arrow) in Fig. 2 depicts the free electron path, transverse to the E field (linear in direction of arrow) and the B field (direction normal to the page). The electron flow can be arrested as the electrons are reabsorbed by the atoms and then, as they belong to overlapping electron shells of adjacent atoms, they can migrate back to their starting point. There is no current Figure 2 passing through the metal, shown in Fig. 2 as a solid layer located between and electrically, but not thermally, insulated from the faces of two heat sink plates. By applying different temperatures to the two plates there is a resulting temperature gradient in the metal and, given the B field, the E field follows as a consequence of the Nernst Effect. The positive or negative polarity of the Nernst coefficient poses an interesting question, but its answer need be no more mysterious than the orthodox `positive holes' as referred to in the theory of semiconductors. It is simply a question of mobility of the charge carriers and understanding the quantum-electrodynamic attributes of electrons in motion. It suffices here to let Fig. 3 serve as a
guide as to how `bound' electrons can migrate through a metal without developing an E field. They are moving around the orbits in their atomic shells and they are distributed in energy bands which govern their relative freedom. From the statistical mix of their activity in transporting heat and the building of concentrations of free electrons which set up the E field effects, they somehow contrive to reveal to us the phenomenon which is termed the Nernst Effect. Sadly, technologists have not exploited this phenomenon, even though it has enormous practical potential. The reason is two-fold. Firstly, they are given scientific training which says that the second law of thermodynamics reigns supreme and, secondly, as engineers, they seem to have lacked the necessary imagination. I Figure 3 am mindful that it was not in a book on physics or one on engineering that I saw this subject properly addressed. It was a book on Physical Chemistry written by Walter J. Moore, Professor of Chemistry at Indiana University. My copy was the third edition published in Great Britain in 1956 by Longmans, Green & Co. Ltd., but the original 1950 edition was published by Prentice-Hall Inc., New York. The words which I now quote were on p. 85: "The laws of thermodynamics are inductive in character. They are broad generalizations having an experimental basis in certain human frustrations. Our failure to invent a perpetual-motion machine has led us to postulate the First Law of Thermodynamics. Our failure ever to observe a spontaneous flow of heat from a cold to a hotter body or to obtain perpetual motion of the second kind* has led to the statement of the Second Law. The Third Law of Thermodynamics can be based on our failure to attain the absolute zero of temperature." Note that the laws are not the word of God, but a consequence of man's experience and frustration at trying to replicate something following God's example, because the creation of the universe introduced perpetual motion into our environment and, indeed, in our own composition, a system of atoms, each of which involves electrons kept in a state of motion, even when the atom as a whole comes to rest at that supposedly non-achievable zero temperature on the absolute scale. Having mentioned God, I should say that I believe we can only go so far in our understanding of God's creation as to reach the point where we face questions such as "What is space?", "What is energy?", "What set that energy in motion in space?", "What came before?" and "What follows as destiny?" The human race is a life-form on one planet amongst the numerous astronomical bodies forming that universe and our immediate concern is survival based on a deeper understanding of the energy conversion processes governed by those laws of thermodynamics. However, if those man-made laws are wrong then we need to revise them before we finally accept the inevitable decline in our energy fortunes. Although Professor Moore said that the failure to invent a perpetual motion machine had meant human frustration and resulted in the First Law of Thermodynamics, I must ask how Professor Moore would view the Moving Sculpture which we are told was seen on Norwegian TV as an exhibit by its creator Reidar Finsrud. It is mentioned in the July 1996 issue of the Utah publication `New Energy News'.
10
____________________________________________________________________________ * Perpetual motion of the second kind is the continuous extraction of useful work from the heat of our environment, whereas perpetual motion of the first kind is the production of work from nothing at all. ____________________________________________________________________________ A steel ball weighing 2 lb. runs around a 25" circular aluminium track and rolls towards the pole faces of a horseshoe magnet suspended by a lever and pivot system just above the track and ahead of the approaching ball. As the ball gets close to the magnet it encounters a ramp linked to that lever system and the weight of the ball in riding over the ramp displaces it downwards to lift the magnet sufficiently so that the ball can roll on and pass underneath it. The magnet imparts a forward drive force as it attracts the ball and it needs less energy to lift the magnet clear of the ball than is gained from the magnet when in its lowered position. The report states "A working model has been running for over one month in full public view in Norway". Now, given that this is a genuine account of a real machine, we confront the reality of perpetual motion. On the face of it, the First Law of Thermodynamics has been disproved, but I remind the reader of those words above from that 1956 edition of the book by Professor Moore, "The laws of thermodynamics are inductive in character." What that means is that the laws are not `proved' 100%, because they are worded so generally as to extend far beyond the immediate experimental circumstances which have been taken as their basis, but that one seems able to predict from them what may happen if applied to hitherto untested circumstances. Now, from that year 1956, I have been declaring to whoever was willing to listen that the setting up of a magnetic field by the process we call ìnduction' sheds energy into space (even vacuous space) as heat, where it is dispersed by merger with the omnipresent vacuum energy activity of the aether. I have urged recognition that the aether becomes polarized by reacting and so is conditioned to shed its own energy when we demagnetize that field. So, if you regard that aether energy as heat, whether at zero temperature absolute or at 2.7 Kelvin, the cosmic background temperature of space, then you can see how `thermodynamics' gets into the act. In the latter case the inductive process is a mysterious exercise of influence by an electrical current in a circuit, as it somehow affects energy transfer across space to where a secondary circuit is located. My inductive powers then tell me that, for energy to go from A to B via empty space C, I cannot say space is empty if energy is to be conserved according to the first law of thermodynamics. Then, if space is not empty, since space is open terrain not assigned to the exclusive use of the energy source at A, I ask if that space could pool energy in transit from a multiplicity of sources. In that case I would hesitate before ridiculing the possibility that energy shed by A may arrive at B supplemented by an excess of thermodynamic energy drawn from C. Now, if you do not like to think about space in this context and you choose to regard the aether as non-existent, then that process of electromagnetic induction means an exchange of energy with something that does not exist and so the process cannot occur, according to the First Law of Thermodynamics as a statement of perpetual motion of the first kind. Yet, we have built electrical technology on the discovery of electromagnetic induction, building on the recorded experience of Michael Faraday. If you choose to regard the aether as existing but describe it as a field then you are playing with words and have defined aether as something other than simply an energy medium. In that case would you say that a field has a temperature? It is difficult to see where `thermodynamics'
11
comes into play unless we have heat. Physicists speak of entropy, which is a word expressing something far more mysterious than what I understand by the word aether. Entropy is heat degraded by temperature, it being Q/T, a quantity of heat Q divided by temperature T. We shed energy into empty space by heat radiation and we say that entropy always increases, but yet we do not say that that emptiness of space has a temperature. In other words, most scientists who refer to thermodynamics and entropy, really do not know what they are talking about and, certainly, they could never believe that the Norwegian Moving Sculpture mentioned above is anything other than a trick aimed to deceive. When one then considers the Second Law of Thermodynamics there is even greater confusion, because one needs two temperatures to account for heat flowing to a greater entropy state as it converts into useful work, but always needing to find a cooler destiny. Does that Norwegian perpetual motion machine run on heat? It cannot, according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, unless we feed in some heat at a temperature higher than ambient. So, what can the Third Law of Thermodynamics tell us? We can never attain absolute zero of temperature! Well, why should we want to do that anyway and, if we did, how far might we get? Professor Moore in that book which dates back more that forty years states: "In 1950, workers in Leiden reached a temperature of 0.0014 Kelvin." They did that by a process of demagnetization. In telling this story Professor Moore reaches his conclusion which is that: "The Third Law of Thermodynamics will, therefore, be postulated as follows: It is impossible by any procedure, no matter how idealized, to reduce the temperature of any system to the absolute zero in a finite number of operations." Yet, I recall a recent mention of researchers at M.I.T. having achieved a temperature that was a low as a few billionths Kelvin, and so presume that, whatever purpose there was in devising the Third Law, it is hardly important technologically. Now, I really have little patience with scientists who tell me I cannot do something or other owing to one or other of the laws of thermodynamics. Each of those laws involves `small print' and needs scrutiny to see what is meant by the `let-out' clauses. In enforcing those laws one has always to adapt their interpretation to the `case law' on which they were founded, the experience of the past. However, we must accept that we are inevitably destined to experience new discoveries as technology advances. To come to the point about what is disclosed above by reference to Figs. 2 and 3, does an electron in motion have a temperature and is that temperature different from that of the metal conductor in which the electron transports heat? Scientists can refer to Fermi energies and temperatures of electrons that can run into millions on the centigrade scale but they will not accept the possibility of using electron flow conveying heat in metal as a means for breaching the laws of thermodynamics. This Report faces up to that issue and challenges the Second Law of Thermodynamics by the facts of experiment, just as that `Moving Sculpture' in Norway challenges the First Law of Thermodynamics unless one sees the aether as an energy source in its own right. There seems no point in challenging the Third Law of Thermodynamics, because, as it is worded above, it merely says that there is a final line to be drawn between what is measurable in terms of temperature and what is not measurable and that we can only reach that line by taking one step at a time. An atom, the centre of mass of which is at rest, has zero temperature, even though its component electrons and nucleus remain in motion. A free electron moving through a metal at
12
what is virtually zero absolute temperature, might still be said to have a temperature. As such it has the capacity to do useful work. If we can extract some of its energy by slowing it down and it can get recharged by being drawn periodically into the quantum world of an absorbing atom, then there is scope for technological advantage which breaches the laws of thermodynamics. The free electron can be deflected by a magnetic field. It can act in concert with other free electrons to set up mutual inductance electromagnetically, which is a thermodynamic process shedding heat. Our task is to see how we can use magnetism to our advantage and, though Report No. 9 in this Energy Science series concerns tapping energy from the aether, our horizon in this Report No. 3 is more modest in seeking only to tap the ambient heat resource of our environment. We will defy the Second Law of Thermodynamics, but do so by harnessing a phenomenon discovered by Nernst, whose name is closely associated with that Third Law of Thermodynamics. However, we will not be doing anything in breach of that Third Law. Experiments using the Strachan-Aspden devices already tested show cooling to minus 40 degrees C from an environmental temperature of a normal laboratory and that is sufficient to challenge the Second Law of Thermodynamics and gave basis for useful technology. Unfortunately, I cannot see a way in which to build a Moving Sculpture which can demonstrate this process, but it may help to portray something along the following lines. Refer to Fig. 4. Imagine that steel ball to run down the slight incline of a straight track, where the incline represents a temperature gradient. Then suppose the track is curved through a right-angle at a low level so as to deflect the ball and cause it use its kinetic energy by rolling up a steeper but short incline. The ball represents the electron and the deflecting track represents the action of a magnetic field. Now, if the ball is set free at the top of the main track and given a starting velocity it will have enough energy, not only to reach the same height in climbing the branching track, but it will crash into other such balls that got there ahead and try to push them out of the way. Happily we provide a power-driven conveyor system by Figure 4 which a ball reaching that position can be carried back to the start position before being release again to start the ball rolling once more. That power-driven conveyor system is shown in Fig. 4. The conveyor is the zero-point activity of that microscopic quantum world of electron motion in the bound states within the atoms forming the metal conductor. The balls will circulate around that system and allow us to extract some of their energy just before they board that conveyor system, just as surely as conduction electrons are set free from host atoms of a metal and are reabsorbed by those atoms, even though they have spent some of their energy. This is an ongoing process whether or not the metal has a uniform temperature, but we need to set up a temperature differential (T to T* in Fig 4) so as to create that track which allows the applied magnetic field to serve as a deflecting influence. The temperature difference is needed to initiate the electron flow which allows us to relate this to what is shown in Fig. 1. In referring to the way in which electrons have two ways of spending their time, one where they roam free in gliding past atoms as they wander through a conductor and one where they have found lodging inside at atom, we are discussing something real and active in the world of physics. This is not imagination. It is a physical system in which energy exchanges processes occur on an ongoing basis without suffering any restraints imposed by the laws of thermodynamics. Why, one
13
may wonder, is there not a law of thermodynamics which declares that a body at a uniform temperature cannot sustain activity in which there is any ongoing changes of state as between its component parts? Such a law would not be contrary to our experience of what we see in our environment. All we can `see' inside the microdomains of a solid metal conductor using electron microscopes and the like is evidence of a crystal structure and a state of order, but yet we have not adopted a law of thermodynamics which says that there is no ongoing activity exchanging energy states in that conductor. Without such a law I am free to ask what happens when an atom with a single vacancy in its electron lodging capacity moving one way collides with an electron moving the opposite way and absorbs it. Obviously, it becomes a neutral non-ionized particle of matter and we know from Newton's laws of mechanics how to interpret momentum and the resulting energy deployment. However, Newtonian mechanics also do not tell us what happens to the magnetic inductance energy that the system had before the collision, owing to opposite polarity electric charge travelling in opposite directions, but yet does not have immediately after that collision. Suppose, just for the sake of argument, that the atom before collision had the same mass as the electron before collision, then Newtonian theory tells us that both particles could come to rest momentarily before separating again by moving in opposite directions with the same relative velocity. We have then full conservation of energy because the net electric current has reversed direction and so the self-inductance energy of this two-charge system is unchanged. Go further and allow for the atom having a normal mass much greater than the electron. Now, even with the electron having high speeds governed by the Fermi-Dirac statistics, the speeds of the atoms at normal room temperature will inevitably result in energy being transferred to those electrons by those collisions. Heat latent in the motion of atoms will transfer to the electrons, but the effect of current and the field reaction associated with inductance can play a role which ensures that the energy added to the electrons is not lost as heat but deployed in motion that sustains the overall level of that current. In short, there can be a superconductive state owing to the regeneration of spent heat as it converts into electricity which can be harnessed. Therefore, as we see superconductivity develop and come into use in room temperature applications, so we will have another route available for breaching the accepted laws of thermodynamics, but the immediate task is to describe the technology which exploits the Nernst Effect. The First Strachan-Aspden Invention It is possible to combine three different metals to form a composite conductor which operates in a magnetic field so as to convert heat into electricity, without being subject to the Carnot efficiency limits. It is even possible to generate alternating current as output, which means that it can be extracted through a transformer coupling at an elevated voltage. Consider Fig. 5. There are three metals Cu, Ni and Zn bonded together in the manner shown. The wavy line indicates the passage of heat, its direction being transverse to the direction in which electric current oscillates. A magnetic field is applied in the third orthogonal direction. The magnetic field acts on the nickel to polarize it sufficiently, say to about 80% saturation. Figure 5
14
When current flows to the left it favours passage from Ni to Cu, owing to the fact that there is Peltier cooling at the junction between the nickel and the copper. When current flows in the reverse direction, to the right, it flows from Cu to Zn and from Zn to Ni, cooling at the first junction and heating at the second. Of itself, this Peltier action of cooling and heating is productive of heat overall, meaning that the a.c. current will result in conversion of electricity into heat, which is not of special interest. However, that heat flow through the nickel plays an important role by virtue of the Nernst Effect. When current flows to the left much of it flows through the full body of the nickel sector. In travelling transversely with respect to both a magnetic field and a temperature gradient the current is aided by an induced E field. There is additional cooling in the nickel. When current flows in the reverse direction it is opposed by that same E field in the nickel induced by the temperature gradient, which is why it flows through the zinc instead. It finds passage into the nickel only at the extremity of the nickel sector. As a result, the overall effect can be a Nernst cooling which far outweighs the Peltier heating and that means that we can generate a.c. from the heat flowing into this metal structure. Note that with astute use of thermal insulation over the Cu section and on the left hand portion of the Zn as well as on the right hand edge surface of the Zn section and underside of the Ni section, the heat flow can be guided along the required path. This is sufficient to explain the principle of operation implemented in what is a fairly robust design, but one demanding the external application of strong magnetic fields (as by use of permanent magnets), a mutually orthogonal flow of heat. It needs some confidence to go to the trouble of building such a device but there is little complication in circuit design if the an a.c. power source is used as input and the load circuit is itself an electrical resistor which represents a load for test purposes. The initial prototype design could aim to take an input of heat at, say, 30oC and allow its passage through the device to a cold heat sink at !10oC. Now, if you have understood what has already been said about the Nernst Effect you will know that the temperature gradient promotes heat inflow to the device and that we use magnets to deflect that energy so that, instead of reaching the output to the cold heat sink, much of that energy is converted to augment the electrical power in the load circuit. Temperature, as such, meaning an absolute measure in Kelvin does not feature in the coefficient governing the Nernst Effect and so one could expect, say, 50% of that heat to convert to electricity that can reach the load. So now suppose that you can demonstrate this, guided by what is disclosed to you here in this Report and also in Energy Science Report No. 2, and consider how you might develop the prototype to the next stage. This involves using a reversed heat engine, such as a vapour compression machine. A coefficient of performance of 6 can be expected for the above temperatures, meaning that for every joule of electrical input there is 6 joules of cooling. Yet, at the 50% conversion efficiency rate of the Nernst device, this would mean a heat input of 12 joules from the 30oC heat sink. As augmented electrical circuit power we would generate 6 joules of electricity from the heat absorbed in transit. Of that, we can feed the 1 joule back to the reversed heat engine to sustain its operation. There is margin here for a good measure of operational losses, but a significant net power gain delivered as electricity is seemingly quite feasible, with other spin-off benefits if we wish to use the device for heating purposes as well. To keep the energy books balanced there has to be a matching external inflow of heat energy at 30oC equal to that delivered as electrical power. The logical source for that heat is the ambient atmosphere and so, if that temperature is lower in value, then the engine must be designed and set to operate between different temperature limits.
15
Conclusion There is one point at this stage that warrants comment. So much is said about the First Law of Thermodynamics by those not involved in the real technology of the thermodynamic field, everyone quoting it as a statement of something that says it is impossible to do what we have described above. However, Thermodynamics was one of the five final examination subjects I took in my honours level university degree. It was in engineering and involved extensive practical testing of many different heat engines. The Heat Engines textbook we used was written by the Director of the Engineering Laboratories of that university. In his words, the First Law of Thermodynamics "may be stated as follows: Heat and mechanical work are mutually convertible." To me, that is implicit in the thermo and dynamics expressions, just as if we refer to electrodynamics we are discussing the conversion of electric to mechanical work and vice versa. In mechanics generally, which embracing heat as the kinetic energy of the molecules in the heated fluid, there has to be compliance with the laws of action and reaction and `perpetual motion' is ruled out on that count. In electrodynamics generally, as is well known from the accepted theory of the interaction force between two isolated charges in motion, there can be out-of-balance forces. These signify energy exchange with the inductive field environment. In my above account concerning the Nernst Effect I am referring not to the motion of molecules as conveyers of heat, but electrons moving freely as discrete charges, these being the primary carriers of heat through metal. The magnetic field effect harnessed puts the action discussed outside the realm of thermodynamics and brings it into the field of electrodynamics. The latter is a subject I have researched far more than thermodynamics and the motor research, the subject of other Energy Science Reports in this series builds on that research background. Whatever the expert and academic background of the reader, the interdisciplinary nature of the subject I am discussing here cannot be ignored by assuming that someone else will be able to fault my claims. If I am deemed to be wrong, there is need to prove me wrong, not just assume I am wrong, because, if I am right, then the technology is indispensable in the onward quest to solve our energy needs. As a starter, one ought to begin by explaining an observed fact evident from the Strachan-Aspden devices as demonstrated. Though we do not have an operational unit any longer, there is a video record of operation. They were bimetallic assemblies of symmetrical construction as between the two heat sinks. When operating in Peltier mode to generate a heat difference with electrical power input along a transverse path parallel to the planes of the heat sinks, it should have been a 50:50 chance at switch on, whether heat sink A cooled or heat sink B cooled, as the other heated. That transverse path was through the planes of Ni-Al metal layers, stacked between those heat sinks. Yet, in every test witnessed, there was always cooling of the exposed heat sink, whereas the other heat sink was a metal base on which the electric circuitry was mounted, which meant that any excess power generated was dissipated as circuit current heating. The logical answer, as I see it, is that there was a cooling process supplementing and indeed overriding the Peltier Effect, and that cooling, I submit, can only be the Nernst Effect cooling which I have discussed at length above. *****
NOTE THAT THE REMAINDER OF THIS REPORT IS A TEXT DATING FROM A 1994 VERSION AND IT STANDS ON ITS OWN, SEPARATE FROM PART I ABOVE, EXCEPT THAT THERE HAS BEEN ADJUSTMENT OF THE FIGURE REFERENCES TO PROVIDE CONTINUITY OF SEQUENCE.
PART II
Introduction This is the third of a series of reports which are intended to serve as a technical briefing helpful in the evaluation of invention rights by expert opinion more familiar with conventional technology. The subject matter concerns thermoelectricity and ferromagnetism as applied in a novel combination aimed at a fundamentally new technique for converting heat and electricity using a solid state apparatus. It is foreseen that the technology proposed will allow the efficient generation of electricity on a scale that can serve as a main power supply based on non-polluting heat sources that need not necessarily be nuclear in form. The same technology is also seen as a substitute for CFC refrigeration and air conditioning systems. The background to what is here described is the demonstrated research prototype devices built by John Scott Strachan and incorporating principles which are the subject of patent rights of which this author and Strachan are co-inventors. Both Strachan and the author are independent in a research sense, meaning that the project work reported is not the work of research in a corporation or institutional laboratory. The physics involved in the invention is somewhat challenging and, in the light of established doctrines and practice, not easily understood without a special briefing. Indeed, without such a briefing as this, comment by experts on the technical viability of the technology, notwithstanding its demonstrable features, could impede the assessment task confronting technical advisors to those corporations we hope to interest in the needed R&D that the technology warrants. This Report No. 3 sets out to explore a new aspect of the technology and is supplemental to ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT No. 2 which is really a packaged assembly of prior reports and patent information covering the earlier activity on the Strachan-Aspden invention. The latter Report plus a demonstration of the working device in its refrigeration and power generation modes, as shown also in a video record, have been the basis in our efforts to engender interest by those who can take the R&D forward. This Report aims to point researchers in the direction which this author perceives as being the most promising from a product development point of view. However, in the absence of documented legal agreements, the Report should in no way be deemed to confer any implied free right of use in connection with what is disclosed, as proprietary rights are reserved, as by prior patent filing. Preliminary Observations The prototype demonstration devices all had a working core assembled from strips cut from an electrically polarised polymer sheet that formed the substrate for a very thin bimetallic surface coating of nickel and aluminium. The relevant features from a functional viewpoint are: (a) (b) (c) (d) The fact that the nickel is ferromagnetic. The fact that the two metals have contact interface that can intercept heat flow confined to the plane of the material. The fact that, in being very thin, the metal, when transporting heat, could operate with fairly high temperature gradients in the metal. The fact that the substrate was a heat insulator and a space filler separating the conductive metal films and so ensuring that losses by heat flow between hot and cold heat sinks were minimal. The fact that, in lending itself to assembly in a structure that became a series-parallel plate capacitor, we could excite electrical oscillations
(e)
17
transverse to the bimetallic junction interface plane, which meant that Peltier EMFs were directed in the line of current flow and such flow was through metal over an area of large cross-section which meant virtual elimination of I2R loss. (f) The fact that the two metals were opposite in electrical character, meaning that their charge and heat carriers were of different electrical polarities, a feature which, by virtue of the Thomson Effect, means that in-plane current flowing and circulating between the hot and cold sides of the device derived its power directly from heat throughput and did not drain the electrical power fed by the Peltier EMF. The fact that the device functioned as it was designed to function with a.c. as the transverse input-output form of power, because the Thomson current could divert the flow between hot and cold junction sides of the device according to the reversals of current polarity.
(g)
What we did not know is the design scope for increasing the thickness of the laminar metal in the device and whether the use of an a.c. operating frequency measured in tens of kilohertz was essential. It seemed from our earlier research that we needed that frequency activity to prevent a kind of lock-in effect forming super-cold spots in the Peltier-cooled portions of the junction interface or one needed a prevalent magnetic field which, by Lorentz force effects, could promote a shifting or displacement of the current flow traversing a junction. Strachan had suspected that there were oscillations developing in his d.c. experiments on thermocouples subjected to strong permanent magnet fields. Furthermore, and having regard to certain other early experiments that were performed on thick metal assemblies subjected to high temperature operation, but operating at power frequency, we may well have neglected the role of the Nernst Effect in interpreting the performance data in our high frequency capacitor coupled devices. It is noted that it was the Nernst Effect which this author saw as the crucial factor in the operation of the three metal device that became the subject of our U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 (corresponding U.K. Patent No. 2,225,161). However, Strachan in his funded experimental work concentrated attention on the form of device that was so impressive in generating power from ice and in freezing water with electric battery power input using that capacitor assembly and the subject of those other patents remained undeveloped. It may be noted also that the whole foundation of the cooperation between Strachan and myself was our correspondence and exchanges some time even before we first met en route to a 1988 Canadian symposium on clean energy. Those exchanges concerned the prospect of fabricating thermocouples by laminar thin film assemblies, virtually almost as a book-binding operation, and particularly our findings that magnets have a significant effect on the way thermocouple junctions perform. A practical problem which confronted Strachan was that a great deal of effort was needed to cut and assemble hundreds of tiny pieces of polymer film in a way which avoided short-circuits between adjacent metal films and yet allowed connections to be made linking into what was a combined series-parallel capacitor structure. In being of small size, meaning limited power rating, there was then the task of designing and connecting an electronic circuit that could develop the necessary oscillations and take off power without interposing obstructive circuit contact and threshold potentials, whilst, to get adequate current flow through the series-connected sections of the capacitor, resonant operation at high electrical stress in the polymer dielectric was necessary.
18
Indeed, the manual assembly problem and circuit design exposed, in a sense, Strachan's Achilles' heel and it was this that precluded extensive onward diagnostic testing based on building several test structures using different design parameters, eg. choice of metal combination, metal film thickness and substrate material. There were other factors too, mainly arising from the route Strachan had followed in his earlier corporate research employment, which had involved the bonding of stacks of the polymer film in a structure which was acoustically tuned to set up mechanical vibrations for a medical application. That project had encountered operational difficulties owing to delamination and the assembly technique, though tedious, had evolved to overcome that problem whilst still needing excessive care to avoid electrical end-shorting as the bonded film components were cut to size. In testing the structures assembled for that project Strachan had found that spurious electrical effects were overloading his test circuits and that there were instabilities that could be stimulated, seemingly by static charge, heat or mere physical displacement associated with manual handling. Another problem, concerning the later thermoelectric research, was that there was some uncertainty, at least in Strachan's mind, as to whether the piezoelectric properties of the polymer were contributing in some way, even though this seemed to be ruled out of significance by the a.c. operation. My assumption on this was that the heating and cooling that accompanies cycles of voltage potential would compensate one another. There simply had to be an operational asymmetry from a functional point of view if net heating and net cooling were to link with the highly efficient electrical energy exchange that was in evidence. It was only late in 1992, stimulated by a new funding sponsor interested in the power generation applications, that Strachan about measuring the magnetic field that was of necessity produced in the thin film by the Thomson Effect current circulation. His findings were of such an unexpected nature that he then stated we need have no more circuit switching problems. He became convinced that we were dealing with a phenomenon in the metal and not one in the polymer dielectric. Thermodynamics Limited, which was the vehicle through which the patent rights were to be exploited, was granted an option to acquire rights under the U.K. patents which allowed the contractual arrangement with the sponsor and the R&D appraisal funding was passed on by subcontract to Strachan's laser-orientated venture Optical Metrology Limited. Strachan's research findings were then covered by Thermodynamics Limited filing a U.K. patent application on 6th February 1993, but since then no further progress has been made and no information forthcoming from that project. In the event, therefore, though this patent application was officially published as GB 2,275,128 it was not taken further and so became abandoned. However, it is of relevance to this Report to summarize the scientific nature of the above discovery and, no doubt, more information will eventually be forthcoming from research endeavour of others now interested in that subject. In this connection, it must be stressed that, although we believe the phenomenon of interest is occurring in the metal, it is clear that there are some advantages in using the polymer PVDF because, in the form used, it has a strong electric polarization which allows one to control the cyclic changes of very strong electric fields at the interface with a metal film. This had a quite remarkable effect on the magnetic polarization developed in nickel but only when a temperature gradient was present in the plane of the film. The main thrust of this Report, which does not concern polymer features, is the onward research now needed to fabricate a product version, based on this author's own independent research findings, and this requires some discussion of the Nernst Effect.
19
What will be described below is a way of building a `solid-state magneto-hydrodynamic power generator' that has features which allow one to probe heat-to-electric-power energy conversion efficiencies not hitherto believed possible in a thermo-electric power converter. The Nernst Effect in thermoelectricity is one for which a temperature gradient in a metal in the z direction will, in the presence of a magnetic field acting in the x direction, produce an EMF in the y direction. The polarity of this EMF can be positive or negative according as to whether the heat transport is propagated by charge carriers which are of positive or electric polarity. The effect arises by analogy with the high power plasma technology involving thermal activation of ion flow in a magneto-hydro-dynamic (MHD) generator. In simple terms the magnetic field acts as a catalyst in asserting the usual Lorentz force action and causing the ions to be deflected from the z direction to the y direction. Heat is thereby deployed into an orderly electrical form which means that if electrical power is taken off in the y direction there is cooling and heat flow in the z direction loses temperature at an accelerated rate. In practical terms, of course, the problem is one of taking the electrical power off in the y direction without losing heat through the current conductor leads. In a MHD generator this poses little problem because of the plasma is transported at high speed and the heat is not merely that of conduction in a static gaseous medium. This eliminates the contest between metal conduction of heat and electricity that one finds in normal Nernst Effect devices. The Strachan-Aspden configuration is abnormal in this sense because the heat flow contest is between a polymer and the bimetallic laminations and the polymer, as a dielectric, transports electric current by Maxwell displacement processes which are unrelated to heat conduction. Now, what was the late-1992 experimental discovery? It may have been illusory, a kind of ghost action related to magnetostriction in nickel and the Villari Effect, by which a stress induced piezoelectrically in the substrate polymer and subject to applied heat conditions was affecting the polarization of the nickel. On the other hand, it could come to be regarded as a new thermoelectric effect, ranking alongside those of Seebeck, Peltier, Thomson, Nernst, Ettinghausen and Leduc, all of which are different and yet somehow related phenomena. The discovery indicated that the application of a thermal gradient in the z direction combined with the application of an EMF producing a potential drop through the dielectric interfacing with the metal and perhaps communicated into the metal in the y direction will spontaneously affect a magnetic polarisation in the x direction. On the face of it, the experiment showed that a powerful magnetic field could be switched on and off in the x direction by regulating that EMF and no significant electrical power input was needed. Strachan proved this by feeding the control signal through a very high resistance and we saw this as amounting to a kind of solid-state grid-control device by which a powerful magnetic field could be switched on and off, even at a frequency measured in tens of kilohertz. What was needed was the heat input setting up that temperature gradient. It was on this basis that the above-referenced patent application was filed, because one could see this as a way forward for converting heat input into electrical output via magnetic induction based on the use of transformer principles. However, with no useful detailed measurement data adequate at this time to determine the true nature of the action, this writer has been left in a quandary on this issue. Whereas the basic Nernst Effect is the use of magnetism as a mere catalyst in converting heat into electricity and vice versa, we had here sight of the possibility of using a controlling electric field as a mere catalyst in regulating energy exchange as between heat and magnetic induction power output. The latter represents control, modulation, operation at a power frequency
20
and voltage output governed by the turns on a inductively-coupled winding, all of which is good news for commercial exploitation. This finding by Strachan must be researched further, in the light of the fact that the discovery was made using very thin film metal on the polymer substrate, and Strachan's later attempts to replicate the control action in a unit assembled from metal sheet stock were also successful, though only partially so when the metal thickness exceeded 10 microns. The research was abandoned before he had performed enough diagnostic testing of the phenomenon and given enough attention to magnetic inductive coupling problems in his test rig. One remains in doubt, therefore, as to whether or not it may be possible to exploit the above discovery in a heat pump or in fully operative heat to electricity converter. This is where this author decided to get involved directly on an independent experimental venture which has, however, been of minimal scope so far owing to the problem of setting up a home laboratory facility with no external funding source. My objective was to see through a form of experiment where heat gradients are established in bimetallic laminations by inductive in-feed of eddy-currents. That might seem the wrong way to go about the research, bearing in mind that one seeks to avoid loss and have heat transfer supplied via external heat sinks, but the physics of the internal eddy-current heating action can be quite revealing. Also, I had become mindful of the fact that research on cold fusion had proved unrewarding as soon as èxpert' verification had involved extra care in keeping temperature constant in a test calorimeter. This, I had interpreted as a recipe for choking off the action, in that it might require a temperature gradient in the host metal cathode used in cold fusion to set up the electric nucleating charge effects that could initiate the reaction. So, my feelings were that there was sense in our thermoelectric situation in feeding heat into the metal to set up the initial temperature gradients which could act as a switch-on trigger in activating the Nernst Effect. Accordingly, with this preliminary commentary, I draw attention to the reference to my thermoelectric research reported at pp. 21-30 of ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1 which gave me confidence in the energy regeneration potential possible from use of the Nernst Effect in the manner of the Strachan-Aspden invention. ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2 gives the full background of record concerning the 1988-1993 activity on the Strachan-Aspden invention. This Report concerns therefore what this author now sees as the most promising way forward, presented as part of an overall project, but the general effort, as funded by future sponsoring interests, still ought to proceed on several parallel investigations to ensure we do know the best route to expediting commercial development. There are four separate research avenues warranting such exploration and, in retrospect, the first, which involves use of polymers, is the one that seems to be the most difficult but yet it is the one used by Strachan in all three demonstrated prototypes. The reason is that the evidence of an anomalous thermoelectric effect presented itself as unexpected spin-off from the prior research performed by Strachan for the medical application. That, fortuitously, upon special development, made it possible to table a demonstration of something that was quite tantalizing but somewhat ahead of the understanding of the true physics involved. However, in being linked to the polymer feature, that predisposed research effort in a way that has thwarted rapid progress. Strachan's full report on this background technology is an Appendix to ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2. The four research routes can be summarized as: 1) The development of thin-film polymer-based devices replicating the design features of the three prototype devices already built by Strachan and all of which functioned
21
well. Strachan has not run the two devices designed to work in refrigeration mode much below !40o C and the object should be to see how low one can take the temperature in view of the cryogenic possibilities. Strachan has avoided upper temperatures beyond that of water under normal pressure, because the polymer substrate properties would deteriorate and he relies on that for the capacitor activation. Here, however, one can see the potential for using polymers which are electrically conductive but heat resistive, i.e. not exploiting their dielectric capacitative properties, and that certainly warrants full scale R&D investigation. 2) Effort on developing the design embodied in the magnetically activated thick metal structure disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 5,065,085 (U.K. Patent No. 2,225,161). Test results on this have not been documented by Strachan but he reported that he had in fact done tests which were successful and it was on that basis that the subject patent applications were filed. Flame heat was apparently used as input and that promises something of interest to higher temperature needs of the power generating industry. There should be effort to explore the `discovery' of the electric field control further, first from the pure verification aspect of this as a new scientific 'effect' and then as an application study to understand if the principle can be built into a practical heatelectricity transformer device. If that proves impractical it is important to know the reason why. There should also be an experimental investigation based on the theme now to be discussed in the remainder of this Report, which aims directly at a regenerative action by which heat is converted into electricity. The prospect in sight here is not just the generation of main power from heat, but the refrigeration features that are entailed in the same process.
3)
4)
Solid-State Magneto-Hydrodynamic Power It is assumed at this stage that the reader will have access to the detailed description of the Strachan-Aspden technology as described in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2, it being the sole objective now to develop the research theme (4) of the above list. In order to focus the attentions of industrial interests it seems best to outline at this stage the anticipated constructional form of a possible product. The core design would seem to be one having two planar metal heat transfer surfaces bounding an internal assembly. A temperature differential between these two surfaces is associated with heat flow through laterally-disposed metal rib-like connections within the structure. Some means for electrical activation of a cross-current flow transverse to the heat flow direction is then needed inside the panel unit thus formed. The latter could, as simple logical alternatives, be couplings or connections that are either capacitative, directly conductive (through heat insulating polymer) or magnetically inductive, whichever is the most effective and reliable as well as viable on price considerations. This description, however, presents a quite ingenious way of using the conductive coupling without the design limitations of capacitance coupling. It has the merit of also being the most expeditious research route for this author in present circumstances, pending developments on the conductive polymer front.
THERE IS NO PAGE 22
23
In outlining this specific product form, this author is relying on his assumption that it is the Nernst Effect that can be exploited by a special combination of design features and it is important, therefore, to give a solid physical scientific basis for that assumption. This is based on a logical consideration of the problem of harnessing the Nernst Effect and, more particularly, upon an experiment. The experiment is that discussed below under the heading Nernst Effect in Relation to Eddy-Currents. The logical theme is that of the following argument. A conventional MHD generator feeds heat into an ionised gas by combustion leading to ionisation. The gas is caused to flow along a channel subjected to a lateral magnetic field. This deflects positive ions one way and negative ions the other way, causing them to develop a back EMF across the side electrodes, which EMF acts against their motion in the direction of deflection and slows them down. In cooling they have transferred energy into electric potential that feeds a current drawn off from those electrodes. This process is subject to the Carnot efficiency limitation, because the gas has a temperature and as much gas flows as output as enters as input, losing temperature on the way. The Carnot efficiency concerns the amount of heat energy extracted as electricity in relation to heat input, but that gas emerging as waste heat at a lower temperature carries away the energy that cannot be converted into electricity. Note that the Peltier Effect or Seebeck Effect have a Carnot limitation because here the relevant action occurs at a junction interface between two metals having a contact potential set up between them. Here there is a circulating current confined to the metal circuit, but the crossing of the current at the hot junction interface results in a cooling because the current is produced by an EMF proportional to the contact potential (Peltier EMF) at the higher temperature. All that power is transferred into electricity which goes around the circuit, not as heat, but as electrical action. The current, unfortunately, has to cross the other cooler junction and so it has to allow much of that electrical power to come back into the thermal picture and go to waste by producing heat related to that cooler junction temperature. This is what brings the Carnot energy conversion efficiency restriction into play. Then, there is the Thomson Effect by which the very presence of a temperature gradient, even in a single metal substance, results in heat flow conveyed by electric charge carriers. These are like the ionised gas in the MHD generator. They do not escape from the metal but if two metals work together, one conveying negative charge and the other positive charge, with that heat flow, so the action can occur to transfer heat whilst the process complies with the Carnot criteria. It is here that a discerning scientist might ask whether one can arrest the flow of heat in a metal by applying a back EMF. The answer is negative, but the answer is not to be found in textbooks. The reason, undoubtedly, is that heat flow is a shared and collective action involving all free charge present in a metal, whereas the moment one applies an EMF to a metal there is an unstable effect and a current discharge that drives electrons against the heat flow by allowing some to group into a fast-moving filamentary flow. This is seen as accounting for the `cold-spot' effects occurring at the cooled thermoelectric junction, as discussed in an Appendix to ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2. Now, let us consider the Nernst Effect. Here there is a temperature gradient, which means a flow of heat energy carried by free electric charge in metal. In iron or nickel this becomes subject to the magnetic action present in all the microscopic domains, but we will simply consider that, owing to the ferromagnetic nature or iron or nickel, we can set up a strong magnetic field transverse to that heat flow.
24
This is nothing other than a solid-state MHD scenario which suggests a Carnot limitation on performance. However, consider here what it is that is carrying that heat. It is the electrons or positive holes and we need to ask how these are affected in transit between the hot and cold sides of the metal host conductor. Firstly, they are deflected by the usual Lorentz forces to set up the EMF transversely in the metal. That means cooling as energy feeds into electric potential. Secondly, is there a difference between this and the MHD generator? Yes, there is, because once an ion in the MHD generator has cooled by delivering the electrical output, that ion merges with other gas ions that are all flowing with it along the channel towards the exhaust end of the generator and it can acquire no further energy able to generate more electricity without depriving another ion from asserting that role. In the metal, on the other hand, there are atoms vibrating about 'rest' positions in the structure that act as mediators in the thermal exchanges. This means that the heat shed by an electron can be promptly replenished while still in the hot zone, replenished by a source that does not itself have to move on to the lower temperature region. Note here that when an electron is deflected by the magnetic field to set up that transverse EMF it knows only the local temperature. It cannot just shed an amount of heat energy that leaves it at the temperature at the cooler end of the system. Indeed, it may be brought to rest in a thermal sense and have to merge with the environment by picking up heat which implies conservation of `cold' in the process. If energy and heat can be conserved, so can `cold', meaning that, if the electron has shed its heat by the Nernst Effect, it will need some action at the low temperature end of the system to bring the Carnot regime into this scenario. Yet, as the electrons reach the end of their passage through the metal and the magnetic field they are still subject to same heat-to-electrical transfer action because the Nernst Effect is still active so long as some heat is flowing. The result of this is that the Nernst Effect becomes a function of temperature gradient and not temperature as such. The temperature gradient is a measure of the relevant electric current flow as carried by 'free' charge. Heat flow carried by electrons in passage through a strong transverse magnetic field and subject to a high temperature gradient will then develop an EMF which, if allowed to feed current, will, in turn, develop a cooling effect which has no regard to the absolute temperature except to the extent that the heat content per electron is determined by that temperature. If one assumes that an electron giving up its heat energy to set up a Nernst potential loses only a proportion of that energy and recovers none in its onward passage to lower temperature regions in the metal, then one can logically argue that the Carnot efficiency factor applies as in the MHD generator. However, this seems not to be a correct physical picture of the true events occurring with the Nernst Effect. Indeed, it seems one can think in terms of a near 100% efficiency of heat-to-electricity energy conversion, just as the operation of Lorentz-related electrodynamic forces in electrical machines operate at near to 100% efficient mechanical energyto-electricity conversion. This author submits, particularly in the light of the experiments described in this Report, that the facts support the logic of this challenging argument and this, therefore, gives us a route forward to an energy technology that has enormous implications. The only question we really face from a practical point of view in performing an experimental test is the task of deciding how to cause heat to flow one way through a metal whilst we take off electric current in a transverse direction without diverting heat flow in the same direction. This assumes that we can set up a magnetic field at right angles to both, which is clearly very possible.
25
Having considered this at some length and in the hope of exploiting that unwanted heat generated, if it is confined to the region where it can still do useful work, the author has devised the following structure expressly to perform the thermoelectric power conversion using the Nernst Effect. Skin Effect Segregation In order to get current to traverse a metal in the y direction with heat flow in the z direction and a magnetic field in the x direction, one can provide a metal interface between metals A and B across the xz plane and feed a.c. current through the structure in the y direction in a way which restricts the current flow to a metal surface of the A metal, whereas heat flow in the same direction is spread over the cross-section of the conductor and not subject to such a restriction. Then that heat flow can enter metal B from metal A at a position in metal B behind the current traversal position. This means that the heat entering metal B can then turn to flow in the z direction transverse to that current in the y direction. The way to do this at normal power frequencies is to provide a rather thick highpermeability ferromagnetic conductor as metal A with metal B being a very thin ferromagnetic conductor. The current-heat segregation arises from eddy-current skin effect in metal A and, in traversing a thin section of metal B, the current will choose a flow path that is through a single ferromagnetic domain in metal B in which the magnetic polarization is transverse to the heat flow path and the current flow path and also in the direction that causes the Nernst Effect to develop a forward EMF. An experimental test rig by which to verify this action is depicted in Fig. 6(a) and Figs. 6(b) to (h) apply to its operating principle. Referring first to Fig. 6(f) the intention, for operation in the power generating mode drawing on heat supplied through a duct intermediate two panel structures in Fig. 6(a), is to cause heat to enter a thick metal heat sink layer of a ferromagnetic material coextensive with the surface of the duct. Then the heat flow is guided through 50 micron (0.002 inch) steel film which greatly reduces the thermally conductive cross-section and so results in a steep temperature gradient in that film. If much of this heat can be removed at entry into the film owing to a thermoelectric action there will then only by a small residual heat flow of much reduced temperature gradient left to provide direction for that flow towards the other heat transfer interface. To use the Nernst Effect to discharge this cooling function one needs, firstly, a strong magnetic field, then, secondly, a flow of heat and, thirdly, a route for current flow, all mutually orthogonal. This means that one must contrive a way of ensuring that the heat flow does not automatically assume the same path as the current. How can we separate heat flow and current flow in a common metal structure without having the current flow through a capacitative gap in the metal? Consider Fig. 6(d). Here a thick steel rod is shown to have an external current circuit which is arranged to magnetize the rod along its axis. One can set up a temperature differential along that axis and have heat flowing through the rod distributed uniformly over its cross-section. If now the current is a.c. and the rod has a high magnetic permeability and is thick in relation to that frequency, eddy-current skin effects will confine the current to a section close to the perimeter surface of the rod. Most of the heat will then enter the rod along a path that is different from that of the current. Should that rod be cooled in some way from the outside, as with the Fig. 6(f) representation, that small amount of heat loss will require heat to be diverted radially, and so orthogonally, with respect to any d.c. magnetic field along the rod axis and with respect to the induced skin current.
26
In this scenario one would have heat converting into electricity by Nernst Effect cooling, but all that would occur would be enhancement of the eddy-loss as the current escalates and the skin-effect becomes even more restrictive. Heat would be regenerated and there would simply be anomalous eddy-current effects, a phenomenon actually found in normal transformer sheet steels, but one that has not been understood by the academic establishment. The way forward is to consider now Fig. 6(e). Here, the circuit loop is an elongated parttubular thick ferromagnetic core and it is presumed that the a.c. current is supplied in the manner shown. In this case, the eddy-current skin effect is not on the outside of the core. The current is concentrated at the inside surface. The reason is that the current follows the path of least resistance and it would rather flow around a thin metal path embracing what is mainly an air core than around the highly inductive ferromagnetic core as well. This configuration allows us to intercept the EMFs that are developed by the Nernst Effect, because they constitute `forward' EMFs assisting flow, meaning that, if we can conceive heat action bringing about electrical current oscillations in a converter which incorporates the principles being described. Now, rather than providing a special magnetizing winding for producing a powerful magnetic field in the metal and then contriving the heat transfer interfaces inside that winding, it seems best to make use of the intrinsic domain magnetism in a core comprising thin steel film. Refer now to Fig. 6(b). Here, several such films or laminations are shown to be sandwiched between two steel bars. The bars form an energy route for heat which is to flow through the steel laminations and be bled off through those laminations to seek a cooler heat sink at their extremities. A conductive metal, which need not be ferromagnetic, in between the base section of the laminations merely serves to provide the conductive path makes their connection. Looking at a single lamination, one can see from Fig. 6(c) how the saturation magnetic flux in the domains can be directed. The dots and crosses denote arrow directions as pointers indicating the magnetic flux orientation. Any current passing transversely though the lamination will be aided by the intervening non-magnetic highly conductive metal to guide it through the domain which offers least resistance. Going one way through a domain will develop a back Nernst EMF and going the other way will develop a forward Nernst EMF. According to its polarity the current will always choose a route through a domain which offers a forward Nernst EMF. There will always be cooling if there is an orthogonal temperature gradient. This is shown in Figs. 6(g) and 6(h), with the skin effect serving to separate the heat flow path (broken lines) and the current flow path (full lines). The domain pattern in the thin film, whether in nickel or iron, which have different polarity Nernst Effects, will always govern the current flow and contribute to cooling. Note that, by using thick steel bars to provide the heat sink spacer members, the heat can flow freely to the entry into the domains in the film. The skin effect, even if such that current is confined to what is effectively a 10% section of the thick steel bar, will only suffer the resistance losses that relate to flow in that restricted section, but set alongside the power generated by the Nernst Effect cooling action, this is a quite small loss and it merely regenerates heat input. The only loss as such is that of heat conducted to the remote secondary heat exchange interface. Thus, in Fig. 6(a), the structure shows how current circuit connections can be made to link with a transformer core and other windings coupled to external circuits. The bold lines indicate a thin layer of electrical insulation, which still allows passage of heat, it being necessary to avoid the short-circuiting of the power generated. The rib-like connecting films can, in functional terms, be left floating in a cooling medium with no assembly for the secondary heat exchange interface.
27
An inert gas blown across the fins thus formed would serve as the means for assuring the temperature gradient which activates the main cooling function drawing on heat supplied to the inner duct. *********** THE ABOVE TEXT WAS WRITTEN IN MARCH 1994 WITH A VIEW TO INCORPORATING A SECTION HERE WHEN A PRELIMINARY EXPERIMENT ON THE ABOVE LINES HAD BEEN PERFORMED. IN THE EVENT THE EXPERIMENT WAS DEFERRED PENDING COMPLETION OF THE EXPERIMENT REPORTED IN THE NEXT SECTION. *********** The Magnetic Inductively-Coupled Device Whereas the above description concerns a electrically-conductive coupling between separate compartmented sections of a thermoelectric power converter and uses a transformer coupling externally to bring together the power generated from heat in each metal film current crossing, one can see scope for building a version which relies directly on a magnetic inductive coupling in each cell of the structure. In effect, this involves building a transformer within each compartment. This is shown in Fig. 11 of a recently filed patent application. (See Appendix I on page 37). The device would comprise internally a series of longitudinal compartments each containing a slender rod-like magnetic core. A winding on the core would provide the circuit by which input or output a.c. is fed through all such windings connected in series and possibly through an isolating transformer. The heat transfer problems of the outer bounding metal surfaces and their design will not be discussed as these are familiar terrain for those involved in the relevant industries and this is not intended to be part of a business proposal for setting up a manufacturing venture. Noting that the bimetallic metal circuit linked by each ferromagnetic core is virtually a shortcircuit, the reader will understand that very little EMF has to be induced to set up the internal current circulation. That said, the cross-section and operating magnetic flux density can be quite small, even though the design aims to take off substantial current by transformer action. A very close coupling as between the heat-driven primary circuit and the secondary as output winding is then essential and that is assured by the enclosed compartment feature which provides a conductive housing along the whole length of the ferromagnetic cores. The latter do not need flux closure structure in small product applications, because being very long in relation to their sectional dimensions, they have very little demagnetizing effect and such inductance as does exist is to the good, because it will serve to smooth out the loading as between the several cores. *********** THE TEXT JUST PRESENTED WAS WRITTEN IN MARCH 1994 BEFORE THE AUTHOR'S OWN EXPERIMENTS ON THIS CORE SYSTEM WITH MULTIBIMETALLIC-LAMINAR STACKS WERE PERFORMED. TWO SUCH EXPERIMENTS ARE NOW REPORTED BELOW. ***********
28
(a) First Experiment Two ferrite-cored transformer units were used, each having a primary input winding and a secondary output winding, arranged side by side and parallel-connected to feed a common shortcircuit single turn tertiary winding, the latter comprising strips of aluminium through the cores bridging external stacks of multi-laminar metal composed of alternate layers of 50 micron steel shim and electrolytically tinned sheet steel of 200 micron thickness. There were about 140 layers of steel in each of the two stacks and the thin layers of tin provided electrical contact between them and separated the current flow paths through the magnetic domains in the steel. In principle, current flow in the primary induces an EMF in the tertiary winding which, given a temperature gradient in the bimetallic stacks, should develop a negative resistance owing to the Nernst Effect. This should cause current to flow augmenting the action of the primary current in overcoming the reaction set up by a load current. Hopefully, heat input to the bimetallic stacks would then result in electrical power output from the secondary windings whilst the power supplied to the primary winding would be mainly reactive in sustaining the magnetization. The result of the experiment was that a comparison of power input versus power output from the secondary indicated that the transformers were functioning as if the tertiary single turn winding did not even exist! It did not seem to draw any short-circuit current that could effect the operation and did not contribute any thermoelectric current to the output, so far as could be judged. However, no heat input was applied and there was little point in making that provision, given that the current flow through the bimetallic stack and on which the experiment relied was not in evidence. Since ferrite cores were used in the transformers it was possible to connect a capacitor to tune the input impedance to unity power factor and run on secondary load at an audio frequency so as to explore the possibility that the short-circuit path was obstructing current flow owing to it having a high self-inductance. A resonance at 12 kHz was observed, but energy accounting in this state revealed no thermoelectric anomaly, albeit with no heat input. It was evident that there was some unexpectedly high resistance effect in the short-circuit path through the bimetallic stack, sufficient to restrict the transformer action to interplay between the primary and secondary windings, inasmuch as the short-circuit tertiary winding embraced both of those windings. Yet, the very existence of the changing core magnetic flux should still produce EMF in that circuit through the bimetallic stacks. It was decided to establish just how much of the action could be conveyed through that bimetallic stack circuit, by constructing new apparatus, the subject of the second experiment. (b) Second Experiment Here two 100 VA 50 Hz power transformers were coupled to form a unit with a primary winding on one and a secondary winding on the other, the coupling being through a single turn circuit through two copper bars linking two stacks of about 200 steel laminations, with intervening tin coating, which formed the secondary output from the first transformer and the primary input to the second. The power finding its way through this system would have to involve current flow through the bimetallic stacks. Tests were performed which, again, confirmed that the current circuit through the laminations was sufficiently resistive to preclude any chance of a thermoelectric gain, at least with a modest heat input, though, again, no provision for that was made at this preliminary diagnostic stage.
29
The two transformers and their windings were identical and so, in voltage terms at 50 Hz, the no load secondary output voltage should be reasonably close to the no-load primary input voltage, if the common coupling circuit through the bimetallic stacks could function to carry sufficient current to supply the magnetization needs of the second transformer. The first test gave the following data: Primary 50 V 100 V 150 V 200 V 250 V Secondary 0.111 V 0.227 V 0.349 V 0.493 V 0.640 V
Prior to this, the input transformer of this identical pair was tested to determine its no-load magnetizing input current. The standard rating at 240 V by the manufacturer of the kits from which the transformers were assembled was 120 mA. The following test data apply: Voltage 10 20 30 40 50 100 150 200 240 250 Current 0.80 mA 1.39 mA 1.88 mA 2.40 mA 3.02 mA 6.19 mA 12.58 mA 53.8 mA 121.8 mA 154.0 mA
It was clear from this that something significant was obstructing this 50 Hz current flow through the bimetallic stack. It was possible, from the symmetry of the apparatus, to test the d.c. resistance of the two stacks as if they were parallel connected rather than series connected. A current of 96 mA gave a potential drop of 2.5 mV, corresponding to a parallel resistance of 0.026 ohms and a series circuit resistance of 0.104 ohms. When tested at 340 mA the potential drop was 9.3 mV, meaning a loop circuit resistance of 0.109 ohms. The problem now was that, having passed some d.c. through the bimetallic stack, there was the possibility that some circular in-plane magnetic polarization had taken place in the steel laminations, possibly affecting the inductance to a.c. current flow. Accordingly, and also because the d.c. might have affected contact resistance, the primary to secondary voltage ratio was again measured, with the following improved results: Primary 20 V 40 V 80 V
Secondary 7.57 V 11.22 V 13.61 V
30
120 V 140 V 180 V 240 V
14.30 V 14.69 V 14 83 V 14.95 V
To make sense of these results, it is noted that at 240 V, the rated induced EMF per turn of the transformer is 0.37 V and to feed enough magnetizing current to develop reaction flux corresponding to 14.95 V in a magnetizing winding the above magnetization current data show that about 1.20 mA will suffice in the 240/0.37 number of turns. This translates into a magnetizing current of 0.78 A generated in the stack loop with a 0.37 V signal. The impedance of the loop is 0.47 ohms at 50 Hz. This is rather curious. If the current flow is resisted by the contact potentials in the bimetallic stack then one would expect the increasing induced EMF as the input volts range from 80 V to 240 V to cause a progressively increasing current flow, whereas the data suggest a saturation effect. Something is limiting the current. That loop current of 0.78 A passes through 400 junctions from steel to tin interleaved with 400 junctions from tin to steel. It could therefore be that the Peltier heating and Peltier cooling at each junction pair sets up sufficient temperature differential in the current flow direction for a limiting current situation to develop which overrides any hope of exploiting the Nernst Effect. Remember that in the dielectric stack assembly built by Strachan there was thermal separation between adjacent junctions in the transverse current direction through the stack and this thermal isolation of junctions could well be essential. In this author's own experiments with a transformer assembled from bimetallic laminations [See Energy Science Report No. 1] the laminations are insulated from each other as in a conventional transformer and so the close dual junction crossing does not occur in that situation either. To sum up, at 0.109 ohms, we have a higher d.c. resistance than is expected when 0.34 A flows through the loop circuit. The 50 Hz a.c. impedance at 0.78 A is 0.47 ohms, which seems enormous for a stack path through metal conductor of about 2 sq. cm cross section and 10 cm length linked by copper bars of 20 cm length and 0.5 sq. cm section. Even allowing for the selfinductance attributable to the high permeability of steel, that permeability would have to be truly enormous to account for the 0.47 ohm impedance at 50 Hz. Accordingly, the author is inclined to suspect that the Peltier effect of two closely adjacent junctions in the current flow path is defeating the scope for tapping the Nernst Effect, but, whatever the cause, it seems logical to abandon attempts to build a through-conductor metal coupling between laminations in the bimetallic stack. This causes attention now to turn to the alternative of harnessing the Nernst Effect by virtue of its interaction with eddy-currents in transformer laminations. ********* Nernst Effect in Relation to Eddy-Currents It is assumed that the reader is familiar with the way in which eddy-currents are induced in a sheet steel lamination as used in a power transformer. The cyclic oscillations of the magnetic field cause an EMF to be induced in any circuit conductor wrapped around the core. This is why power can be taken off from the secondary
31
winding. Given then that the steel laminations are of metal and that they share in carrying that magnetic flux oscillation, each lamination experiences a small circuital EMF internally and this causes a circulating current flow around what is a short-circuit path. As a result there is a loss which is termed èddy-current' loss. This loss is small in comparison with the power that can be transferred between primary and secondary windings by the transformer action, but yet it can be significant and the design reduces such loss to a minimum by using steels which have higher resistivity and laminations which are small in thickness. The loss can be avoided by use of ferrites but commercial power transformers are subject to other design criteria related to size and I2R losses and steel laminations offer the best design option. It so happens that this author devoted three years Ph.D. research effort to the study of anomalous eddy-current losses in sheet steels (1950-1953) and is aware of the fact that there has been little progress in the further understanding aspects of those anomalous losses since that period. Indeed, not many academics working in electrical engineering today even know that there is a loss anomaly. Yet, under certain circumstances, the loss, as observed experimentally, can amount to a tenfold increase over what theory based on Ohm's law prescribes. Moreover, as this author's research verified, the momentary values of the loss factor (experiment versus theory) varies significantly around the magnetization loop and in dependence upon mechanical stress and d.c. polarization. From the viewpoint of this Report the introduction of heat by eddy-current induction as a way of testing a thermoelectric action is an interesting proposition, because adjacent laminations in a transformer are electrically insulated from one another and this must, in some measure, mean that the eddy-current heating and hysteresis loss as well will involve thermal conduction in plane in the laminations. This is what we have in the Strachan-Aspden thermoelectric device, but whereas heat flows from one side of a laminar assembly to the other in that device, the flow is from the centre outwards in the transformer. Now, in spite of the fact that the writer, as an undergraduate, had in his possession a textbook on physics which includes a very extensive section on thermoelectricity and does explain all the named Èffects' mentioned above, it did not at any time in that later Ph.D. research era occur to him as relevant to study thermoelectric action in the conventional transformer core. One thinks of thermoelectricity as being something involving two metals and, if one does ponder the single metal situations where heat gradients apply, the effect of an a.c. magnetic field oscillating at 50 Hz or 60 Hz can hardly be expected to develop a non-cancelling thermoelectric action. The heat energy cycling at such frequencies by sequential cooling and heating in equal measure will, one might presume, not do much to the temperature profile in a steel lamination and so any heat that is produced by magnetization loss is seen simply in that light as being mere energy wastage and having no thermoelectric implications. What the writer completely overlooked, even though professing expert insight into eddycurrent phenomena, though well knowing that magnetic domains in ferromagnetic crystals are a factor in enhancing losses, was something that is now blindingly obvious. It has taken the diagnostic testing of our Strachan-Aspden devices to turn the essential key by seeing reason to challenge the way we accept that d.c. electric current flow in metals is uniformly distributed over the conductor cross-section, whilst a.c. current flow might experience some surface concentration as a function of frequency. Suppose that the flow is carried by electrons and ask the question as to whether electrons can convey current if they all share the action equally at every instant or if they find it easier to
32
carry current by getting in line one behind the other and all moving together. In short, for a given limited current flow, may it not be that filamentary current surges can occur by electrons taking turn in joining a team and forming sporadic fast-moving surges, whilst those left out of such teams enjoy freedom from the current transport task? If this is seen as `no more than an idea' I invite readers to wonder why there is something magical about a current of 19 amps. This is a level of current at which current discharges in certain plasma type experiments divide into separate filaments. It happens also to be the current carried by a flow of electrons, lined up one behind the other, with each electron moving forward past a check point every time, as it were, that the whistle blows, assuming that the frequency is that we associate with the Compton wavelength of the electron. Current flow through a metal could well involve short-lived filamentary surges comprising discontinuous elementary circuit elements of a momentary 19 amp strength. What we measure might seem to be a continuous mere milliamp current uniformly distributed over the metal crosssection, but what may be happening inside that metal is something else. It is for this reason that in the earlier research on the Strachan-Aspden thermoelectric device it was concluded that the a.c. activation is what precluded cold-spots forming at junction interfaces. The transport of current across the Peltier cooled junction in a metal as opposed to in a semiconductor would obviously act to cool the metal in the very limited territory of that junction and that means enhancement of electrical conductivity owing to that supercooled region. There is every reason then to believe that with d.c. operation the formation of a filamentary flow would cause the filament to lock into one junction spot. Effectively the spot would cool until it nearly was at the temperature of the remote Peltier heated junction and that would mean that d.c. thermocouples composed of base metals, such as aluminium and nickel, would have very poor thermoelectric power properties. With a semiconductor the cooling usually tends to increase resistivity and that would drive the filament away to a path of lower resistance and so preclude that cold-spot locking. Now, keeping in mind that current flow may be filamentary and that currents like to follow the paths of least resistance, consider that steel transformer lamination and suppose we apply a strong d.c. magnetic field plus a relatively weak a.c. field which puts some eddy-current heating into the lamination. We then have a situation where, by the Nernst Effect a temperature gradient on one side of the lamination will interact with the d.c. magnetic field to produce an EMF directed through the thickness of the lamination. Similarly on the other side, because heat flow is in the opposite direction, we have a Nernst EMF directed the other way through the thickness of the lamination. This is a recipe for setting up a current circulation in the lamination that is not an eddycurrent but a d.c. current flow. Now, depending upon the polarity of the Nernst Effect for the metal, such current would either act to strengthen the d.c. field or would act to suppress that field. In one case, the action would, in theory, mean an escalation of the d.c. field strength. In other words, unless there is something that qualifies what is being described, a ferromagnetic lamination could conceivably become a bistable element, polarized overall in one direction or the other and lock in to that state by virtue of the controls we exercise on heat gradients. Note that nickel and iron have opposite polarity Nernst coefficients and so one or other should meet the specified criteria. The phenomenon suggested is, however, is something that I believe can rightly be declared as `contrary to experience' and therefore unlikely. However, it means that we have to explain now
33
why it does not occur and so, since I did not argue the filamentary current case, in developing that polarization theme, I will now reexamine the question assuming filamentary current flow. To proceed, take note that in truth the steel lamination comprises magnetic domains all of which are magnetized to saturation in one or other of the three orthogonal axes in its crystals. Imagine that the Nernst Effect is at work setting up those circuital EMFs but pose the question as to which magnetic field direction really governs the action, because any externally applied d.c. field is not going to affect much the strength of the local magnetic field in the domains which happen to be momentarily occupied by the filamentary current. Consideration then shows that the filamentary current flow will, if the `hypothesis' holds, always choose a path through a domain having the magnetic polarization in a direction which corresponds to cooling since this is the path of least resistance, indeed of negative resistance. In short there could be a net cooling effect if the ohmic losses arising from in-plane current flow are less than the Nernst power action that is generated. Indeed, such a scenario would be one that escalates because the heating in the central region of the lamination would enhance the temperature gradient as that heat is conducted back to the edges and, in effect, the action would be selfregenerating and run continuously with no intervention from outside. If the applied field were an a.c. field the action would see the filamentary current direction reverse, it having then the phase of the eddy-currents, but in physical terms it would be as if the resistivity of the steel lamination had, in effect and overall, reduced virtually to zero. To summarize the position, either one accepts the filamentary current hypothesis or one does not. If it is not accepted, then one has the problem of explaining why a steel lamination in a transformer does not virtually convert into a permanent magnet. Also one cannot then explain the very high thermoelectric EMFs which we measured for Al:Ni junctions using a.c. activation, because there is then no reason why the very much lower d.c. thermoelectric power of record in reference data should not apply to the a.c. embodiments. That also leaves us with a problem. If it is accepted, then one can predict a very high anomalous eddy-current loss under circumstances where the lamination thickness is small enough to imply single domains over that thickness. The issue is intimately associated with the exploitation of the Nernst Effect as a cooling process because the interaction of our external controls and the internal current circulation inside the metal lamination can greatly enhance the scope for practical energy conversion. Experimental Investigations The objective of the experimental investigations can be set in context if one refers to a vector diagram showing the normal operation of a power transformer on load and on no load. The focus of attention is the eddy-current induced in a single lamination as normally used in a transformer. The current flow parallel with the surface of the lamination is subject to resistance and that flow accounts for virtually all of the eddy-current loss, whereas the flow of current at the edges and transverse to the main flow makes the short crossing of the thickness of the lamination and will take the path of least resistance. A lamination that has a 200 micron thickness is one in which single magnetic domains could well span the full thickness, meaning that a current which has, near those edges of the lamination, to flow from one side to the other can do that by passage through that single lamination. This contrasts with the main flow parallel with the surface, in that the latter has no choice but to travel
34
through the succession of domains in its path which have polarizations first one way and then the other way. Given that the temperature gradient in the lamination will normally be confined to flow in the plane of the lamination and across its width as opposed to its length, that makes it orthogonal with the current crossing the thickness and with the magnetic polarization of some of the domains. That current can choose a domain for which the Nernst Effect asserts a cooling action to give an EMF impetus to the current flow. In summary, therefore, we see that the Nernst Effect in a thin transformer lamination will drive eddy-currents as if it introduces a negative resistance in the eddy-current loop circuit, given the natural heating that occurs anyway with the presence of magnetization loss. The question at issue is how this Nernst Effect can be represented on a vector diagram showing transformer core operation and the answer to this is that it amounts to a forward EMF driving a current in anti-phase with the back EMF and so amounting to a magnetomotive force (MMF). It may now be realised that there are interesting considerations when one makes a comparison between the on-load operation of a transformer and the no-load operation of a transformer. Remember, however, that, without the temperature gradient, there is no Nernst Effect. Provided, therefore, we operate the transformer on load and try to avoid the no-load situation, which aggravates loss owing to the Nernst Effect, there is special advantage from a power generation point of view in accentuating the Nernst Effect by incorporating the bimetallic lamination feature. This transfers heat in a way which can sustain the thermal gradient and allow the transformer to provide more output electrical power than needed as input, by virtue of the Nernst cooling action which draws on the external heat source. In its own curious way, this on-load-no-load distinction between the magnetization loss action in a transformer can account for the lack of concern about the eddy-current anomaly by transformer design engineers. The loss anomaly is there to be seen if one tests the no-load properties but transformers are so efficient when operating on load that one need not worry about it at all. However, if the subject under discussion in this Report becomes a technological reality, the transformer that accentuates the Nernst Effect by using thinner bimetallic laminations will bring that eddy-current anomaly more to our attention. ******* At the time of writing this Report the author has encountered the problem that the same test device, albeit after a lapse of time and following some spurious testing involving connecting a capacitative load across the secondary winding, has exhibited operation in a different mode when comparison is made with the initial tests. It is therefore of interest to explain first the test protocol and objective of the experiment, but to facilitate latter analysis this will be done from two viewpoints related to the two different temperature profiles that might be set up in a lamination. The laminations were bimetallic and of Fe:Ni composition. See Energy Science Report No. 1 for description of the test apparatus and results. Assumption I The temperature profile from edge to edge of a lamination is deemed to be of the kind shown in Fig. 7(a). This assumes that the heat flow by normal conduction through metal is from right to left and that any excess heat generated by eddy-currents is mainly shed on the left hand edge of the lamination. We do not consider the thermoelectric current circulation owing to the Peltier and Thomson Effects at this stage, though their action would affect the heat deployment.
35
Assumption II The temperature profile from edge to edge of a lamination is symmetrical as if eddy-current heating occurs normally and heat flows to both outside edges. This is shown in Fig. 7(b). Now, by having Fe and Ni as the two metals in the lamination, both having opposite Nernst coefficients, Figure 7 we will examine the action where there is a rapid change of temperature. The heat flow in these regions crosses the strong saturation fields in successive magnetic domains and this induces Nernst EMFs which will set up microscopic current circulation around loops through adjacent domains. This is a parasitic action that does not interfere with the main eddycurrent effect; it feeds on heat produced by self-cooling and the energy books balance as part of the natural thermal equilibrium inside the ferromagnetic metal. However, we have a circulating loop of eddy-current that changes from a clockwise to an anticlockwise current flow and vice versa at the power supply frequency. This current, regardless of direction will always follow the path of least resistance, which is the one through the forwardly directed Nernst EMFs in the domains which have the polarization direction giving the forward EMF. In other words, but only deriving from where the temperature gradient profile is steep, there will be substantial cooling adding power to drive that eddy-current and there will be ohmic I2R heating in the mid-range where the current flow is, in any case, not transverse to the temperature gradient. By the Assumption I temperature profile, this means that the eddy-currents will enhance the temperature gradient on the left hand side of the lamination and merely feed the balancing heat as a build-up on the left-hand side, so preserving the profile. By the Assumption II temperature profile, the Nernst Effect action will be to take heat from the sides of the lamination and feed it to the centre, so preserving that form of temperature profile. Conceivably we have a bistable thermal situation sustained by the eddy-current action. In both cases, however, the Nernst Effect will have enhanced the current flow as if the resistivity of the lamination has been reduced. Indeed, the eddy-current flow will be enormous and, even though heat is merely moving around a loop by virtue of the Nernst Effect, there is added input of energy needed from the external induction source because the superimposed action has reduced the path resistance. It is as if a resistor R is fed by current from two sources I from A and Io from B. When we work out the loss this suggests (I+Io)2R but source A contributes I2R plus IoI2R/(I+Io) and source B contributes (Io)2 plus I(Io)2R/(I+Io), whereas the latter is matched by an internal cooling effect. We still have to feed in extra power from source A. That extra power is anomalous eddy-current loss. From an experimental viewpoint it is then of interest to find which situation, temperature profiles I or II apply, given that we can check our theory by examining the level of that eddycurrent anomaly observed.
36
Now, let us consider the Peltier Effect as superimposed on this situation. The eddy-current component seems to have no relevance because the oscillations mean heating and cooling in balance, though one could suspect that an overall added heating effect might apply if the Peltier EMF exceeds the Nernst EMF and the Peltier activity is biased towards heating. For the temperature profile of Assumption I there will be a d.c. current circulation which will partially polarize the state of magnetism in the lamination as a whole. For the temperature profile of Assumption II there will be no overall d.c. polarization but there could be two d.c. current loops, one clockwise and one anticlockwise, whereby one half of the lamination is biased in one direction and the other half is biased in the other direction. Any such d.c. effect, in either case, will limit the range of flux change as evidenced by a BH loop test. In the first case of assumption I, the loop will be displaced. So, in mounting the experiment, the writer was just curious to see what happened and was expecting the assumption I scenario. The plan was to build a test rig with no provision for asymmetrical heat exit from the test specimen and then rebuild with the eddy-currents generating heat but with one core edge insulated from heat egress and the other having a cooling facility. This latter version of the experiment has not yet been implemented and it may, indeed, be facilitated by co-operation with an institutional laboratory, should such assistance be proffered by sponsors. The report on the initial experiment, some of which was recently published, as in the Australian magazine NEXUS (pp. 48-51, February-March 1994 issue), has also been presented and in its updated form in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1, the findings suggest that the test device is bistable and can be made to work in either assumption I or assumption II mode. Discussion The tests just reported tell this author that the Nernst Effect, if exploited in thin ferromagnetic laminations, having surface provision for guiding conduction current through single domains selected naturally by `path of least resistance' action, and having a temperature gradient that is in-plane in the lamination, will serve as a very efficient cooling device. The findings reported in the test conforming with assumption I are very exciting in that, given confirmation by further experiment, there is reason to believe that a self-generating action is possible. It may even be that we can feed heat into a transformer implementation and with a controlling primary input get the main power from the secondary. This combines refrigeration and power generation, not just as variants on the same technology, but as one and the same, though to get main power generation on a kW per unit weight of apparatus basis one will need to force-feed heat energy input. The technology needed on the basis of the reported experiments is one of intercepting the èddy-current' flow and that is essentially what we see in a power transformer, because the secondary windings are circuits in which eddy-current flow if the output connections are shorted. We simply need to incorporate a secondary winding that can react inductively to the èddy-current' circuit or include the Nernst activated elements into that secondary circuit directly. These issues, therefore, become design questions that involve R&D of a proprietary nature and it is submitted that this ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT has served its purpose of introducing prospective development interests to the potential of the technology outlined above. The technology is destined to provide a very effective route to converting heat into electricity and, since the principles of operation depend upon temperature gradients and not absolute temperature in Kelvin, there is no Carnot factor to limit performance. There is therefore,
37
with some internal heat recyling, clear scope for a near to 100% conversion of heat into electrical power and at least refrigeration prospects down to 77K, where the warm superconductor regime offers future promise.
HAROLD ASPDEN 15 MARCH 1994
POWER FROM MAGNETISM: THE TRANSVERSE RELUCTANCE MOTOR by HAROLD ASPDEN, 1997
Contents Section Title Introduction Basic Energy Anomaly A Test Result from the Experimental Motor Test Result Significance Test Machine Description Supplementary Commentary APPENDIX I: LC Circuit Loss Analysis APPENDIX II: Machine Description in Patent Specification page 1 2 7 13 16 18 22 24-40
******
HAROLD
POWER FROM MAGNETISM: THE TRANSVERSE RELUCTANCE MOTOR Introduction This Energy Science Report is Part I of a research report documenting progress on a project funded by the U.K. Department of Trade and Industry as a Stage I SMART AWARD*. This was awarded in August 1994 to Thermodynamics Limited in an open competition based on an invention submission by the author. The object of the research is to establish whether or not a magnetic reluctance motor can derive any of its power by tapping the thermodynamic field background and the proposal suggested a novel form of motor construction with this objective. At this interim report stage (May, 1995) tests on an experimental machine give a preliminary indication that such thermal effects, which involve magnetocaloric cooling, do exist and account for the enhanced efficiency anomalies observed. This machine, which has technological features hitherto unexplored and which meant that its design is somewhat of an exploratory nature, provides the evidence needed to design a viable prototype demonstration machine system. The latter should now progress on a much shorter time scale and will be the basis of the Part II report. The content of this report will not relate to the many problems that beset this project in its initial period, nor to the spin-off research findings, which also have a special interest, nor to the different machine constructions explored en route. What will be disclosed is: (a) The author's original reasons for expecting a thermodynamic power gain in the pursuit of this project, (b) The experimental evidence supporting the above proposition as derived from detailed analysis of one set of test results on the primary machine and (c) The constructional features of that machine which will also be the basis of the onward design of the prototype to be tested for the next Report. The tentative conclusion emerging from what is here reported is that we can hope to see a way forward to magnetic reluctance motor development which brings in sight the possibility of generating electrical power by tapping the ambient thermodynamic field background. Success in such a venture would bring with it a much-needed new nonpolluting energy resource. _______ * "Small Firms Merit Award for Research and Technology. HAROLD
Basic Energy Anomaly It is hoped that technical specialists reading this report will not prejudge the findings by believing, inappropriately, that the Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to this particular technology. This preliminary section gives a background introduction to the scientific principles underlying the work, including comment on its thermodynamic principles. The magnetic reluctance motor differs in operating principle from normal d.c. or a.c. motors in that it relies upon magnetic induction, a process which involves storing energy in gaps between magnetic poles. The more familiar electromagnetic machine operates by passing current through windings which are acted upon by magnetic poles to set up the drive force causing machine rotation. In the reluctance motor it is the release of energy from the pole gaps as they close that feeds the drive power to the machine. When we consider how a d.c. voltage power supply is used to feed that priming induction energy to the reluctance motor the equivalent circuit is seen to be one having winding resistance R and inductance L connected in series to a supply providing an EMF E resulting in a current I. By applying standard electrical theory it is an easy task to calculate the proportion of energy input that goes into the I2R losses and the proportion LI2/2 that is stored by inductance. Their ratio changes as the current builds up and would become extremely large if the flow were allowed to continue long enough in its effort to reach the ultimate value Io of E/R. However, as in the reluctance motor, we commutate the flow, allowing just enough inductance energy into the machine to give it the drive power before switching the current off. The time period involved need not therefore be any greater than 25% of the period of the magnetic flux cycle resulting from successive pole gap closure and separation, this being determined by the synchronous frequency of the machine. For the 8-pole machine test reported later this becomes 1/200 second at 50 Hz and 375 rpm. At 1500 rpm the 25% duty cycle would be of 1/800 second duration. Even though these time periods are short, the design of the machine has to be such that a sufficient input energy can reach that inductance in that short time and that means that the winding resistance has to be low. However, a design compromise is needed here. It might seem reasonable to require operation for which that charging time period is of the same order as the time constant of that inductive circuit, namely L/R seconds, thinking that if this were not so then the full inductance of the machine would not be harnessed to give the machine its best power rating. The question at issue, is the amount of the loss in the resistance in relation to the energy fed to inductance. HAROLD
For an ongoing power input rate simple calculation (see Appendix) gives this ratio as a function of time as: eRt/L - 1 (1)
which at the end of the period defined by the time constant L/R becomes e-1 or 1.718. This means that only 37% of the power input at the end of this period can be finding its way into the drive of the machine, because 63% is being lost. As shown in the Appendix if the cumulative energy input during that time period L/R is calculated, based on a linear inductance assumption, then 54% finds its way into the power drive and 46% is lost in that resistance R. Of course, if, as is the case, the inductance increases as the poles of the machine close this will progressively shorten the relevant time period in (1) and reduce the proportion representing loss, but it would still seem surprising that there could be a reduction of an overall loss percentage to 10% or even 20%. Yet, as is well established, magnetic reluctance motors can operate in the 80-90% efficiency range, even taking into account magnetization losses in their core structures. This can be explained by the design expedient of putting a strong input EMF on the motor winding so that the input pulses develop a rapid rate of change of the magnetic flux accounting for the inductive energy input. This develops a back EMF which leaves little potential drop across the low resistance of the winding. The pulse period must then be much shorter than the time constant L/R, so that the current is switched off before the magnetic circuit begins to saturate. This is tantamount also to using a very low resistance winding, an awkward design constraint if the coils forming that winding have to fit on salient poles. Modern electronic switching technology, which in itself brings with it another form of loss, has progressed to the point where the expense of the current pulsing makes the magnetic reluctance motor a viable alternative to the normal a.c. induction motor. Evenso, we need to look at ways of developing the reluctance motor further, not only with that winding resistance and the L/R factor in mind but also with regard to the following argument concerning a thermodynamic factor. Given the high efficiencies obtained by reluctance motors and accepting that designers will know precisely where the loss occurs, there is really no fully justifiable basis for suggesting that existing magnetic reluctance motor technology may be already deriving benefit from a magnetocaloric energy regeneration effect. However, this author does wonder if, marginally at least, such an effect is already assisting motor performance.
HAROLD
If a pulse duration period commensurate with the circuit time constant L/R were to be used and the I2R losses were 50% of motor input power, then to regain the 90% level of efficiency the inductance energy would need to be augmented by the equivalent of 40% of motor input from the quantum field background. The latter governs the atomic electron quantization in the ferromagnetic state in iron and plays a key role in magnetocaloric cooling. In this case, the flux recovery cycle of the machine would result in environmental cooling within that field system and this would draw on the heat generated in the resistance to gave the overall appearance of an efficient motor. So here might be an important technological phenomenon that we may, in some small measure, be using unknowingly in our reluctance motors, but one we could use to much more advantage if it were researched and well understood. The author, therefore, has had occasion to examine more closely what is of record in university teaching concerning how energy is stored in an air gap in a magnetic circuit. The author's Ph.D. thesis had concerned anomalous energy losses in iron based on research (1950-1953) in Professor E.B. Moullin's Department of Electrical Engineering at Cambridge and one needs to look no further than a textbook by Professor Moullin. On pages 172-174 of his 'Principles of Electromagnetism', (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1955), an experiment is reported which describes the inexplicable aspects of apparent magnetic flux linkage between two magnetic cores separated by an air gap. The teaching conclusion was that leakage flux defies calculation when one tries to theorize about experimental results. This author, having developed suspicions about the thermodynamic aspects discussed above, has come, many years later to see the Moullin experiment with new eyes. The evidence is clearly there indicating that the energy in the air gap is greater than the energy supplied as inductive input to the magnetizing winding, greater by a factor that increases with increasing magnetic flux density. This led the author, in the first of these Energy Science Reports, to describe and report findings on an experiment based on that performed by Professor Moullin, in order to confirm this position. That experiment involved a sequence of tests on static cores with successively different air gap spacings and has been reported by this author to a conference on the new energy topic held in Denver, Colorado. It has since been repeated independently by others, all of whom confirm that there is a significant energy gain. The magnetic reluctance motor is the device one turns to if one wishes to use that excess energy before it is recaptured by the magnetic core system during the reset period. It was this background that inspired the inventive concepts which are now under test in this SMART AWARD project.
HAROLD
To end this introductory section, and before moving on to present test data on the experimental motor, a few words concerning the Second Law of Thermodynamics are appropriate. This law is based on the doctrine of the impossible, namely that one cannot take heat from a source and convert it into useful power in a machine unless that source sheds heat to an absorbing medium at lower temperature. Now, in a magnetic core, or in an air gap between magnetic poles, there is an activity that accounts for energy storage by inductance. That activity involves electric charge in motion and reacting to the applied field. That reacting charge is kept active by thermal motion, whether this be mere thermal noise in the magnetic circuit seated in conduction electrons or whether, as applies in the vacuum gap, that 'noise' is and the quantum activity known to physicists as 'zero-point' field energy. If energy is fed by machine excitation into that inductance then the energy supplied, whether driven by current in a magnetizing winding or augmented by the ferromagnetic core it embraces, must be pooled with that thermal energy. It is shed as heat. Then, when the demagnetization process occurs or the pole gap closes to reduce the inductive energy stored, so there is cooling as energy is used to do work. The latter may be by setting up an EMF in the magnetizing winding or by mechanical work derived from the force action between the poles, but this thermodynamic activity is an ongoing and essential part of the physical property we describe as inductance. Its return is not by a random heat diffusion process, simply because the applied magnetic field set up by current in a winding brings order into the reacting charge motion and orientates its vector in readiness for an eventual collapse directed into the winding as a back EMF. Electrical science does not ascribe temperature to the field energy stored by induction. Accordingly, scientists reading this will not be familiar with this summary description. However, no reasonable scientist could assert that this process is in any way restrained by a need to comply with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The latter only concerns true heat engines that operate between set temperature limits and not to machines which know only one temperature, the ambient temperature, and in which magnetism is the catalyst converting heat into electricity. This latter statement needs just a little qualification because MHD technology is subject to the Carnot efficiency limitations, MHD being the magnetohydrodynamic technology of the 1960 period, in which ionized gas passes through a transverse magnetic field which cools the gas to develop an EMF producing electrical output in the mutually orthogonal direction. Here, the heat is that of ions in a gas and the gas emerges at a lower temperature than at entry. If we consider instead the energy associated with the motion of free electrons in metals or the charges that sustain displacement currents in the field medium of space, then that temperature property, so far as it concerns the hidden charge reacting to the inductive field becomes at best something that is notional and unrelated to the temperature of a machine proper. That hidden charge, whether in the system of free electrons or in the zero-point field of the vacuum medium, becomes the 'prime mover' HAROLD
reacting to shed heat energy to sustain the EMFs regenerating useful power from inductance and recovers heat by cooling the surrounding atoms in the machine structure. To use the Second Law of Thermodynamics to argue against this, one must contend that there are two temperatures and assign a temperature to the 'prime mover' that differs from the ambient temperature of the machine. The 'prime mover', however, in iron, for example, is the free electron population and one is told in physics that such electrons have very high Fermi velocities and so are, notionally, kept at very high temperatures. If such temperatures are so high, they are higher both for inward transfer of inductive energy and the later return of that energy. The Second Law of Thermodynamics can only apply to one way energy transfer but inductance is a two-way phenomenon, as we well know from the highly tuned resonant oscillatory conditions that can be established in inductive circuits. Even by normal equipartition of energy rules concerning particle collisions within the iron core, the free electrons we need to account for electrical conduction are kept in motion at higher effective temperatures than the surrounding atoms. One can, therefore, argue that the Second Law of Thermodynamics has to be confined to the machines such as steam engines and internal combustion engines and not applied to the inductive properties of the reluctance motor. This is in spite of the fact that the latter do involve thermodynamic energy processes. Unquestionably, however, the doctrinaire attitude of academic physicists on this question of the Second Law of Thermodynamics has precluded acceptance of this author's long standing explanation of electromagnetic induction and related gyromagnetic reaction phenomena. Enough has been said for the moment on this scientific debate and this Report need not take the argument further. What matters is the experimental evidence reported in the next section. The real purpose of this Part I introductory discourse has been to argue that the thermodynamic foundations of the invention to be described are on very firm ground and can be traced by survey of this author's work of published record in scientific periodicals and books.
HAROLD
A Test Result from the Experimental Motor The design and construction of the motor will form the subject of a following section. Here it suffices to state that the motor has two magnetizing windings which are inductively coupled, the excitation of which can switch the magnetism of a permanent magnet between a path through the pole gaps to develop drive torque or a leakage path where no torque is developed. The intention is that the magnets will do the work needed to drive the motor, buffering energy through inductance, and absorbing ambient heat to replenish that shed by the magnets, with applied electrical input power serving essentially to control flux switching. As will be seen the design precludes any torque reaction from normal electrodynamic effects between current in the magnetizing windings and magnetic flux in the machine, thereby restricting any motor drive to a true magnetic reluctance action seated in the inductive field energy. The reason is that all conductor turns on the windings, to the extent that they are linked by magnetic leakage flux, can only assert forces in directions that are radial with respect to the machine axis. As a summary statement, the test to be described gives reason to believe that the thermodynamic efficiency gain predicted as a basis for the project has been confirmed. It remains now to build a prototype machine and a new control system designed to a more effective specification which can now be formulated from the data provided by this test. Note that, so far as this test result is concerned, emphasis is placed upon the establishment of the principle that a magnetic reluctance motor can operate with an efficiency enhanced by magnetocaloric cooling, the ultimate hope being to secure evidence of 'over-unity' performance. By 'over-unity' is meant a mechanical output power exceeding the electrical input power owing to thermodynamic input involving environmental cooling. The dominant pursuit, the focus of the SMART AWARD, has however been the less ambitious aim at a modest efficiency improvement by investigating the possibility of self-commutation by a 'shaded-pole' construction of unusual design which has similar thermodynamic implications. Both technical objectives have been served by the same test machine. Note particularly that this 'self-commutation' objective explains why the machine has no conventional commutator, a feature which has made the broader scope of the research testing of the machine particularly difficult. The test reported here was a no-load test in the sense that the only mechanical function was that of running both a drive motor and the test machine as a mechanicallycoupled system. The task is the assessment of the inherent operational electrical and mechanical characteristics of the test machine. This latter has a very special and unusual
HAROLD
design configuration which has made it impossible to use standard electrical engineering knowledge to make a reliable prediction of its response to applied power. Besides this, as can be seen from the opening text of this section, there are certain complexities in the magnetic circuit form, which includes permanent magnets, and the pole gap configuration as well as end effects, not to mention eddy-current reactions. All these pose unusual design considerations, involving non-linear characteristics and non-harmonic time characteristics, and so are best explored empirically. The Equivalent Circuit of the Test Configuration This is shown in Fig. 1 where the two machines are depicted by the broken line as having mechanically coupled shafts and each machine has its own circuit powered by a stabilized d.c. voltage supply. The d.c. drive motor has a permanent magnet stator system and rotor windings fed as a single input through a commutator incorporated in the machine. It has a high torque and a maximum speed rating of 5,100 rpm when driven by a 12 volt d.c. supply, its maximum power rating being 65 watts.
Fig. 1
[Note that as the research developed, the 'shaded-pole' feature was implemented by providing laminated stator cores, which were mounted in the motor in a 'transverse' sense and were tilted in the forward direction of rotor spin. The word 'transverse' means that they were arranged to act in a cross-wise direction. This explains the title of this Report.] HAROLD
It was chosen because the cogging effect owing to the the stepping action of the pole structure of the test machine showed the need for a good drive torque, but evenso the system had to be given a hand-start by bringing the poles out-of-register when the d.c. motor was started up. This requirement will be avoided in the onward construction of the prototype machine. Vm was measured by a digital voltmeter (d.c. scale) and its waveform observed on an oscilloscope. Vi was also observed as a waveform on an oscilloscope. The machine speed was measured using an optical tachometer. The 2.2 and 2.6 external resistors were included as load devices to buffer potential drop and, in the case of the d.c. motor, to allow its power supply to remain unadjusted whilst the motor changed speed during the test. The 0.65 resistance was the measured internal resistance of the d.c. drive motor winding, whereas the windings on the test machine had a 2.6 resistance.
Test Machine not Excited The drive motor was run coupled to the test machine at 800 rpm and id was found to be 1.03 amps with Vd of 5.5V. Total power input: Power in 2.2 load: Power supplied to motor: Loss in 1.2 winding: Drive power to system: (5.5)(1.03) (2.2)(1.03)2 (0.65)(1.03)2 5.665 watts 2.334 watts 3.331 watts 0.690 watts 2.641 watts
After the system had been operated with the above voltage input but with the test machine excited the following further measurement at higher input voltage with the test machine non-excited was performed at higher speed. The drive motor was run coupled to the test machine at 1350 rpm and id was found to be 1.15 amps with Vd of 7.1V. Total power input: Power in 2.2 load: Power supplied to motor: Loss in 0.65 winding: Drive power to system: HAROLD
(7.1)(1.15) (2.2)(1.15)2 (0.65)(1.15)2
8.165 watts 2.910 watts 5.255 watts 0.860 watts 4.395 watts
10
Test Machine Excited Vd was held at 5.5V and the test machine now powered by adjusting a regulating potentiometer controlling a power transistor used as a switch, avoiding an oscillation mode, to result in a Vm waveform of the form shown in Fig. 2. The d.c. supply voltage to the transistor circuit was 12.26V.
Fig. 2 Note that the trace showed an upward surge just before the current ceased. This will be explained later, but for the immediate purpose we will interpret the waveform as being a rectangular pulse with an initial exponential transient, such as one expects from switching a d.c. step voltage into an inductance. Note that Vm as a voltage is really a measure of current in a 2.6 load resistor. The measured d.c. average of this voltage waveform was 1.31V and the machine ran on this setting at 1350 rpm with the drive motor current id having reduced to 0.64 amps. From the waveform it was estimated that the switched-on duty cycle of the test machine was 60% and it was clear that the exponential rise in the signal represented the inductive power input needed to sustain magnetization loss and the true drive power fed to the test machine, whereas most of the power was dissipated in the I2R loss of the load resistance and the machine winding as well as by potential drop in the power transistor used for this test. This 60% duty cycle was longer than had been intended but it did serve to give a result as control settings providing such pulse duration were found more effective than the shorter pulses obtained by biasing the control. However, this is most certainly only because the timing of pulse onset was not optimally set owing to a weakness in the electronic circuit design used and this, too, will be overcome once the main prototype machine system is built. Such redesisgn will avoid reliance on the close magnetic coupling of the power input winding and the winding used to produce the commutating control signal.
Fig. 3
HAROLD
11
In a sense, therefore, the test result presented is a good example from the data obtained by varying several control parameters but a 'worst case' example from the I2R loss point of view, owing to the long duty cycle of the pulse. Note that without the inductance effect the power input to the machine plus load resistor would be a step voltage waveform of rectangular form applied across a resistance of 5.2, the 2.6 winding plus the 2.6 series resistor. The shaded area in Fig. 3 is the portion signifying the time variation of the inductance voltage component driving the machine. It was estimated by inspection of the waveform that approximately 20% of the rectangular outline form was a measure of the time period corresponding to the inductive input. Bear in mind that an exponential build-up of current combines with an exponential decay of induced EMF to give an inductive energy input of half that expected from a multiplication of current amplitude, voltage amplitude and the time duration. This means that only 10% of the power represented by a volt-amp measure of d.c. power input is deployed into inductance. Of the 12.26V input to the transistor circuit some voltage drop would occur across the transistor even during the inductive transient period, though a much greater potential drop, involving loss in the transistor, occurs as the inductive transition ends. Proceeding on this basis the 1.31V measured across 2.6 converts to a measure of Vs, the voltage across the load resistor during the non-transient portion of the rectangular pulse form, given by: (0.6Vs)(1-0.2) = (1.31) from which Vs is found to be 2.73 volts. This, when doubled to account for the identical drop in the winding resistance, was consistent with the estimated operating load potential delivered in the on-state of the power transistor used as the switch. The inductive drive power will involve a back EMF diminishing from 12.26V and we need to calculate the resistance losses not only in the 2.6 machine winding but also in the transistor and in the 2.6 external load resistor. Total power input: (12.26)(1.31)/(2.6) 6.177 watts Power loss in load resistor: 80% of (2.73)(1.31)/(2.6) 1.100 watts Power loss in winding: as above 1.100 watts Inductive drive power: half of 20% of total input of 6.177 0.618 watts Power loss in transistor: balance of above 3.359 watts
HAROLD
12
Ignoring the power transferred to the load resistor and the loss in the transistor (which can be reduced to negligible proportions by suitable design) the deployment of power by the machine combination operating at 1350 rpm was found to be: Test machine input: Power loss in winding: Inductive drive power: Power supplied to drive motor: (0.64)(5.5-[(0.64)(2.2)]) Loss in 0.65 winding: (0.65)(0.64)2 Drive motor power to system: Total power (other than I2R loss) needed to drive the system at 1350 rpm: 1.718 watts 1.100 watts 0.618 watts 2.618 watts 0.266 watts 2.352 watts
2.970 watts
This 2.970 watts at 1350 rpm compares with 2.641 watts needed at 800 rpm and 4.395 watts at 1350 rpm when the test machine was not on power. The reason that I2R losses are excluded from this comparison is that, owing to specific design characteristics, the test machine losses can be reduced very substantially by using a winding conductor of larger cross-sectional are and much lower resistance, whereas this is not feasible for the d.c. motor which already uses winding space to maximum advantage. The real gain in performance is that evident from the inductive power drive, which involves the magnetization losses in the system. What we see here is a power reduction of 1.425 watts from a base value of 4.395 watts. Yet we are activating more magnetic excitation in the test machine when excited than was present for simple non-excited drive by the motor alone. We have excluded the I2R loss and there must be more magnetic loss for the system running with both motor and test machine excited, but yet the overall power intake has reduced by 32%. This can only be ascribed to the regenerative effect of magnetocaloric cooling which the machine design aimed to explore. If such cooling does accompany the enhancement of the magnetic pole action in driving the motor then the magnetization losses of the expected order can occur to generate heat in the normal way, but overall the machine must be operating with an exceptional efficiency.
HAROLD
13
The test, as interpreted above, does establish that there is an anomalous excess power phenomenon at work. Test Result Significance The tests were made with the test machine rotating clockwise, which was the direction corresponding to the shaded-pole construction of the stator pole pieces. Anticlockwise rotation for the same input power conditions gave speeds some 10% below those measured for clockwise rotation. Therefore this feature, in aiding commutation, is contributing to machine performance and will now be accentuated further in the onward construction of the prototype machine. This prototype version of the machine will be designed to overcome the test difficulties encountered in the pulse control of the machine as tested above. The tests suffered from the problem of correctly timing the onset of the pulse current and its duration. When the design parameters of such a control could be ascertained from the tests it became apparent that the best way forward was to design instead a machine having a dual excitation so as to avoid the inductive coupling of the single excitation which set up unwanted oscillations and so limited scope for full power testing. The machine had a size and weight commensurate with a normal motor of several hundred watts rating and yet was tested at 1350 rpm, taking a coupled d.c. motor up to that speed from a base speed of 800 rpm, with only 0.329 watts of additional input drive power! This excludes the power needed to sustain I2R losses in the windings of the two machines, but the corresponding increment in such power was only 0.676 watts. The above data show 0.690 watts as drive motor winding loss at 800 rpm, 1.100 watts as loss in the test machine winding at 1350 rpm and 0.266 watts loss in the drive motor winding under combined operational conditions at the latter speed. As is explained below, the latter losses can be very substantially reduced but the prime attention has to focus first upon the thermodynamic implications to clarify a very basic issue. The question at issue is whether one can be 100% sure that the machine is acting regeneratively in a thermodynamic sense. There is every indication that it is, but there is one open question that is crucial to scaling up the design to a high power machine. The answer to the question will decide whether this research is leading to a new machine technology of highly efficient motors, which can, as it were, feed on the heat they generate and so come close to being 100% efficient or whether it can lead to a technology breakthrough of far greater importance.
HAROLD
14
There is good reason, by reference to the Moullin-type of experiment already mentioned, to suspect that we can draw on energy feeding the underlying quantum field that powers the atomic spins in a ferromagnet. If this is so then the magnetocaloric cooling process has much more to offer than the near-to-100% efficient electric motor. In sight comes the possibility of building a new form of power generator. In other tests on the same machine system as that discussed above it was found that increased current input to the test machine could reduce the d.c. drive motor current to 0.2 amp, less than 20% of its normal value, but it was not possible with the particular test rig used to run the system with only the test machine on power. The objective there was to see if one might reach a stage where the d.c. motor current reversed as it became a generator. Then one could explore the degree to which magnetocaloric cooling can be exploited in a power generation mode. Clarification of this issue will be the objective of the Part II Report which will follow from tests on the prototype machine now under construction. In the meantime, the following technical points emerging from the above test findings are to be noted: (a) The I2R losses attributable to the test machine winding can be reduced by a factor of 5 at least, because it should be possible to limit the inductive power input to less than 40% of the pulse period used in the test and because a single winding of 2.6 was used instead of two such windings in series driven at half current. The second winding was deployed, contrary to original design intention, to provide the commutating signal control for the electronic switch and the pulse period was longer than it should have been and its onset poorly timed owing to control settings adjusted to avoid feedback-induced oscillations. The latter problems can easily be eliminated with a dual test machine combination. The machine design would allow the winding resistance to be reduced very substantially if the weight and cost of the copper could be justified by the efficiency gain. The use of only 4 magnets in the test machine may mean that end effects which weaken the operation owing to magnetic leakage can be present. These can be reduced relatively by using more magnets and a longer rotor axis. The latter was accepted as a limitation in the design of the first machine, dictated by availability of stator pole pioece laminations, but the findings now warrant building the longer machine. More magnets on a longer stator with the pole gap spacing halved should give power enhancement by a factor of 3 or more, without appreciably changing the overall size of the machine. The magnets used in the machine tested above developed a flux density in the stator having an a.c. RMS value of between 600 and 800 gauss, which implies a unidirectional polarization of 1700 to 2260 gauss. By using stronger magnets or,
(b)
(c)
HAROLD
15
in a large machine, electromagnetic excitation of a soft iron rotor core by input of current to a rotor winding, this could be increased to 10,000 gauss, meaning a power rating enhancement by a factor of 20 to 35. The latter increases as the square of flux density. (d) Concerning the I2R losses, these can also reduce further as a function of scale so as to become negligible in a larger machine. For a machine of the same 3dimensional proportions, the power rating increases as the cube of the base length whereas the I2R losses increase as the square of the base length. Therefore, in a large machine such losses can be dscounted to leave the machine performance at efficiency levels tested by reference to the inductive power and magnetization losses. Possibly also a higher power rating can be obtained by running the machine at higher speeds than those used in the above tests. In one set of tests using an excitation control circuit different from that used for the above data, it was found that the machine had to run above 2,300 rpm to avoid oscillations in the power circuit, but the system did operate to relieve the power input to the d.c. drive motor quite substantially at that speed. Finally, and of considerable importance, there was an observation not discussed above and this was an indication of a return of inductive power by the test machine. In several of the tests the transient increase of pulse current was accompanied by a transient on pulse switch-off. What was observed was an increase in current to a peak, a kind of one-sided spike that could nearly be double the current just before it switched off. Even in the test reported, the duration of the pulse exceeded the controlled on-state of the transistor* and this meant that the inductance of the machine was forcing current flow even though the transistor should have switched off. The fact that the current was sustained as the reverse induced voltage transient occurred is sufficient to indicate that there was power feedback not allowed for in the above calculations. This promises an even greater efficiency in the onward development. The hidden promise here can be understood immediately, once it is recognized that the inductive input voltage pulse occurs as current builds up, whereas the inductive reverse voltage pulse accompanying flux collapse occurs as current increases further. Since the time-integral of voltage has to be the same for flux change in either direction, this can only mean that more inductive energy is being returned as flux collapses than was supplied during flux build-up. The reasons for this and the source of power, the magnetocaloric cooling, are now well understood by the author and, so having seen the evidence in the performance data of the test machine, this will be the focus of attention in onward development. [* The control was by an inhibit signal, and would not base current sustained by inductive feedback]
(e)
(f)
HAROLD
16
Overall, therefore, in the expectation that a machine modelled on the one tested above could, with a higher speed, convert that small power gain to a 5 watt gain, there could be as much as a 60-100 fold gain by using a better magnet structure. This implies a 0.3 kw to 0.5 kw rating for a machine having a base length of 125 mm, of about the right order expected with conventional motor technology, but we are here considering a machine that could be a thermodynamically powered generator. If such a performance proves feasible, then by scaling up the machine size to a 10 metre base, that power rating becomes 150-250 Mw, which is of power generation station capacity. As will now be seen from the onward description of the constructional features of the test machine, its mechanical structure and assembly are eminently suited to scaling to large size. It is a salient pole machine but there are no windings on those individual poles and this is very important from the point of view of dynamic balance. Furthermore, where the rotor magnetization is excited electromagnetically by a rotor-mounted winding, that winding could comprise a simple superconducting coil system coaxial with the rotor axis or a coaxial solenoidal coil system neatly mounted between the rotor pole pieces. It is a particular feature of the design of the machine discussed in this report, which has a permanent magnet rotor, that the single magnetizing winding is an externally mounted solenoid which can be made without need to restrict the cross-section of the winding. Therefore, the winding resistance can be very low and related losses commensurately reduced, an important power saving feature for a motor. Regardless, therefore, of the thermodynamic implications and their effect upon machine efficiency, the fact that a motor having this special single winding design works at all is something that gives this project merit. The following machine description represents a form of construction that should prove interesting in its own right and in connection with a motor development on conventional lines, devoid of the shaded-pole and themodynamic factors, but where high powered magnets are incorporated in the rotor. Test Machine Description The test machine incorporated four 60 mm diameter ring magnets of anisotropic ferrite. Their thickness was 8mm and they had a 24 mm diameter central hole. They were mounted with spacer hubs on a 19 mm diameter brass spindle separating five rotor pole sections comprising 90 mm diameter laser-cut disc laminations having perimeter teeth forming 8 salient poles. They were cut from electrical sheet steel of 0.5 mm thickness. The magnets were very inexpensive standard loudspeaker-type magnets having no special properties and a relatively low power of about 3 MGOe. They were chosen because their size as available of-the-shelf stock items suited the needs of the test machine. There are commercially-available magnets of sintered neodymium-iron-boron with a power of 10 HAROLD
17
or more times this. High speed operation is certainly possible with cast Alnico magnets which have a 5.6 MGOe rating, but the onward prospect on the horizon is a new type of magnet developed in Japan which is said to have an enormous BHmax rating of several hundred MGOe. The design technology implicit in the motor described below has, therefore, to be viewed in the context of such development and the 100-fold prospect of power enhancement suggested in the previous section of this report is then realistic even where magnets are used to polarize the rotor. To spare effort and demands on the author's time during this onward research phase, the following description is not presented in research report style, but is, apart from the following illustrations in Fig. 4, 5 and 6 simply the text written for a patent application covering the machine. Accordingly the figure numbering sequence following those three figures is that of the separate figure number sequence of the patent specification and the excerpts taken from the patent specification are incorporated at the end of this Report as Appendix II. As will be seen, the magnets produce a magnetic field directed along the axis of the machine, but this field develops magnetic flux which is diverted laterally through the laminar rotor discs and then, after passage through the pole gaps, diverted again in a return direction parallel with the machine axis to pass through the bridging stator laminations. All this occurs within the confines of a solenoidal magnetizing winding and, to the extent that the fluctuations of magnetic flux from the magnts are confined to the pole gaps and the magnetic circuit including the rotor and stator, there can, in principle, be no back EMF opposing the action of the magnetizing winding. Yet, the pulsating current in that winding has been found to operate the motor. There is, of course, some leakage flux which contributes to the inductance of the magnetizing winding but there is reason to expect much of the inductance energy input to be recovered, whilst the magnets actually do work and generate power solely owing to the control effect of that inductance. The following supplementary commentary provides some further information and may explain why the author is encouraged by these findings and is anxious to know the outcome of tests on the dual machine system which is described in the latter part of the appended patent description. As indicated above, a Part II Report will be prepared as soon as tests on the dual machine system are completed.
HAROLD
18
Supplementary Commentary The above test data is subject to some modification which can best be explained by first explaining that the first test on the machine was a test using half-wave rectified 50Hz a.c. This meant running the machine at low speed (375 rpm), not enough to test the shaded-pole feature, which was the dominant interest owing to the funding arrangements. These tests were therefore of a cursory nature just to see if half-wave current pulses did affect the machine in the manner expected, but more particularly to get a measure of the induced back EMF and so the level of flux activity across the pole gaps and to see how such pulse input relieved load on the drive motor. It proved extremely difficult to get the adjustments of the controls just right with the motor running at 375 rpm for the expected sychronisation to establish itself. Then, and only then, was it possible to reduce slowly, stage by stage, the current input to the d.c. drive motor while holding that 375 rpm speed. In spite of this, several such tests were performed and the a.c. magnetizing current and voltage was measured as the power input to the d.c. motor progressively reduced. Each such test proved very satisfying, because the saving in d.c. power input to the drive motor far outweighed the a.c. input as measured in VA (volt-amps), without regard to power factor. Effort was made to take run the system with the test machine driving the d.c. motor as a generator, but with the test system used the system lost the 50Hz synchronism once the d.c. input current had reduced to about one third of its original value. The problem here arose because the d.c.power suply used was a stabilized voltage supply and it could not drop below a 4.5 volts, which is why a load resistor had been put in series with the motor. Although some time was spent in effort to overcome this, the author was more anxious to develop a control system for running the machine at much higher speed and so these 50 Hz tests were abandoned. One important aspect of the test was, however, the monitoring of both the current waveform as supplied to one test machine winding in relation to the voltage waveform induced in the unloaded magnetically-coupled and near identical second winding. Together these waveforms gave an insight into the inductive power fed in and returned from the machine over the cyclic period of pole closure and separation. It was then very evident that the power factor governing the a.c. power input was such as to indicate a quite significant excess power, even assuming that the d.c. drive motor was only 50% efficient. Ostensibly, it seemed that the test machine had to be operating above 100% efficiency by drawing on thermal heat input.
HAROLD
19
The most important observation, however, apart from finding that a pulse amplitude of about 0.8 amps in the single test winding was needed in the test, was that very nearly all of the inductive power input to the machine was being returned by the a.c. circuit. The volt-amp product reversed polarity as the half-wave current decreased. It could do this because the rectifier diode used could sustain current flow by the winding generating a forward EMF. Now, here was a feature that was important. With the machine driven by the permanent magnet system the inductive power fed in to secure flux switching was not all used in adding power to the machine drive and even in these 50 Hz tests, where current was reducing as flux collapsed, most was, it seems, recoverable. This had been anticipated, or at least hoped for, in developing the machine design because of the relative configuration of the source magnets and the stator pole pieces, but it was gratifying to see this confirmation. This then became a reason for examining the prospect of building or procuring an a.c. power source that could operate efficiently at 250-400 Hz to power an inductive load regeneratively through a diode. The attendant problem was also that of assuring sufficient frequency stability to be compliant with the synchronous operation of a motor not receiving its power drive as such from that supply. This pursuit tended to runaway with the time available for the project, with partially successful results using the same test machine. Eventually, to move the project forward, the author decided to use a simple electronic power drive where one machine winding signalled the control timing needed to put power on the other winding. A pnp power transistor was connected so as to deliver its collector-base current to one winding in its ON-state, and inhibited so as to be in the OFF-state when the other winding delivered a positive polarity signal to the base. With such a control system the test results of this Report were obtained, but any inductive power returned from the machine winding is necessarily dissipated and detracts from the possible efficiency of the machine. This is because the forward EMF set up by that return of energy causes unwanted current spike at the end of the cycle. There was the problem with the system under such test that it could very easily be set with its magnetic pole gap flux wasting power in oscillations.
Fig. 4 HAROLD
20
Had a capacitor been incorporated without informed design based on test performance then that too could have aided oscillation, rather than helping to suppress such effects whilst storing energy for use in the next machine cycle. With only slight adjustment of the bias controls a Vm waveform corresponding to Fig. 4 corresponding to Fig. 2 on page 9 was obtained. The exponential rise of current peaks before dropping a little and then rising again to end in a upward surge which, in some tests, was so narrow that only its amplitude could be validly measured. This waveform shows that the input current, which is really what this voltage waveform represents, owing to it being the potential drop in a series 2.6 resistor, builds up as in a normal LC circuit. The pole gap flux is therefore changing so as to set up a back EMF acting against the supply EMF. Then the flux levels off and begins to reverse the back EMF, owing to machine rotation changing the pole gap spacing. Once this occurs the back EMF becomes a forward EMF increasing in its effect the supply voltage feeding the collector of the transistor and so overriding the inhibit signal set up by the bias and enhancing current flow in its ON-state. Now, to interpret Fig. 4 in terms of energy one needs to take note that the supply EMF to the transistor circuit has to be strong enough to overcome the maximum back EMF induced in the magnetizing winding. Note then that a magnetic reluctance motor works in one of two ways. In both the inductive energy fed into the machine, as measured by I(ViI)t, far outweighs the return energy expressed when this quantity becomes negative. One way of assuring this is to switch I off at the point when the motor poles are in register. Thus I is zero during the reset stage and, since the net flux change has to be the same but opposite in sign for the two stages, IVi.t is equal in magnitude for the two stages. In the first mode of operation, the inductive input power augments the magnetic flux to strength the pull between poles during the pole closure phase, so that the energy added in this way goes directly into the mechanical power drive during that phase. In the second mode of operation, the inductive power input is used to suppress the magnetic attraction between poles during their separation and the energy is deployed as in compressing a spring to recharge the magnetic energy potential of pole gap without that recharge drawing on the inertial power of the motor. Then, during pole closure, with current off, the energy in the gap does the necessary work. In this case the machine would normally include permanent magnets. However, what we see in Fig. 4 is something quite different from either of these situations. Drawing the waveform in the manner shown in Fig. With the voltages now corresponding to a current drop in 5.2, the total test machine circuit resistance, the 5.46V line represents a norm in the transistor ON-state set when the inductive effect is zero. The full line represents current or voltage across the 5.2 resistance. Above this line the HAROLD
21
voltage difference to the 12.26V level represents voltage drop across inductance or in the power transistor, the intermediate broken curve showing a demarcation between the two. The latter when multiplied by current is the heat loss in the power transistor. 12.26V is the supply voltage fed to the transistor circuit. The determination of the input IVit quantity is then represented by the voltage drop in the shaded section in the upper right portion of the rectangular boundary shown. Consider now the return of inductive energy. Of necessity, IVit has to be the same in magnitude for input and output, and the question at issue is how much of the latter change occurs with I on, as seen in Fig. and how much occurs with I turned off. Certainly, the showing is that the current is greater, much greater, on average during the return transient. Guided, however, by the observations at 50 Hz already mentioned, the author tends to the view that most of the input inductive energy is returned and is in this transistorpowered test shed in I2R loss in the circuit resistance. This means that the underestimate of the input inductive power is compensated by the return of inductive power and becomes an entry in the energy balance sheet as excess heat developed in the load resistance. Certainly, it is clear that the inductive energy put into the system has not been wholly used to power the motor. Much of the energy is returned but precisely how much energy is difficult to ascertain. These observations do not detract from the validity of the conclusions reached in the main sections of this Report, but what has been discussed here becomes a factor in designing the onward prototype machine system and particularly its control circuit. The machine system to be built next will present few design problems because it will be a cross-coupled dual combination of the single test machine already tested, the cross-coupling bringing the machine flywheel action into play as a regulator avoiding parasitic flux oscillations caused by the close-coupling of the windings of the single test machine. The control system needed will be researched in exploratory stages, beginning with transistors in the form of power MOSFETs, but attention will focus on the inductive energy recovery and that may dictate the need for other control techniques for powering the system.
HAROLD
22
APPENDIX I LC Circuit Loss Analysis Before calculating the resistance loss portion of the power input transient supplied to an inductive circuit, it is instructive to study first the capacitative situation. Consider a step voltage E applied to a resistor connected in series with a capacitor. Such a circuit (resistance R, capacitance C) has a time constant RC, verifed as follows. The current at any instant is denoted I and Io is E/R. E = IR + (1/C)I I.t where the integration is from t = 0 to t = T. Write: I = Ioe-t/RC (2) (1)
and substitute in (1) followed by performing the integration: E = Io[Re-T/RC + (1/C)(RC-RCe-T/RC)] which reduces to: E = IoR (3) (4)
verifying the assumed time variation of I expressed in equation (2). The I2R loss is then: WR = Io2RI(e-2t/RC)t which integrates to give at time T: WR = Io2R(RC/2)(1 - e-2T/RC) and the corresponding energy stored in the capacitance is: WC = EIoI(e-t/RC)t - WR which is: WC = EIoRC(1 - e-T/RC) - WR (7) (8) (6) (5)
It follows, therefore, that if is infinite WR is Io2R2C/2 and WC is EIoRC less WR. From (7) WR becomes E2C/2 and is equal to WC. In other words, for every unit of energy stored in the capacitance exactly this same amount of energy is lost in the resistance R.
HAROLD
23
In the initial stages of the transient energy is lost at a greater rate than it is being stored and the situation reverses as charging proceeds. With an inductive circuit, on the other hand, this situation reverses as the energy stored in inductance outweighs the loss initially but then the situation reverses with passage of time and the energy stored settles at a final level whilst there is an ongoing steady resistance loss. The relevant equations with inductance L and resistance R are: E = IR + LdI/dt where: and: I = Io(1 - e-(R/L)t) E = IoR (9) (10) (11)
The total resistance loss to time T is given by evaluating the following expression over the range of integration from t = 0: WR = Io2RI(1 - 2e-(R/L)t + e-2(R/L)t)t which is: WR = Io2R[ + 2(L/R)e-(R/L)T - (L/2R)e-2(R/L)T - (3/2)(L/R)] If T is L/R then WR becomes (LIo2)(1 + 2/e - 1/2e2 - 3/2) or (0.168)LIo2. In contrast, the inductance energy stored at that time T is found by evaluating LI2/2 from equation (13). It is simply LIo2/2 times 1 - 2/e + 1/e2 or (0.200)LIo2. One sees from this that at time the inductance has stored 54% of the energy input, this being the proportion 0.200 of (0.200 + 0.168). Concerning the rate at which energy is apportioned between the resistance loss and inductance this is the ratio of I2R to ILdI/dt or, from (13), (R/L)(1 - e-(R/L)t)/(R/L)(e-(R/L)t), or simply: e(R/L)t - 1 (14) (13) (12)
so one sees that at time T, which is L/R, the proportion of loss to energy being stored has become e - 1 or 2.718 - 1 or 63% of power input.
HAROLD
24
This Appendix therefore guides the design to determine a value of L/R which is high, meaning that R has to be as low as possible, and then driving a voltage pulse into the winding using a sufficient, but not excessive, input EMF of adequate duration to block unwanted magnetic flux oscillations. The technology suggested by this Report using a single solenoidal magnetizing winding allows R to be very small whilst providing for some power regeneration sourced in I2R heat generated. APPENDIX II Test Machine Description This text is extracted from pages 1, 2 and 5 to 26 of the description in a patent specification relating to the test machine. The 4 sheets of drawings containing 16 figures in the patent specification are numbered as 35 to 38 of this Report. The application was filed at the U.K. Patent Office on July 7th 1995. [Official publication date February 12, 1997 as GB 2,303,255]. ****** MAGNETIC RELUCTANCE MOTOR FIELD OF INVENTION This invention relates to magnetic reluctance motors, which are motors having salient poles which drive the motor by magnetic attraction rather than interaction of a magnetic field with current in a winding. Such motors can operate by applying current which strengthens the magnetic polarization as stator and rotor poles come into register as the rotor rotates or which weakens the magnetic polarization as the poles separate from the in-register position. Magnetic reluctance motors are known to have high efficiency and could well become a dominant type of motor now that the cost of the semiconductor circuitry needed to control such machines has reduced to the level at which they can prove commercially more attractive than the induction motor. This invention is concerned with an improvement in the basic structure of the reluctance motor, which increases efficiency even further by a technique which harnesses a physical property known as 'magnetocaloric cooling'. This property is intimately connected with the manner in which the energy in an iron-cored inductance is stored in the core. The field of this invention is therefore primarily concerned with thermodynamic power input to a reluctance motor, which is, in fact, a new field having a very limited technical background. HAROLD
25
BACKGROUND OF INVENTION The background relevant to this invention, so far as it is known to the Applicant, will be described in the following specification, by reference to the drawings. At this stage it suffices to make simple bibliographical reference to the following patents which are discussed in this specification. These are: GB Patent No. 2,234,863 corresponding to U.S. Patent No. 4,975,608, GB Patent Application No. 2,267,995 corresponding to U.S. Patent No. 5,376,184, and GB Patent Application No. 2,282,708, the first four of these having the same applicant as applies to the subject invention and the latter having additionally, as co-applicant, Robert George Adams of New Zealand. GB Patent No. 547,668 granted to Stanley Isaiah Hitchcock. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS Figs. 1 to 5 show schematically the form of five different prior art permanent magnet reluctance motor constructions, which serve as background relevant to the invention. Fig. 6 shows a test core configuration used to verify a magnetic flux switching feature that is applied in the invention. Figs. 7 and 8 show, respectively, a side elevation sectional view and an end elevation sectional view of a motor constructed according to the invention. Fig. 9 shows the magnetic flux paths in a part-section of the structure shown in Fig. 7. Figs. 10, 11 and 12 show different interacting stator and rotor pole arrangements in a magnetic reluctance motor, Figs. 11 and 12 pertaining to the invention and Fig. 10 to a prior art form. Fig. 13 shows a design variant of the motor construction presented in Fig. 8, the rotor poles being tilted in the forward direction of rotation. Fig. 14 shows a machine system incorporating two reluctance motors coupled in an anti-phase pole configuration, with a cross-connected magnetizing winding arrangement for coordinated power input pulse regulation. Fig. 15 shows a B-H magnetization curve applicable to the stator cores in the reluctance motor according to the invention, illustrating how the field excitation, in interacting with reluctance changes as the motor poles close and open, causes flux density changes in a loop direction which represents power generation rather than loss. Fig. 16 shows the rotor of a reluctance motor having provision for rotor magnetization by current in rotor windings on ferromagnetic soft iron cores mounted between laminated rotor sections. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION At the end of this specification there is an Appendix which shows, by technical analysis, using formulae familiar to experts in electrical science, the physical basis on HAROLD
26
which this invention relies. What is described and claimed has been established by experiment, but inasmuch as it will surprise many experts in the art to learn that thermodynamic effects can contribute to the improved efficiency of an electric motor, the Applicant has deemed it prudent to give the formal scientific basis for the research which underlies this invention. The essential point made is that, if one can feed power into an inductance L having a high value by supplying a current of strength I, the energy then stored being LI2/2, and then cause L to reduce substantially before reducing the current, one must gain electrical energy. The Applicant's research extending over 40 years has recognized that inductive energy is stored by the partial ordering of the thermal state of a reacting field medium, which means that upon the recovery of inductance energy there has to be a cooling of the reacting medium to assure energy balance, just as there is heating upon energization. In spite of this awareness for so many years, it is only now that the Applicant, owing to this invention emerging from experimental research funded by the U.K. Department of Trade and Industry by their SMART AWARD programme, has been able to bring this knowledge to fruition in a technological application. The essential considerations, as applied to the reluctance motor, can best be described by first examining how energy is deployed in the motor. Suppose that the motor incorporates magnets and the stator and rotor poles begin in the out-of-register position. Without feeding in any external power, the magnets can serve to pull the poles together and so put drive torque into the machine. At the in-register position the magnetic circuit through the poles has its highest inductance as seen by windings on those poles. It is at this position that a current of strength I is supplied in the direction that aids the action of the magnets. As the current builds up L holds its high value. The current will do no work other than sustain some I2R loss and store energy LI2/2 in that inductance. If the current is then kept on at the level I as the poles separate, by the time they have reached their outof-register position the poles gaps formed will have virtually reduced the inductance to near zero. The current can then be switched off without the return of any energy at that final stage. However, during the phase when the poles were moving apart, L was reducing at constant current I and this means that, since the power delivered is I(LI)/t or I2L/t, one has an overall electrical output in energy terms of I2 times the change of inductance, which is L. In other words, one gets twice as much electrical power back as was fed in when the current was switched on. Of course, there is some ohmic heating loss, but there is also that cooling already mentioned. Also, one can rightly assume that the current I strengthens the magnetic pull between the poles as they separate so that more mechanical work is needed to pull them apart against the action of the magnets than was delivered from their mutual attraction during pole closure. This may, therefore, seem normal and unsurprising, even though electrical power is generated, because mechanical work has been added and because standard science in dealing with such problems applies what is known as 'the principle of virtual work' which assumes an answer based on energy conservation. If the heat exchanges are not factored into the analysis, use of this principle becomes a misleading exercise. HAROLD
27
Now consider the situation where that same current I is applied in the opposite direction to weaken the magnetic flux between the poles when they are fully in register. The current experiences a back EMF in the windings and only senses flux rate of change; it has no knowledge of the biasing magnetic field set up by the magnets. There will be inductance energy supplied as input amounting to LI2/2 as before. In this case the poles can separate without there being any strong magnetic attraction demanding mechanical energy, because the magnetic flux has been biased to a zero value. As the poles separate the current can reduce progressively to keep the zero flux condition and no exchange of inductive power occurs. The overall result is that the energy input LI2/2 has been spent and mechanical energy gained from the magnet during the pole closure phase. These two energies can be presumed to be equal, but if the motor has the design described below, it is found that the mechanical drive power of the machine exceeds the inductive power input. It is then a matter of design to reduce the I2R heating loss so as to gain overall enhancement of motor efficiency by the magnetocaloric cooling thus evidenced. The reluctance motor which has variable pole gaps complicates the situation represented in the Appendix, the more so if magnets are involved, and it should be explained that using the magnetizing current to divert flux from the magnet and along a leakage path will set up demagnetization effects which effectively reduce the inductance L. This allows the value of the current I and the angular position of the rotor in adjusting the pole gaps to combine as a control determining LI. As one then sees from the Appendix, the root principle of the power gain argument is that if one can contrive to reduce LI of a circuit whilst it carries constant current I, then the inductance will deliver more energy output than was supplied and there will be commensurate cooling in the inductor core. By suitable positioning of magnets or magnetizing windings in a reluctance motor, this becomes feasible technologically. The essential design factor in this is the positioning of the magnets or windings which govern the inductance at positions not directly linked by a magnetic field to the seat of the inductive action. Here 'magnetic field' is used in the context of ampere-turns and is distinct from the magnetic flux which necessarily provides the inductive linkage. The magnets or windings can be placed in positions offset from the pole gaps in a reluctance motor or positioned with axes orthogonally angled with respect to the flux direction in the pole gaps. Referring to Figs. 1 to 6, the background applicable to this invention will now be described. In each of these figures the components marked with arrows represent magnets, the arrow pointing from south to north poles so as to represent their field action and magnetic flux direction. In Figs. 1, 3 and 5, the spindles 1 support two rotor sections 2 each comprising an assembly of electrical sheet steel laminar rotor discs having a set of salient poles. In each of Figs. 1 to 5 the cross-shaded components 3 are stator windings, each of which has a stator core 4. These cores are of solid soft-iron form in Figs. 2 and 4, but otherwise in Figs. 1, 3 and 5, they consist of an assembly of electrical sheet steel laminations. Each stator core in Figs. 1 and 3 provides a pair of stator poles, interacting respectively with the rotor poles of the separate rotor sections. HAROLD
28
Fig. 1 shows a prior art reluctance motor disclosed by this Applicant in GB Patent No. 2,234,863, corresponding to US Patent No. 4,975,608. In principle the motor there disclosed has magnetizing windings 3 which, when energized, block the through-passage of magnetic flux sourced in the magnets, forcing diversion around a path through outer bridging yokes 5 to the poles on stators 3 and corresponding poles of the two rotor sections 2. These rotor sections serve, according to the angular position of the spindle 1, to open or close pole gaps between the rotor and stator so that flux from one pair of magnets in one stator core can return as flux through another pair of magnets on an adjacent stator core. There is an even number of such stator cores and the magnets of adjacent stator cores are arranged with opposite polarization directions to assure this. By pulsing current through the windings 3 at times when the poles are closing, this allows the magnets to drive the motor. As the poles separate the current is switched off and the magnetic flux diverts through the stator 4, the path of least reluctance, leaving the poles free to separate. The relevance of this prior art disclosure is its showing of magnetizing windings that are mounted parallel with the spindle axis and so are orthogonal with respect to the flux direction across the pole gap. In the invention, the subject of this patent application, a superior construction incorporating the magnets in the body of the rotor is disclosed. It has been found easier to exclude from the pole gaps the flux sourced in the magnets if the latter are rotormounted, as opposed to stator mounted. Fig. 2 shows a motor structure which became public knowledge from the publicity in Australia relating to a motor construction by Robert G. Adams of New Zealand. The Adams' motor has all poles of the same polarity bonded together at a collar 6 on the spindle 1, leaving the end poles at the free ends all also of the same polarity. Each such pole sweeps in turn past a stator pole and is attracted to the soft iron of the stator core 4. As it passes the in-register position, the magnetizing winding is energized to act in opposition to the flux then linking the core from the magnet. This expels the flux and allows the magnet to move on until attracted by the next stator core. The Adams' disclosure shows that, by using powerful magnets, accepting flux leakage and by using short stator cores as controlling electromagnets, a motor can be constructed which, according to test reports by Adams, is said to have a quite exceptional performance of the kind contemplated in the above preamble. This Applicant opened a liaison with Robert Adams and proposed cooperation to find then that we had developed our ideas on common ground in conceiving a motor version with rotor-mounted magnets disposed parallel with the spindle axis. This led to the filing of GB Patent Application No. 2,282,708 relating to a motor having the construction shown in Fig. 3. Adams had built and tested a machine of the form shown in Fig. 4. In both machine designs the separate bar magnets 7 all rotate together so that all their poles at one end of the machine are of N polarity and all the poles at the other end are of S polarity. This avoids flux reversal in the stator cores which would develop extra loss, bearing in mind that the motor is driven by flux changing in amplitude rather than in direction. HAROLD
29
The Fig. 4 machine operates in a manner analogous to that of the Fig. 2 machine, whereas in the Fig. 3 machine the flux from the magnet is diverted through rotor laminations to traverse poles gaps to the stator in a radial direction. The U.K. Patent Office cited GB Patent No. 547,668 (inventor Stanley Isaiah Hitchcock) against the patent application corresponding to the arrangement shown in Fig. 3 and this citation is a disclosure of a motor of the form shown in Fig. 5. Here the design is much the same as that of Fig. 3 except for the vital differences in Fig. 3, (a) that the stator magnetizing windings and the magnets, which together control the flux acting across the pole gaps, are both orthogonal with respect to the flux direction across those gaps and (b) the flux closure path is through separate bridging stator cores rather than into annular stator cores having salient poles. The latter avoids problems of flux closure, as through a casing 8 (shown in in Fig. 5 in broken outline), by using the stator core members to support windings 3 located in the magnetic flux circuit between the rotor sections 2. From the viewpoint of the subject invention, the weakness of the Hitchcock disclosure is the use of short-length stator coils mounted very close to the operative pole gaps. This provides such close field coupling that none of the power gain from flux domain rotation, as discussed in the specification of GB Patent Application No. 2,282,708 (the Fig. 3 machine), is available from the magnetizing action. Also, with the need to minimize I2R ohmic heating loss as a paramount consideration, if high efficiency is to be achieved, the contraint on space available for the stator magnetizing windings poses problems which are avoided by the following invention. Referring to Fig. 6 it is noted that a test on a static assembly of the form shown, comprising a magnet 9, a laminated ferromagnetic core 10 having a magnetizing winding 11 with laminated core members 12 linking the two revealed that a quite moderate current was sufficient to break the magnetic holding force between the core and the magnet. In principle this served to demonstrate that a current in the winding directed to oppose the action of the magnet will sense the core 10 as having very nearly its normal high magnetic permeability , whereas the stray action of the direct magnetic field from the magnet will have little effect. Accordingly, the magnetic flux, which the magnet would normally drive around leakage paths between its poles, but which it transmits at a magnetic flux density B through a bridging yoke if one is present, is effective in the core 10 as a field B/. It needs very little current in the magnetizing winding to obstruct passage of flux from the magnet in such a case. There are some additional field effects from the laminated core members 12, but the general point holds, namely that if one wishes to improve efficiency and gain power in a reluctance motor there are distinct advantages in putting the field-generating sources in positions around the ferromagnetic circuit orthogonally directed with respect to the gap orientation. Figs. 7 and 8 show different views of a motor construction incorporating the invention. The rotor has a spindle 1 which is of a non-ferromagnetic metal, such as brass or stainless steel. It is mounted in ball bearings 13 set in end frame members 14 which are of a tough electrical insulating material, a rigid polyurethane product being used in experimental versions of the machine. These are connected between their corners by stainless steel studding 15. The object is to minimize stray magnetic field effects and, so HAROLD
30
far as possible, confine the magnetic flux produced by the machine to the space within the bounds of solenoidal winding 16 located on and enclosing 8 stator core members 17. These stator members 17 are formed from I-section transformer laminations and are located on shoulders formed as part of the end frame members. They are disposed parallel with respect to the central axis of the spindle, this axis being also the central axis of the solenoidal winding. Each set of I-section transformer laminations forming stator core members 17 is bolted between rigid polyurethane supports of triangular section (not shown in the drawings). These hold the laminations in a tilted position, at a 45o angle as depicted in Fig. 8. In a test machine of this form the solenoidal magnetizing winding comprised two coils, each of 220 turns. The rotor, in the representation shown, which is that of one machine constructed, comprises four barium ferrite ring magnets 18 of the kind used in loudspeakers. These magnets have a thickness of 8 mm and an outer diameter of 60 mm. Five rotor core sections 19, each comprising an assembly of 0.5 mm thick disc laminations of electrically sheet steel having 8 teeth at its perimeter to form salient poles, are mounted on the motor spindle 1, separated by the four magnets 18. The end rotor core sections had a thickness of 4mm and the three intervening sections had a thickness of 8mm. The magnets were mounted on the spindle, with their polarizations all in the same direction, as shown in Fig. 9. The principle of operation of the motor will now be explained by first commenting on Figs. 10, 11 and 12. A conventional design of a magnetic reluctance motor has a salient pole rotor 20 with no magnets in its structure. Its poles interact with salient poles on a laminated ring stator 21, these having individual windings 22 to control the magnetic flux across the interpole gaps. When the magnetizing winding is energized the rotor and stator poles moving into register as the rotor turns develop a magnetic flux across the pole gap with flux lines tilted forward as indicated by the arrow. If these flux lines were perfectly radial as applies to electrostatic field action, should that analogy be contemplated, the pull between the poles would not develop torque on the motor spindle. By symmetry, when the poles are in perfect register (Fig. 11), the magnetic field in the gap is radial and the torque produced is then zero. It then serves no purpose to maintain the energization of the winding. Indeed, the current must then be terminated in order that pole separation should not develop a brake torque. Fig. 11 shows the stator core 21 as formed with its laminations lying in planes transverse to those applicable to the stator in Fig. 10. Thus, whereas the magnetic flux in the conventional stator of Fig. 10 has to find a path to an adjacent pole through a stator lamination coplanar with a rotor lamination, the stator form shown in Fig. 11 guides the flux between mutually orthogonal laminations to a pole on a separate rotor core section at a position further along the spindle. This latter construction then allows tilting as shown in Fig. 12, the object of this being two-fold. Firstly, in some small measure, the tilt assists in conforming with the inclination of the flux and so the force action across the pole gap. Secondly, the flux, having been established, has to be precluded from developing a tilt in the backward direction corresponding to a retarding torque action. As already indicated, if the flux is HAROLD
31
set up by a magnetizing field, then the commutation is less of a problem. It is just a matter of terminating the current pulse at the right moment. However, if the magnetic flux is developed by magnets, as in the machine shown in Figs. 7 and 8, then the commutation task involves setting up an action opposing the magnets as the poles separate. Given then that in the Fig. 12 position, the magnets cause flux to cross the pole gaps and enter the planes of the stator laminations, the action of pole separation requires either that the flux should break whilst still tilted forward, at least in the stator, or that the flux must be pulled through the full planar faces of the laminations on the forward side of the stator cores. This will induce eddy-currents which oppose this action. However, it is important to realise that what is opposed is not the reduction of magnetic flux already present, but rather the build-up of magnetic flux in passage through the planar faces of the laminations. This therefore can but aid commutation and ease the task of using control circuit means to set up the currents opposing the action of the magnets. In summary, therefore, there is purpose in tilting the stator laminations as shown, and this is not an available option with the conventional ring-type stator lamination. In the operation of the motor shown in Figs. 7 and 8, the control involves pulsing the current in the solenoidal winding to set up a magnetic field directly in the stator cores directed in the same orientation as the polarization of the magnets. Notwithstanding the fact that all magnets face the same way and are separated only by good ferromagnetic material, the magnets do not seek a common flux path along the axis and through to the open pole regions near the motor bearings. Because the rotor laminations have projecting teeth which extend 15mm from the outer perimeter of the magnets, the rotor lamination discs being 90 mm in diameter, these guide the flux to the stator region. Therefore, if the rotor and stator poles are in register the magnet sends its flux around a closed loop across the pole faces and through the sections of stator cores located at corresponding axial positions. When current is applied in a direction which supports the magnet, this developing a magnetic field H as shown in Fig. 9, this opposes and blocks flux passage in those stator sections and forces the magnet to seek a leakage route for its flux. Much of the diminished strength of the magnet is then deployed away from the pole gap and much of the flux finds a return leakage path within the confines of the cylindrical boundary set by the solenoidal winding. This means that the current pulses fed to that winding can serve to control the action of the magnets in driving the reluctance motor, but the actual change of flux involved does not all link that winding inductively. Such flux as does link the winding will be a measure of the inductance of the winding and some of the power supplied as inductive energy will be recovered during a complete pulse period. The former factor means that in some measure the motor will be driven by the magnets without drawing commensurately on input electrical power and that can only mean that there has to be magnetocaloric cooling of some kind to provide that excess power from a heat source. In Fig. 13 a modification of the motor depicted in Fig. 8 is presented. It uses rotor laminations 23 which have the pole-forming teeth angled in the direction of forward rotation of the motor to complement the tilt of the stator laminations. In this figure the arrows on rotor lamination 23 show the magnetic flux lines sourced from the magnets HAROLD
32
entering the rotor disc and being guided by the angled teeth to track along a path to the pole gaps. The construction of a machine of the general form shown in Figs. 8 or 13 can prove difficult if it is attempted to assemble a unitary stator core with winding and a rotor separately and then bring the two together. The powerful magnetic attraction between the rotor and the stator then make it virtually impossible to mount the rotor inside the stator and support it in its end bearings. A solution to this difficulty was found by adopting an assembly process by which the rotor was first mounted in its end bearings with the linking studding 15 bolted in position. Then each stator lamination component is inserted and secured in position, this providing sufficient bonding to hold the end frame mambers 14 in place when the studding is temporarily removed to allow the solenoid to be wound. The innovation involved here is the use of the end frame mambers 14 as side flanges of a bobbin form for that winding. With this construction the motor can operate with one single solenoidal winding by suitable current pulsing, but it is foreseen that the ultimate benefits of the thermodynamic features of the machine render it adaptable for use as a power regenerator or in a coupled motor configuration which has a pilot drive motor as a starter motor. In this case, by reference to Fig. 14, a solenoidal winding 24 on one of two machines 25, 26 having the form shown in Figs. 7 and 8, is used to control the timing of power input to a solenoidal winding 27 on the other machine. The stator core system of each machine is depicted in Fig. 14 as incorporating a core 28 which inductively couples two windings 24 and 27. The inductance of the core depends upon the pole gaps in the associated machine, because the core is formed by the magnetic path through the rotor and stator core system. In Fig. 14 the d.c. motor 29, which has a power supply not shown, is used as starter motor and it serves during normal operation at speed to regulate the speed of the machine combination. It can also be used as a d.c. power generator feeding on the drive power generated by the machine system, thereby serving to recharge batteries used as an energy source on start-up. In the cross-connection between the solenoidal windings 24 and 27 on the two machines there are power amplifiers 30 serving to boost the power exchanged between the machines and these power amplifiers are supplied with electrical power from an external power supply system when the regenerative action of the machine system is inadequate. To understand the regenerative action, refer now to Fig. 15. This shows a B-H relationship between flux density B and magnetic field H in a stator core of the machines. When B is low, the rotor and stator poles are out-of-register and no field current is supplied to the magnetizing winding. The pulse timing governed by the power amplifier or the biasing arrangement through an electronic coupling including diodes assures that no significant current flows in the winding until the pole gaps have closed. The machine has periods during rotor rotation where the gap spacing changes very little over a range of rotor movement. It is during this period that the circuit control allows current to flow to a level determined by the input voltage. The state of magnetism of the stator core then shifts from X to Y in Fig. 15. Since this is a range involving high inductance, commensurate with the effective permeability HAROLD
33
of the stator core being of the order of 1,000 times that of a non-magnetic material, this action needs very little current, meaning a low field strength H. At Y, even though the poles, though beginning to separate, are still in near-register, the current reaches a level where it has succeeded in driving the flux sourced in the rotor magnets from the closed paths through the stator core and thereafter with increased current obliges that flux to seek a leakage path to find a closure route. It is then found from tests on such a machine that one route adopted, besides leakage within the confines of the solenoidal winding, is that through the open ends of the stator cores, which means that these free ends develop poles which set up a demagnetizing effect. This demagnetization, although principally set up by the flux from the magnets in the rotor, has a direct action opposing the onward build-up of field by the current in the magnetizing winding. Accordingly, the transit from X to Y occurs at high inductance, but the transit from Y to Z occurs at a rate subject to a very small incremental magnetic permeability, even though the motor poles are still virtually closed. During this Y to Z phase there is the need to feed in substantial current and substantial inductance energy to take the flux density B to the value at Z. The B-H area between YZ and the B ordinate is a measure of this input energy. At Z, the current input pulse having peaked, the motor pole gaps begin to open rapidly and since the current is sustained the action of the motor inertia in forcing the pole separation operates to deliver a return of inductance energy to the magnetizing winding. The energy returned is that represented by the B-H area between ZX and B ordinate in Fig. 15. Overall, the area of the B-H loop formed is a measure of the energy excess that has been fed back by this induction process, by drawing on magnetocaloric cooling. Note that the loop is described clockwise, whereas in conventional magnetic systems such as transformers, the B-H loop is always described anticlockwise, in which case the B-H loop represents magnetization loss. Such magnetization loss as does occur in the motor will therefore detract from the B-H loop area and so be accounted for in the overall gain. To maximize this power gain the machine must be able to act virtually as a magnetic reluctance switch with the motor function serving only to open and close pole gaps. If the motor system is not loaded as a mechanical power drive, its reluctance function, especially that attributable to the magnets in the rotor, will serve to assist rotation during pole closure and that will nearly balance their braking action during pole separation. Inasmuch, however, as there is a magnetocaloric input of power there is scope for dividing that power output between motor drive and electrical power regeneration. Indeed, it is essential if this technology is to be exploited to the full, that the inductive power regenerated has to be deployed usefully in assisting the system operation, rather than spent on resistance loss in the electronic power source. This is why a back-toback coupling of two machines has merit, in that as one machine is operating over the XZ range requiring power input, so the other is phased in its operation to be operating over the ZX range. This phasing is incorporated in the machine system by adjusting the angular setting of the mechanical coupling between the spindles of the two machines.
HAROLD
34
The induced EMFs in windings 24 are anti-phase signals so that by suitable electronics, or simply diode interposition, they can be used to cross-feed power between the machines when set with the appropriate pole position phasing. A typical test on one machine system using the structure shown in Figs. 7 and 8 has shown that more inductive energy is returned in each flux cycle than is supplied as input, even though the d.c. starter motor itself drew a reduced power whilst the whole system increased in speed from 800 rpm to 1350 rpm. In this case the inductive power gain, though positive, was marginal in comparison with the mechanical power gain, but the findings were a very clear indication that the theoretical basis of this invention, with its reliance on a magnetocaloric cooling as a source of excess electrical power input, is soundly based. Although the invention has been described in its form as implemented in a test prototype, which used permanent magnets, it is to be understood that the essential component is the ferromagnetic core in the system, which need not be of permanent magnet material. In its technological application, the optimum design based on this invention depends upon the scale of the machine. A large machine system can employ rotor and stator structures which are simply electromagnetic in form, provided the core is ferromagnetic. The key feature of the invention is the way in which the reluctance of the core effective in the magnetizing winding can be switched from a high inductance state to a low inductance state by means not directly coupled to that magnetizing winding. The specific design of the reluctance motor by which the pole closure and pole separation design serve this reluctance switching functions is the attribute which brings about the enhanced efficiency condition. The permanent magnets are not essential and, indeed, a rotor built with a soft iron ring cores 31 to replace the magnets with rotor windings 32 such as is shown in Fig. 16 could serve quite well functionally and in fact better in cost terms in a large machine. The rotor winding, supplied through slip rings, would merely carry a steady d.c. current and the flux changes resulting from the pole opening and closing would set up eddy-currents which involve a moderate loss. However, these currents would have limited core penetration and would tend to sustain a steady magnetic flux condition in the body of the rotor. As with the coercive force action of a permanent magnet, these would help to force the leakage flux action that is part of the functional operation of the machine as described. The importance of the enveloping solenoidal winding as the primary magnetizing winding governing motor operation can be seen when it is realized that, if individual windings are used on each stator core, these would need to be segmented along the core length so as not to obstruct the pole gaps. The enveloping solenoidal winding has therefore several advantages, namely its low resistance because of its unrestricted outer diameter, its ease of assembly and its continuity along the body of the machine. In machines constructed by the Applicant to test this invention, the motor end frame members were of electrically insulating material because some pulsating magnetic flux leaks from the open ends of the stator core members. This leakage seems essential if provision of a return flux path through a ferromagnetic casing is to be avoided. HAROLD
35
However, the end frame members could be metal castings of spider-like construction which, with the axial studding 15, provide no closed circuit linked by the changing magnetic flux. The eddy-current losses in the end frame members would then be reduced to those set up by a small amount of flux penetration into the thin spider limbs connecting the studding and the central hubs supporting the motor bearings. APPENDIX OF THE PATENT SPECIFICATION Ferromagnetic Inductor Energy Analysis The energy stored in an inductance L formed by a magnetizing winding mounted on a ferromagnetic core is the integral: II[(LI)/t]t (1) evaluated over the range from zero current I to the applicable level of current. This can be written as: I[LI/t + I2L/t]t (2) 2 2 which is I L+LI /2 where L is the change of inductance, assuming this occurs at the level of current I. It follows from this that if L is reduced when I is high and increased when I is low, the inductance can deliver more energy during the current reduction phase than is supplied to it during the current input phase. This may sound anomalous but it is consistent with basic physical principles, because the process by which an inductance stores energy involves heating and cooling. Heat is shed when the inductance is energized, because the electromagnetic induction polarizes the reacting field in the manner described in the Appendix of the published specification of GB Patent Application No. 2,267,995 or that in U.S. Patent No. 5,376,184. Conversely, there is cooling, known in physics as magnetocaloric cooling, upon deenergization. There the energy balance is attributable to thermal effects which are not formulated in the above expression. To prove that more energy can be extracted from an inductance than is supplied to it, suppose that the inductance has a high value L as the current increases and a progressively lower value L-L as the current is sustained at a high level, the current not being switched off until the inductance is very low. The energy input during the current increase phase is then given by: L(I)2/2 (3) and the energy output at the transition when L reduces is given by: L(I)2 (4) with further energy output during the current decrease phase: (L-L)(I)2/2 (5) Since there is no current when the transition to increased inductance occurs, these three energy components are all we need consider. Together they show a net gain of electrical energy of half the expression (4). This assumes that the inductance can be changed without expending energy equal to that gained and this is not possible for an air-cored inductance. It is possible by using HAROLD
36
a ferromagnetic core, for example, by adjusting an air gap in the core, assuming the gap is positioned somewhere in the core not directly field-coupled with the magnetizing winding. Here the word 'field' (H as used in Fig. 15) has a meaning distinct from magnetic flux (B) which necessarily does couple the air gap with the magnetizing winding.
HAROLD
37
HAROLD
FIG. 7
FIG. 8
HAROLD
HAROLD
HAROLD
by
HAROLD ASPDEN
Sabberton Publications P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England
ISBN 0 85056 0241

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
Contents
Section Title Introduction PART I: Multi-Megawatt Over-Unity Design PART II: The ASPDEN Motor PART III: The Energy of a Magnetic Circuit PART IV: Commercial Development of the Invention
page 1 2 11 19 27-29
*****
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996

Introduction This Energy Science Report is one of a series concerned with new energy technology and the fundamental energy science that is involved. In this series of twelve such reports there are three, Nos 3, 8 and 9 of which are of outstanding importance. Report No. 8 was devoted exclusively to the remarkable discovery of Dr. Paulo Correa and Mrs. Alexandra Correa of Concord, Ontario, Canada. In proving that electrical power at normal power voltage can be generated by tapping aether energy by a plasma discharge technique, we have in prospect one solution for our future energy needs. In this Report No. 9 this author now reveals another way forward to tapping aether energy, one which could well replace main electrical power generating installations in the years ahead. In Report No. 3, soon to be issued, the author will describe a technology which, when developed, will serve as a `free energy' air-conditioning or refrigeration unit. This latter technology does not tap aether energy. It does, however, operate in defiance of the second law of thermodynamics by extracting electricity from ambient heat. This Report in four parts. Part I outlines the design of a large scale motor such as might become a prime mover in a power generating plant or used to power an ocean liner. Part II concerns the design features of a small prototype motor that can be assembled in a home workshop. Part III is an academic discourse aimed at educating students and even university professors of electrical engineering on some elementary, but unfamiliar, principles of magnetism. Part IV discusses further the scope for research and commercialization. It is aimed at government officials and research directors in industry, with a view to urging action to exploit this new technology. For the record, the author explains that he has begun writing this Report on October 6th 1996 and aims to publish by November 6th in advance of a New Energy symposium to be held in Rotterdam on November 9th. This Report will be revised and reissued in updated forms periodically thereafter in the light of developments. [Note added here in this June, 2003 reprint of this Report for placing as a record on the authors website www.energyscience.co.uk and listing in the paper section of the authors other website www.aspden.org which is where any such commentary as to onward development will be reported. However, it is mentioned here that, at this time, the authors attentions have been more directed at the understanding the scientific physical basis on which energy can be tapped from our aetheric environment, replicating in a sense the process by which our Earth and sun acquired their energy. The future prospect here points towards solid-state technology, rather than the theme discussed in this Report.]
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
PART I: Multi-Megawatt Over-Unity Design There have been many reports of motors incorporating permanent magnets and claiming over-unity performance. By òver-unity' is meant the generation of output power in excess of the electrical power input. It is important to note that the use of permanent magnets in motor construction is standard practice for many commercial d.c. motors. Usually the motor drive is generated by currents in conductors interacting with the magnetic field to produce lateral forces on the structure supporting the conductors. In this case the resulting motion induces back EMFs which absorb input power to set up the drive force. There is no anomalous energy gain in such machines. An entirely different motor principle involves setting up a magnetic field in a pole gap as the poles come together and weakening the magnetizing field during pole separation. Such machines are known as `magnetic reluctance' motors. Incorporating permanent magnets in such machines poses problems but offers scope for òver-unity' performance. It should not, however, be assumed that energy is being drained from the magnet. The magnet is merely a catalyst in energy conversion. Also, whatever function can be performed by a magnet can also be achieved using an electromagnet, meaning a ferromagnetic core excited by a magnetizing winding, subject to the scale of the system involved. In large electrodynamic machines used in power generation there is a developing tendency to use superconductive magnets, superconductive coils having no ferromagnetic core. The fact that electric current can be sent around a multi-turn magnetizing winding with no loss that produces heat offers the alternative to a powerful magnet for many scientific applications. This is especially the case now that `warm superconductors' have been discovered, with the promise of room temperature superconductivity. However, here again, it must be noted that, if the ferromagnetic core is to be used as the catalyst for tapping energy from the aether, the use of superconductive windings must be accompanied by the presence of ferromagnetic cores within those windings. The design of the multimegawatt power generating machine to be described below does, therefore, use superconductive windings on ferromagnetic cores. The general principle which forms the basis of the design combines (a) the avoidance of loss by using superconductive magnetizing windings and (b) the minimization of inductive power input by near-to-total enclosure of the complete core circuit of the machine within a single solenoidal magnetizing winding. The operating principle of the conventional magnetic reluctance motor is easy to understand. One stores energy in the magnetic field within the gaps between the rotor and stator poles. The poles come together by magnetic attraction. That magnetic field energy fed in as inductance is then converted into mechanical work imparting drive torque which delivers output power to a motor drive shaft. All one then has to do is to be sure that the magnetizing current is switched off when the poles come into register as the pole gaps are very nearly closed and then they can separate to step on to the next operating position without there being much magnetic drag arresting the motion. The energy fed in as inductance energy is deployed as mechanical output. There is no power gain, but there is some loss owing to magnetization (hysteresis and eddy-currents) and, unless superconductive windings are used, there is ohmic heating loss attributable to the currents in the magnetizing windings.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
Now just reconsider this situation. Firstly one assures that there is energy stored in the magnetic field of the pole gaps. Then one converts virtually all of that energy into mechanical work. Finally one ensures that no further magnetic energy is fed into the pole gaps during their separation. There is no reference to a magnet in this sequence of events. So let us now introduce a magnet and regard the rotor poles as being those of a permanent magnet, with the stator poles being those of an electromagnet, the latter having a magnetizing winding. Instead of supplying electric current to set up the magnetic field in the pole gap during the pole closure phase we let that field be that solely attributable to the permanent magnet. The magnet will pull the poles together and supply mechanical drive torque which spin the motor. The electromagnet will be excited during pole separation so as to set up a magnetic field in opposition to that of the magnet, in effect neutralizing the field, or as some might say setting up poles of the same polarity so that they repel whereas there was attraction during the pole closure phase when a magnet pole attracted a nonmagnetized soft-iron stator pole piece. Here the situation is that the magnet does the work first to drive the machine and then we do something by which we input power to reset the machine for a repeat cycle. If what we do requires less energy that was delivered by the magnet, then we have òver-unity' operation. Whatever we do in feeding that energy into the machine involves the process we call `magnetic induction'. There has to be a back-EMF set up in the magnetizing winding when we supply current, if there has to be energy input. By our laws of physics there has to be what is termed a rate of change of magnetic flux linkage to set up that back EMF. The question at issue therefore is whether we can set up a current in the magnetizing winding which opposes the magnetic field in the pole gap but does not promote any change in the net magnetic flux linking that winding. To reduce this to something quite simple, imagine you are sitting at a table in a room and you have a magnet in one hand and a piece of soft iron in the other hand. See Fig. 1.
The word `soft' in this connection merely means that the iron is of normal composition and not an alloy or special substance that is used for making permanent magnets. It means that it readily accepts change of magnetic state and readily loses its magnetic state given a demagnetizing field. A permanent magnet requires an extremely strong demagnetizing field before it suffers any permanent loss of magnetism and it recovers from any temporary reduction of strength promptly upon removal of the less-than-extremely-strong demagnetizing field. You can feel the pull of the magnet towards the soft iron. The two having come together, you try to pull them apart to find that it needs a lot of force. If you
apply current to magnetize the soft iron bridging yoke then, depending upon the current direction, the yoke will be pulled towards the magnet with even greater force (Fig. 1) or that force will be weakened or even reversed (Fig. 2). If you introduce alternating current (Fig. 3) then the force will oscillate and you can contemplate building a motor by fitting a flywheel, connecting rod and crank shaft. Now there is nothing contrary to simple electrical engineering principles in this method of designing an electric motor. Indeed, for anyone interested in building model steam engines there could be a fascination in using the connecting rod, crank and flywheel arrangement to convert pulsating translational motion into a rotary form of motion. It so happens, however, that the usual design of an electric motor is more suited to producing rotary motion. It is based on the magnetic poles on a rotor and a stator moving owing to a sideways pull which exists even though the interacting rotor and stator pole faces are equidistant whilst altering their areas of overlap. However, staying with our horseshoe magnet and reciprocating engine model, suppose now that, wrapped around the room, running around the perimeter walls, there is a magnetizing winding (or rather a demagnetizing winding) and someone switches a current on in that winding (Fig. 4). Its field acts on the magnet and the soft iron just as it would if the winding were closely wrapped around that soft iron bridging yoke. You would still find you can easily Figure 3 separate the two, thanks to that current in the winding, if it flows in the appropriate direction. Now you do have a problem. You know enough about magnetism to accept that magnetic flux lines close around their paths in loops quite close to the magnetic source. The flux lines emerging from the magnet and the soft iron are therefore all virtually completely closed well within a metre or so from that table. However, that winding around the room is all embracing and hardly any flux escapes as a linking flux through that winding. There is negligible back EMF induced as it accepts the current which breaks the pull between the magnet and the soft iron. Therefore, one has a situation where power can be generated from the magnetic reluctance action as the poles come together but we input no inductive power to weaken that attraction and so allow the poles to separate to reset them for the next action cycle. This is a recipe for òver-unity' operation. We have drawn energy from the thermodynamic system of the quantum power state of the magnet and used it to serve a mechanical purpose and we find that no energy input is needed to reset the system for the next cycle of operation. Now it is not realistic to suggest that windings should be placed around the whole room housing a motor but one can so design a motor that the magnetic flux circuit is closed within a solenoidal winding as if that solenoid does house virtually the whole motor. It is also
Figure 4
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
realistic to contemplate the use of superconductive windings to avoid loss of energy by normal joule heating produced by current flow. It is even realistic to build a small prototype machine which does not use superconductive windings and perform tests to verify the principles just outlined. That is described in Part II below. Furthermore, in Part III we will come to understand where that energy that is drawn into the machine to give it òver-unity' performance enters the machine, though a full understanding of its underlying source, which is within the aether, is beyond our scope here in this Report. For that one needs to study this author's book Àether Science Papers' [This was listed as ref. 1996a in the Appended Bibliography that was included in the original version of this Report. That bibliography is not included here as it can be found on website www.aspden.org along with a copy of that book in PDF format.] To summarize, given that one can design an electrical motor having a magnetizing winding which has no resistance loss and sets up no significant ferromagnetic inductive reaction when carrying an alternating current and given that the motor will run at a synchronous speed set by the pulsation rate of that current, we can design an òver-unity' motor. As already indicated the design of a multi-megawatt system will be presented first, before we come to the design of the small bench-type test machine which the author has devised. Of necessity, the latter form of machine has had to use magnetizing windings which are resistive and which do involve inductance, though these are minimized by astute design. However, since the real significance of this effort is the implication for large scale exploitation as power generators in the electrical supply industry, it is appropriate to present the multi-megawatt design next, the object being to arouse interest in government circles and in the electrical power supply industry. This is done with deliberation, because there have been several claims by inventors asserting that they have over-unity' machines. Often the inventors lack the formal technical academic background of the heavy electrical engineering profession. If their machines work they get involved with prospective sponsors who want the secrets of the invention to be kept confidential until they have exploited the rights, but it needs the engineering talents of the established corporate motor manufacturer to develop the technology. The reason is one of scale. The larger the machine, the easier the task of overcoming the power loading involved in breaking through the over-unity' threshold. A dynamo-electric machine rated at tens of megawatts needs to have dimensions for which the rotor diameter would be of the order of a metre and a length of two or three metres. Machines of this size are not built as a speculative experimental exercise. They should be, in this author's opinion, because the research funding is negligible when compared with the expenditure which governments waste on high energy particle accelerators and reactors aimed at hot fusion power generation. The problem, of course, is that scientists think they know all there is to know about the way in which the dynamo-electric machine operates. They devote their research efforts to writing programs for computer-aided design and thereby underline the point that the basis of their formulations is sound and beyond any dispute. About ten years ago I asked a university lecturer, who specialised in teaching electric machine design and was active in creating computer programs for that purpose, how he allowed for the èddy-current anomaly' in his calculations. His response to me was that he had never heard of the èddy-current anomaly'. I was surprised because I had spent three years of my life doing Ph.D. research on that very subject in the Department of Electrical Engineering at Cambridge University in England. I knew that the precise way
magnetic flux density B in iron varies with the magnetizing field H is not something one relies upon from electrical steel manufacturers' specifications. I will not bore the reader here by enlarging on that theme. If you are interested then do refer to Energy Science Report No. 3 in this series, but take my word here for the fact that the machine design I shall describe below would not be something that could perform in the manner predicted by use of those programs for computer-aided design. Ask yourself, "Could such a program on offer commercially today really predict the òver-unity' performance of an electrodynamic machine?" You see, I know of two fundamental processes that are at work in such machines, either of which has òver-unity' implications. One is the process that undermined by Ph.D. research effort. I found that the eddy-current induction losses in electrical sheet steels could be six times greater than theory predicted, albeit only over a limited portion of the B-H hysteresis cycle. I attributed this to a loss mechanism as if there was a mystery time delay in the flux transitions accompanying change of magnetic state. I was not, in those Ph.D. research years (1950-1953), aware of the possibility of breaching the second law of thermodynamics. Otherwise I would have been writing about òver-unity' machines and `free energy' power sources in my early career, rather than now in my retirement. The mystery which underlies the èddy-current anomaly' is the regeneration of electrical power from heat wasted by ohmic resistance loss! That six-fold factor I measured, later to be surpassed by researchers who found that a factor of 10 was in evidence in some steels magnetized across the direction in which the steel had been rolled to form in into sheets, tells me that there is thermodynamic regeneration of power on a mammoth scale. It exceeds by far any level set by the Carnot criteria and I see in that the basis of a new technology. That may explain why I deem Energy Science Report No. 3 to be very important. Now, in the design of the multi-megawatt machine under discussion here, I need to keep that èddy-current anomaly' in mind, while aiming to tap energy from that quantum world which powers the ferromagnet. The energy source is thermodynamic, but whereas the èddy-current anomaly' draws on normal heat energy generated in the steel by resistance loss, the quantum activity taps entropy of the underlying vacuum medium, or aether, which is where the quantum (Planck's constant) is determined. Moving on, I stress that those who will be consulted in the evaluation of what I say here will not find they can use their computer-aided design techniques to verify in advance whether or not my machine will work to deliver òver-unity' performance. They need to understand rather more about `magnetic flux leakage' than they do at present, before they can even adapt those programs to face this new task. Furthermore, they need first to understand inductance and the `half-field reaction' phenomenon that I describe in Part III of this Report. The only way forward is to bite the bullet and spend the money needed to build the test prototype machine I now describe. They can by all means debate the pros and cons of my proposal, but they will not be able to deny the validity of my overall conclusion, because of what I say above by reference to Fig. 4 and what I shall describe below in Part II. Fig. 5 shows the sectional side elevation of the machine and Fig. 6 shows the sectional end view from the position indicated by the outer arrow markings. The machine comprises a solid steel rotor having a laminated set of toothed electrical steel stampings at each end. The teeth on these stampings form rotor poles which interact with the six stator pole members. These have the form of laminated electrical steel stampings
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
assembled in a stator support frame (not shown) and forming bridging yokes. The structure is comparable functionally with the simple arrangement depicted in Fig. 3.
However, there is a fundamental difference in the way in which the magnetizing winding is incorporated. The main magnetizing winding is solenoidal and shown as the cross-shaded stator-mounted structure in Fig. 5. It is superconductive. There is, however, an additional magnetizing winding (not shown in Figs. 5 and 6) that is positioned in slots around the perimeter of the solid steel rotor. See Fig. 7 for an outline of constructional
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
detail. This winding is a normal copper winding connected between slip rings mounted on the rotor spigots. Between adjacent pole teeth on the rotor laminations there are blocks of electrical steel laminations interfacing with the sides faces of the teeth to guide magnetic flux from the pole teeth around a closed circuit shown by the three arrow markings on the full line curves in Fig. 5. The path is through a spiral wrapping of laminated electrical sheet steel
providing infill between the inter-teeth blocks. As can then be seen there is a closed flux path through the body of the rotor and this spiral wrapping, so that very little magnetizing current in the rotor winding can produce a flux density near to magnetic saturation around that rotor circuit. For design purposes one can assume a magnetic permeability of several thousand so that 15,000 gauss can be developed by a few ampere-turns per cm. length of the rotor. Very little power is therefore expended in introducing the priming magnetic condition of the rotor. So far as induction is concerned, note that the rotor body comprises solid steel. Once the magnetic flux is set up in it the rapid fluctuations of any externallyapplied field will have no effect on the rotor body. Eddy-current screening will confine related flux changes to a very small penetration depth and losses arising from that at the surface of the rotor body will be negligible. However, in resisting inductive flux change through the body of the rotor, the flux has to remain constant and that means that, external to the core body of the rotor, it must find a through path regardless of the varying position of the poles of the machine. The task in operating the machine is, therefore, that of ensuring that the magnetic flux from the solid body of the rotor either finds its way back through the spiral laminar steel wrapping on the rotor or diverts through the outer perimeter faces of the rotor poles and finds its closure path through the bridging yokes of the stator. The latter route is indicated by the broken line curves shown in Fig. 5. With no current in the superconductive winding the paths of least reluctance are those shown by the full line curves. The 15,000 gauss flux density of the core body will,
by appropriate design in determining the ratio of the cross-sectional areas of the solid and laminar portions of the rotor, be such that 8,000 gauss, say, applies in the right-hand direction within the laminated portion. However, when current flows in the superconductive winding in a sense that reverses this flux direction, the design requirement is that the combined effect should produce a 20,000 gauss flux density in the stator bridging yoke members. The plan is to operate the machine by feeding current pulses into the solenoidal winding to divert the rotor core flux across the pole gaps as the rotor and stator poles come into register and have no current in that winding as the poles separate. What is so special about this machine design is the fact that we have built into the machine a basic polarization bias which allows us to use a solid-bodied rotor construction, needed for strength in withstanding rotation at, say, 3,600 rpm and have located a single solenoidal stator winding in a structure that is easy to cool to assure the superconductive condition.
It is special also because we have a ferromagnetic core subjected to pulsating magnetic flux conditions by a unidirectional current pulse fed to that superconductive winding. Note further that the flux density range of change in the spiral laminar wrapping around the rotor is between, say, 8,000 gauss, which is very moderate in electrical machine design terms, whereas the flux density range of change in the bridging yoke members of the stator is between, say 5,000 and 20,000 gauss in the same direction. The thickness of the latter members can, as one sees from Fig. 8, be made such that this 20,000 gauss level of flux density is assured, given that the 15,000 gauss of the solid rotor core portion will be sustained by induced reaction currents if the current excitation of the superconductive winding is not perfectly matched to the load conditions. Also, in the design of this machine an important factor is the retentivity or residual magnetism trapped in the stator bridging yoke members. This residual magnetism makes it easier for the basic level of stator flux density to be maintained at 5,000 gauss. Now, although we have, by reference to Figs. 1 to 4, seen that it is possible to operate a motor with òver-unity' performance, we have not explained how the energy is
10
drawn in from the aether to balance that gain. As we shall see presently from Part III of this Report, we need to activate a magnetic core over a range of magnetization where the ferromagnetic domains in the steel begin to turn owing to the action of a magnetic field, as distinct from flipping spontaneously by trigger action involving a weak magnetic field. The latter is what happens at low flux density. Fortunately, from the viewpoint of our machine design, that `flipping' of flux direction is avoided in the solid portion of the rotor and is very much reduced in the stator owing to the magnetization cycle being centred on a flux density of 12,500 gauss. Hysteresis loss which is associated with those spontaneous flips of the magnetism in the domains within the steel is very much reduced under these conditions. So far as the hysteresis loss in the spiral wrapped laminated portion of the rotor is concerned the 8,000 gauss range limit keeps that loss below normal levels prevalent in transformers and dynamoelectric machines. It follows that the primary loss would be the ohmic resistance loss in the main winding, but we have avoided that by using the superconductor in its construction. Note, further, that the strong magnetic flux densities we see in the steel are not required to penetrate the superconductor material and that the use of a `warm superconductor' substance is likely to prove commercially viable as the machine design suggested here is implemented. It will be apparent to experts in electric motor design who may come to read this Report that the machine depicted in Figs. 5 to 8 does not exploit the feature by which inductance of the magnetizing winding is reduced. Yet it does, in a sense and indirectly. The superconducting winding has to reverse the magnetic flux in the spiral laminar portion of the rotor. This means that we must supply energy as input to match that stored by inductance in the pole gaps of the machine. We intend to use that energy priming condition to develop machine drive torque but, owing to the bias polarization, we intend to draw in some extra energy into that gap, as will be explained in Part III. This augments the drive torque. Now, if we were to wait until the machine had used its magnetic drive fully as its poles reach their in-register condition, before we switch the current off, we would not get much of that input energy back. However, if the machine is operating under òver-unity' conditions, we can target a moment to reduce that current so as to get substantially the whole of that input energy returned from the inductance. In effect, therefore, though we have to contend with the back EMF attributable to inductance, we have in sight the design criteria for a machine which possibly might have the merits of the notional motor arrangement shown in Fig. 4. It will be easier to understand the technical points involved in this proposition if some of the design details for operation of the multi-megawatt machine are deferred until Part IV of this Report. This is because the analysis in Part III will provide a foundation for understanding the way in which the machine functions to tap aether energy and because there will be some reference to patents bearing upon the subject and these patents warrant inspection for their commercial significance. Accordingly, attention is now turned to the bench-type motor which implements the principle introduced in the above discussion of Figs. 1 to 4.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
11
PART II: The ASPDEN Motor The ASPDEN motor is based on an evolving design principle which encompasses several technical features implicit in the name just given. Although ASPDEN is this author's surname, it can serve as an acronym for: Asymmetric Shaded-Pole Dynamo-Electric Negentropy machine. The expression `negentropy' signifies òver-unity' operation, because the usual expectation in energy science is that entropy, which is a notional quantity representing an amount of heat Q as degraded by temperature T, or Q/T, always increases. The term `negative entropy' or `negentropy' implies the reversal of this process and signifies a regenerative action. The àsymmetric property' is a subject discussed in Energy Science Report No. 7. It is introduced by tilting the laminar assemblies constituting the stator poles, the object being to cause the machine to operate more efficiently when rotating in a specific direction. The orthogonal relative disposition of the laminar planes as between the stator and rotor poles accounts for the `shaded-pole' aspect, but this is not strictly a shaded-pole design in the normal sense. The reason is that the `shaded-pole' feature aims to preclude magnetic flux from leaving the poles in a direction that retards the drive, whereas the conventional `shaded-pole' design relies on magnetic flux penetration and that generates unwanted inductive heating. The current giving that heat shifts the phase of the emergent flux and creates the drive. The latter is an inefficient process. The former can be quite effective in supplementing the efficiency of the machine. From what has been said by reference to Figs. 1 to 4 it will be understood that the machine must have a single solenoidal winding mounted externally with respect to the whole operating magnetic circuit, so that it is not restricted in dimensions to the small aperture space that allows it to fit onto individual pole pieces. Furthermore, we want the winding to be so positioned on the machine that it acts only indirectly on the pole gap and lets the magnet system do the work of feeding energy to that pole gap region. Contrary to the design shown in Fig. 5, we will set the solenoidal magnetizing winding so that when it is powered to oppose flux in the pole gaps it assists the magnetism of the magnet. Alternatively, when it is powered to assist the flux in the pole gaps, it opposes the magnetism of the magnets. This poses no problem, however, because the magnets are virtually immune from the effects of fields of the strength needed to run the motor. By putting the magnets into the rotor assembly, it is the soft iron bridging yokes forming the stator that `see' the power of the field we apply to that magnetizing solenoid. The magnets set up the basic polarization which develops demagnetizing effects in those bridging yokes, making it an easy task then for the magnetizing (or rather demagnetizing) current to reduce the magnetic flux across the poles gaps as they separate. However, running in the alternative mode with current assisting the pole gap magnetization, the effective permeability of the irom in the bridging yokes is still of the order of 100, whereas the effective permeability of the magnets in the rotor is close to unity. It is feasible, therefore, to run a motor by using a single magnetizing winding wrapped around the whole body of the machine so as to surround virtual all of its internal flux path. Inevitably, of course, since we are not talking about the notional embodiment shown in Fig. 4, we will have some flux leakage that escapes from the winding. Also, there will be a reduction of magnetic flux through the magnet as the poles separate. This will not involve significant eddy-current losses if the magnet is of a composition that is non
12
conductive, such as a ferrite. It would be a problem if one uses an alloy such as Alnico as a magnet. At least, it is feasible to build and test a small motor that operates by using a single solenoidal magnetizing winding in the manner just described. Fig. 9 illustrates the second test machine built by the author. It dates from April1995. It uses loudspeaker-type barium ferrite magnets of 60 cm outside diameter, 24 mm internal diameter and 8mm thickness. The rotor laminations of 90 mm external radius have 8 poles and an internal diameter of 19 mm permitting a tight fit on a slightly reduced 3/4 inch diamter brass spindle. There are 8 bridging yokes which comprise small rectangular transformer laminations of 3 inch by 1/2 inch dimensions. The machine was fitted with a d.c. drive motor that could serve equally as a generator and was intended to bring the machine up to speed before current was applied to the test machine. The decision to use 8 poles proved to be a problem, because it was not feasible, given the author's circumstances, to assemble a suitable commutator and the author opted to control the machine electronically. Note that, to operate with the current assisting the drive as the poles close, one can expect the machine to be self-synchronizing with the pulsed input. However, in the
opposition mode, unless the pulses have to be correctly timed according to the position of the motor shaft, otherwise it will lose synchronism. To the extent that these problems could be overcome, the plan then was to apply power to the test machine and relieve the load on the drive motor gradually to see whether the energy input to the test machine was less the energy saving in feeding the drive motor.
13
In short, the question was whether any drive at all could be provided by that single external magnetizing winding, because it was quite unorthodox to configure a motor so that the only winding did not link the magnetic circuit traversing the pole gap. Instead, the motor shown in Fig. 9 was designed with a magnetizing winding that was linked only by stray leakage flux and there could be no doubt owing to its outer position on the perimeter of the stator bridging yokes that most of the flux diverted from the pole gaps had still to find its return passage confined within the magnetizing winding.
Note further that the essential issue of concern was, not the amount of loss caused in the winding owing to I2R heating effects, but whether the energy lost as inductive power input to drive the machine was less than the mechanical energy gained. Keep in mind that, whether working in the supporting drive mode or the opposing drive mode, the object is to draw more mechanical power from the closure of the pole gaps than is supplied as irretrievable inductive power input, either to augment the gap flux during pole closure or to weaken the gap flux during pole separation. One troublesome question faced by the author during these tests of the opposed mode excitation was that of being sure that the current applied did not exceed that needed to suppress the pole gap flux, because if it was too large it could simply divert the flux from the magnet into the ends of the bridging yokes and so through an external leakage closure path. The leakage had, so far as possible, to be from the sides of the rotor poles and confined close to the rotor core. That is why the design of the machine was as illustrated by the sectional drawing shown in Fig. 10.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
14
Note that in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11, which shows more detail, there are numerals which are used because these illustrations are copied from one of the author's pending U.K. Patent Applications. The assembly comprises a spindle 1 mounted in bearings 13 in end frame members 14. The latter have shoulders which located stator bridging yokes 17 around which there is a helically wound coil or solenoid 16. Mounted on the spindle is an interleaved assermbly of ring magnets 18 and electrical steel rotor laminations 19, the latter having 8 poles uniformly spaced around the perimeter. The angular spacing between the pole teeth is the same as the pole width. The current pulses fed to the winding 16 are assumed in this case to produce a field H acting to oppose the tendency of the magnetic flux developed in the magnets from producing a full measure of magnetic flux through the stator yokes 17. When no current pulse is present then the magnets can promote magnetic attraction between the poles on rotor laminations 19 and the stator yokes 17. Otherwise, when current
is present, that attraction is weakened. As a result, by pulsing the winding 16 at the right timing, the motor will develop a drive torque. Now, although it is not easy to see from these figures, at times when the current is on and blocking some passage of magnetic flux through the stator, there is a diversionary route for flux closure from the magnet. The inner side faces of the rotor pole teeth allow leakage of magnetic flux lines across the axial gap between adjacent sets of rotor laminations. This is an easier flux leakage route than passage from the ends of the machine and around a path external to the winding 16. What happens is that the intensity of the flux through the magnet diminishes somewhat during the current pulse periods and, of course, at times when the rotor and stator poles are out of register with one another. The magnets, being of ferrite composition, offer negligible eddy-current reaction to such flux change. However, in penetrating across the faces of the rotor laminations the flux from the magnet does encounter such a reaction because currents are induced in those laminations. This has the effect of tending to keep the flux passing
15
through a magnet and reaching the rotor teeth at a constant level. This enforces the flux switching between the leakage paths and the stator and means that the flux across the radial pole gaps varies as the rotor turns in step with the current pulses. The essential question one confronts is that of knowing how effective the current can be in driving magnetic flux from the stator. The answer to this is best found by experiment and the evidence of operation of the machine. It is found that the pulsing of that helical winding wrapped around the whole stator assembly will, in fact, impart drive torque to the machine. This means that we can contemplate making the machine larger in size and making the helical winding so large in cross-section that its I2R loss is very small. Furthermore, if we examine the efficiency of the machine, measured with that I2R loss discounted, we should find that it exceeds unity or 100%, if our assumptions are correct and much of the flux switching occurs within the confines of the winding, with little flux escaping from the ends. The following data is an extract from what was reported in the first report on this subject submitted to the DTI, the U.K. Department of Industry in July 1995. The full text of that first report is provided in Energy Science Report No. 7 of this series. As there acknowledged, the DTI have funded the initial stage of this research project as part of their SMART Award system for technological innovation. "The first test on the machine was a test using half-wave rectified 50 Hz a.c. This meant running the machine at low speed (375 rpm), not enough to test the shaded-pole feature, which was the dominant interest owing to the funding arrangements. These tests were, therefore, of a cursory nature just to see if half-wave current pulses did affect the machine in the manner expected, but more particularly to get a measure of the induced back-EMF and so the level of flux activity across the pole gaps and to see how the pulse input relieved load on the drive motor." It proved extremely difficult to get the adjustments of the controls just right with the motor running at 375 rpm for the expected synchronization to establish itself. Then, and only then, was it possible to reduce slowly, stage by stage, the current input to the d.c. drive motor whilst holding that 375 rpm speed. in spite of this, several such tests were performed and the a.c. magnetizing current and voltage were measured as the power input to the d.c. motor progressively reduced." "Each such test proved very satisfying, because the saving in d.c. power input to the drive motor far outweighed the a.c. input as measured in VA (volt-amps), without regard to power factor. Effort was made to run the system with the test machine driving the d.c. motor as a generator, but with this test arrangement the system lost the 50Hz synchronism once the d.c. input current had reduced to about one third of its original value." "The problem here arose because the d.c. power supply used was a stabilized voltage supply and it could not drop below 4.5 volts, which is why a load resistor had been put in series with the motor. Although some time was spent in effort to overcome this, the author was more anxious to develop a control system for running the machine at much higher speed and so these 50Hz tests were abandoned." "One important aspect of the test was, however, the monitoring of the current waveform as supplied to one test machine winding in relation to the voltage waveform induced in the unloaded magnetically-coupled and near-identical second winding." (Note that the winding seen in Fig. 9 is really a two-part winding, each section having 200 turns.) This gave some versatility for testing and operation, even though both windings are
16
wrapped around the same core system. "Together these waveforms gave an insight into the inductive power fed in and returned from the machine over the cyclic period of pole closure and separation." "It was then very evident that the power factor governing the a.c. power input was such as to indicate a quite significant excess power, even assuming that the d.c. drive motor was only 50% efficient. Ostensibly, it seemed that the test machine had to be operating above 100% efficiency by drawing on thermal heat input." "The most important observation, however, apart from finding that a pulse amplitude of about 0.8 amps in the single test winding was needed in the test, was that very nearly all of the inductive power input to the machine was being returned by the a.c. circuit. The volt-amp product reversed polarity as the half-wave current decreased. It could do this because the rectifier diode used could sustain current flow by the winding generating a forward EMF." "Now here was a feature that was important. With the machine driven by the permanent magnet system the inductive power fed in to secure flux switching was not all used in adding power to the machine drive and even in these 50Hz tests, where current was reducing as flux collapsed, most was, it seems recoverable. This had been anticipated, or at least hoped for, in developing the machine design because the relative configuration of the source magnets and the stator pole pieces, but it was gratifying to see this confirmation." "This then became a reason for examining the prospect of building or procuring an a.c. power source that could operate efficiently at 250-400 Hz to power an inductive load regeneratively through a diode. The attendant problem was also that of assuring sufficient frequency stability to be compliant with the synchronous operation of a motor not receiving its power drive as such from that supply." "This pursuit tended to run away with the time available for the project, with partially successful results using the same test machine. Eventually, to move the project forward, the author decided to use a simple electronic power drive where one machine winding signalled the control timing needed to put power on the other winding. A pnp power transistor was connected so as to deliver its collector-base current to one winding in its ON-state, and inhibited so as to be in the OFF-state when the other winding delivered a positive polarity signal to the base." "With such a control system the test results of this Report" (i.e. Report No. 7) "were obtained, but any inductive power returned from the machine winding is necessarily dissipated and detracts from the possible efficiency of the machine. This is because the forward EMF set up by that return of energy causes an unwanted current spike at the end of the cycle. There was the problem with the system under such test that it could very easily be set with its magnetic pole gap flux wasting power in oscillations. Had a capacitor been incorporated without informed design based on test performance then that too could have aided oscillation, rather than helping to suppress such effects whilst storing energy for use in the next machine cycle." The above excerpts from Energy Science Report No. 7 will show the reader that one cannot just build a motor such as that illustrated in Fig. 9 and expect it to deliver 'over-unity' power on demand. It is essential that one understands how the design features are supposed to function. What was soon evident was the fact that the magnetic flux density across the pole gap was far below the level where 'over-unity' operation can really
17
reveal itself in a dominant way. However, the machine was a prototype that could be scaled up to achieve that result and the tests that could be performed could verify design feasibility. The fact that the machine could be operated by the control of that external winding was the proof this author needed to see purpose in advancing the project. As can be seen from Fig. 9, a d.c. motor is coupled to the main test machine, the latter having the all-enveloping helical winding by which it is powered. The 50Hz tests reported above as well as the electronically pulsed tests reported below were done at an early stage. It is only recently that the author has reverted to this early machine version and fitted the vane switch that can be seen behind the pulley. That vane switch comprised a single 8-pole electrical steel rotor lamination as used in the internal construction of the rotor. Its teeth swept through a gap in a sensor device including a small magnet and a Hall effect switch. The latter was used in onward testing to control the commutation. However, it was not fitted at the time the following test data were obtained. These data were produced with only half of the test machine winding carrying drive current, the other half being used to provide the induced EMF controlling the electronic switching. One can, therefore, see that the I2R losses in the winding can be halved by using both windings for drive power and using either the vane switch, a commutator, or fitting a winding of a fine gauge wire to produce the induced signal for electronic control. Further, one can have more turns or use much thicker gauge wire for the main winding. Essentially, the I2R loss can be reduced to a very small value, the more so if the motor is scaled up in physical size. This is because the loss increases as the square of the linear dimension of the machine, whereas the drive power increases as the cube. The objective is to see if the machine derives any drive at all from the current pulsing of the single helical winding and to get some measure of power gain. Keeping speeds low, but well in excess of the 375 rpm used in the 50Hz tests, the whole machine combination was run, first at 800 rpm and then at 1350 rpm, just powered by the d.c. drive motor. This means that the test machine was simply a load, as the magnetism fluctuating across the pole gaps would involve some parasitic losses. There would be hysteresis loss and eddy-current loss and the retentive property of the stator bridging yokes would apply a stronger drag acting as a brake during pole separation than was gained as a forward drive during pole closure. For these speeds the electrical power input was 3.331 watts and 5.255 watts, respectively. Note that the d.c. motor developed a high torque and was rated at 68 watts at a speed of 5100 rpm and a 12 volt input at that speed. It was of a kind used to power model boats. It included permanent magnets and tests indicated that its efficiency was about 50% over its main working range. It could be run in reverse to generate electrical power with much the same efficiency. Indeed, two such machines, coupled back-to-back, were tested to see how much d.c. power input to the drive machine could be recovered from the generating machine and overall the efficiency was between 25% and 30%. Keeping the d.c. motor drive power on, the circuit feeding pulses to the winding of the test machine was then activated and the power supplied to the d.c. motor adjusted so that the whole machine combination ran at 1350 rpm, as before. The d.c. motor was then taking a power input of 2.618 watts, less than half the power needed to reach that speed without the test machine excited. Of course, there was electrical power input directly to the test machine, but that power was going into the helical winding you see in Fig. 9.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
18
Clearly, the machine could be driven by such a winding, even though it was not linked by magnetic coupling to a flux path through the pole gaps! Now, these tests were run at low voltage and the transistor circuit was very poorly designed for the purpose, but the oscilloscope waveforms could be analyzed and it was possible to segregate the power fed to the test machine to get a measure of the true power input, ignoring transistor losses. The latter can be reduced to very small proportions by using MOSFET technology. From this analysis the power supplied to the test machine for the 1350 rpm speed was 1.718 watts, of which 1.100 watts was VR loss in that helical winding. If the latter I2R loss is discounted, because it can be reduced to negligible proportions with appropriate design, and we look solely at the magnetic activity of the drive, we find that the added 0.618 watts plus the d.c. motor input of 2.618 watts is doing the work which needed 5.255 watts using the d.c. motor on its own. It took 3.331 watts to run the system at 800 rpm before the test machine was excited, but, once excited by magnetic power input of 0.618 watts to the test machine, the 3.331 watts input reduced to 2.618 watts and the whole system increased in speed to 1350 rpm. Ostensibly, to the extent that we can virtually eliminate much of that VR loss in the helical winding, we have a reduced power input of 0.095 watts and the machine runs 69% faster. Now, even if the test machine were 100% efficient and the d.c. motor were 50% efficient, this could not account for this reduction in power, and so one simply must conclude that there is evidence of 'over-unity' performance. Although I could, at this point, begin to describe my onward research efforts and other machines that I have assembled, I intend to confine this Report to the basic issue of establishing a scientific basis for the design of an 'over-unity' machine. There are really only two questions to answer when it comes to assessing the prospect of such technology impacting our future. These are: (a) can one build a machine of such large power that we can use it for generating electricity supplied by a utility distribution network and (b) can one explain the design principles in sufficient detail for scientists to understand the true source of power? I see little point in just building a bench-top machine which runs to illuminate a few light bulbs as if with no input power source, because others who have done that are deemed to be performing tricks and are not heeded by the scientific establishment. As I see it, it should suffice to present the outline of a motor design such as is introduced in this Report No. 9 and as described in Energy Science Report No. 7 and let those interested ponder on my explanation of the scientific principles that I explain. If they can then see the light then, and only then, will they see purpose in building their own machines, guided by what is here disclosed. As with any technological development there is much to learn in the know how of the design and I do not see myself as a one-man R&D operation competing with major industrial power engineering interests. Nor is it my role to educate those expert in that field of endeavour. I will, however, disclose the secrets of that energy world which I have deciphered from my studies, founded as they are on early academic and industrial training in heavy electrical engineering and research in ferromagnetism, and I look only for recognition for my scientific endeavour. This is why I have interrupted my motor research and given priority during 1996 to producing my book 'Aether Science Papers' [1996a]. Accordingly, for those having the necessary skill and background experience in understanding magnetism and electrical theory, especially those versed in power engineering, I will now move on to Part III of this Report.
19
PART III: The Energy of a Magnetic Circuit The academic understanding of the way in which energy is deployed within a magnetic core in which there is a small air gap was a mystery some 50 years ago and has remained a unsolved mystery, now ignored by professors of electrical engineering. Professors of physics teach the science of magnetism but are seemingly unaware of the problem. Indeed, by adopting a particular interpretation of a physical phenomenon of no practical importance they have, in effect, blocked the way forward to solving that mystery and in so doing they have not seen the scope for generating power thermodynamically from the aether itself. The mystery is rooted in the phenomenon discovered by Michael Faraday, namely electromagnetic induction. It is an experimental fact that a closed magnetic circuit formed by a ferromagnetic ring core wrapped within a magnetizing winding will develop a very powerful state of magnetic polarization around the core even when a quite small current is supplied to the winding. However, if you so much as slice a gap in the core no greater than two thousandth of its overall length, then that polarization will immediately lose of the order of 5% of its strength. Make the gap four thousandths of the core length and you lose 10%. Professors will tell you that this is caused by `magnetic leakage'. The core section may have a width of one hundred times that of the gap but those professors will still say that 5% of the overall magnetism in the ring core is `leaking' from the gap and presumably finding a route through air that is far longer than that through the air in the gap. Now, I say that is simply `rubbish' and I can also say that I have yet to see any textbook present a verified theory of magnetic leakage that explains the phenomenon in a formal scientific way. The nearest one can get to that, so far as I know, is the Oxford Clarendon Press textbook published in their Oxford Engineering Series in 1955 under the title `The Principles of Electromagnetism'. Its author was Professor E. B. Moullin, who was President of the Institution of Electrical Engineers in U.K. when I began my first year of research in the Department of Electrical Engineering which he headed at Cambridge (1950). That is nearly half a century ago. You will find that 5% factor, just mentioned, on page 174 of that work and you may take note of his final sentence on that page: "The writer is not able to forecast any relation between the leakage inductance and the size of the magnet". However he did find it possible to match up theory and experiment in the case where the gap was made extremely large by completely removing the bridging yoke in his experiment. the calculated leakage inductance did agree with the measured inductance in that case, but there was something amiss in the concept of leakage when the gap width was small and of the order of a few millimetres. Professor Moullin presented experimental data of tests he had performed on a core which was about one metre in overall circuit length and which had a square cross-sectional area of 8 cm by 8 cm. Although he saw the experimental data as representing `leakage' this author sees something far more important in that data. There was more energy in the gap than had been supplied by the magnetizing current! This was only noticed many years after Moullin's book was published, but it then caused the author to repeat the experiment and confirm that the flux was not leaking to the extent suggested. This was reported Energy Science Report No. 1 in this series, where it
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
20
was suggested that we might be able to build òver-unity' motors, guided by that new knowledge. I wish here, however, to enlarge on the academic theme involved in this question of the core with a small air gap. There are other mystery questions involved in this subject. Firstly, how can it be that a coil uniformly wound over a one metre length of core can somehow shed energy confined to a one millimetre length where the air gap is located? You may say that the magnetic core accepts that energy and transfers it to the air gap but, again, apart from doing an accounting fiddle and making the energy books balance, how does energy travel through that magnetic core? We are not dealing with water in a porous conduit having an empty cavity at one position along its length, though some professors may be satisfied with that type of analogy. No, the answer to this question is something rather startling that will surprise any professor! In fact, what happens when we put electric current through that winding is that it produces a magnetic field around the whole core and in the onset of that field there is electromagnetic induction by which energy is fed uniformly into the whole reacting system, whether the latter is the substance of the core, mere air or even just the vacuum. I am saying also that all that energy input is lost as heat with no time delay since it is fed directly into charge in motion over which we have no control. That moving charge can be in the form of free conduction electrons in a metal or electrons belonging to atomic structure in, for example, a ferrite or be the charges that sustain Maxwell's displacement currents in the vacuum field. The energy is lost as surely as if it were shed in a microwave oven by eddy-current heating. It adds to the entropy of the environment. The secondary effect of that magnetic field acting all the way around the ring core is to assert forces on the electric charges that are moving freely as part of that world of entropy, whether in the air gap or elsewhere around the core inside that winding. No energy transfer is involved in this steady-state condition because the forces act at right angles to charge motion. However, by Lenz's law which requires an opposing reaction or by reference to the derivation of what is known as the Larmor formula, there is deflection of charge motion into helical paths orientated to set up a reaction field. The existence of this field even in metals is never mentioned in physics textbooks. On the contrary, the nearest one gets to this is the occasional reference to what is known as `the absence of free electron diamagnetism'. Physicists who studied this problem early in the 20th century were at pains to eliminate it from their thoughts by inventing statistical reasons, such as spins being paired in opposite directions and so cancelling, their objective being to avoid the embarrassing question of why a steady magnetic field could penetrate copper when, in theory, it should be completely suppressed by diamagnetic reaction. I found those arguments unconvincing and decided that we had to face up to this question and accept that Nature did react to set up a strong opposing field. I went a little further in my interpretation of the reaction and added the rider that Nature would limit its response to the extent that allowed potential energy to transfer into the magnetic energy of the reacting field. You see, my argument is that forces acting on charge in motion are not set up by a magnetic field just because some scientist or other enunciated a form of law. Forces exist only as part of the energy transfer process and are governed by what happens to energy, the latter being subject to that natural `law of conservation of energy'. Simple analysis told me that the maximum transfer of energy into the reacting field occurred when the reaction halved the strength of the applied field. It further told me that the kinetic energy density deployed from the random motion of that world of entropy and used in the orientation of the reacting orbital motion of charge will exactly correspond to
21
that we associate with the magnetic field. In other words, I had discovered how magnetic energy is stored in the vacuum field and how it is recovered when the field subsides. I had discovered the mechanism underlying the process of electromagnetic induction and I knew that it involved reversible thermodynamic processes. Back to our magnetic core problem, I knew that the energy fed into the magnetizing winding is all shed as heat and lost to the world of entropy but, equally, I knew that, of the entropy action inside that core, as distributed all along the length of the core and through that air gap, there is an orientation of magnetic moments producing a uniform reaction field. Furthermore, this reaction is not just attributable to the field H set up by the winding. The reaction cannot discriminate between fields set up by windings or those set up by electrons in motion within atoms in a ferromagnet. So the reaction field really is of strength B, the full intensity of the flux traversing the air gap. However, its direction is in opposition to that of the primary magnetization. Now, far from this being a problem, it was truly wonderful to see what all this implied. The theoretical analysis underlying the reaction effect had told me that the reaction field would halve the strength of the applied field. So, if the learned professor tells me that the magnetizing field set up by current in a winding has a value H but there is no diamagnetic reaction in the vacuum, I say "Oh, no!" and declare instead that the field set up is 2H but it is always opposed by the reaction H in the vacuum state and so the measured field is H, but because of that reaction there is reason to understand how the vacuum stores energy as a function of H and how when the 2H influence is switched that energy is returned to the winding by induction. The professor may say that this adds up to the same result as his interpretation so why complicate things; it is better to keep the argument simple. My answer to that is that it is essential to know the truth where energy is concerned and, furthermore, that it is the physicist who has complicated things beyond all reason. I refer here to the obvious fact that if what I say above is correct the intrinsic magnetic moment of a charge in orbit when measured in relation to angular momentum will be double the value calculated by that professor on his own reasoning. I then appeal to experiment and ask what happens when a ferromagnetic rod finds its magnetism reversed. Will it acquire a change of angular momentum corresponding to its electrons having the gyromagnetic ratio e/mc or e/2mc, where e/mc is the charge mass ratio of the electron in electromagnetic units? Lo and behold, the textbooks say that the theoretical value for electron orbital motion is e/2mc but the value e/mc is observed! So how does that learned professor explain the anomaly of that gyromagnetic ratio of 2. He invents, or rather Nobel Laureate Paul Dirac invents, the notion of èlectron spin' and says that a spinning electron will set up twice the ratio of magnetic moment to angular momentum as applies to orbital charge. The Larmor formula demands the reaction of charge in orbital motion, but Dirac invented spin. What Dirac did not invent was a way of explaining how magnetic induction energy can return to electrons in spin. You see, there is no area described by the motion of a centre of charge and so no scope for flux linkages by which to capture an EMF that can act on the electron to give it energy! Dirac was wrong to offer `spin' as an explanation for the gyromagnetic properties of an iron rod and because of that error professors of electrical engineering live in the dark when it comes to understanding how energy is transferred to and fro the vacuum by magnetic induction. They live in the dark by not realising that we can take more energy from the entropy of our environment than we release, thanks now to this knowledge presented here.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
22
The question I want now to address is the further understanding of how that, magnetic field set up around the ring core can cause an excess of energy to be fed to the air gap. From about 1988 onwards I realised that one could see a way to extract energy from the aether by magnetic techniques, but I thought it would involve magnetizing a magnetic core beyond the knee of the B-H magnetization curve. That really means expending energy in setting up strong currents or contriving to incorporate powerful magnets. The Moullin experiments on the core with a small air gap did, however, suggest that something offering energy gain was occurring below the knee of that B-H curve. I now know why. Essentially it is because we can cause magnetism to turn around corners in a magnetic core. The magnetic flux wants to follow preferred directions in the crystals inside the body-centred structure of iron. If it confronts a corner that is not much of a problem unless there is an air gap ahead around the bend. In that case the magnetism has to get leverage as it were to contend with the demagnetizing effects of the air gap. It has to back-up in some way to build an underlying magnetic field action. Once there is a field H set up inside that iron core then the core is no longer one having high permeability and it develops characteristics that are non-linear which are accentuated below the normal flux density level of the knee of the B-H curve. To glimpse the reason why that `knee' is so important, imagine you are sitting inside the iron of that core, well away from the air gap. You sense the field H. Now if you are inside a magnetic domain within an iron crystal you are where the iron is magnetized to saturation along one of the three main axes of its body-centred cubic structure. That field H is not going to have much effect unless you are close to a domain wall separating you and an adjacent magnetic domain. In the latter case the wall could sweep right through you as the domain polarization reverses. Very little external energy is involved in this exercise. The field H needed when that air gap is present is far too strong to be wholly absorbed by the lateral shifting of domain walls. Given, however, that the field H exists, those magnetic domains that have the most vulnerable orientation, allow some rotational deflection of their polarization vectors and they will respond as if they have a magnetic permeability of the order of, say, 50 in gauss/oersted units. With no air gap the normal B-H curve can show a permeability of several thousand up to the knee and then, as domain rotation takes over from domain wall movement, the incremental permeability drops to that lower value. With an air gap the need for H to exist at a significant level, even within the core in its below-the-knee state, means that some rotation occurs. Note that rotation in the normal sense begins when all domains have taken up states of polarization along the preferred crystal axes most nearly aligned with the core axis. The sudden instabilities that flip the transitions over lower ranges of magnetization account for hysteresis loss, but once all the triggered transitions are complete and the rotation is smoothly controlled by the strength of the field H, the hysteresis loss reduces. Indeed, rotation regulated by a field strong enough to assure saturation involves no hysteresis loss. This can be a considerable advantage in machines operating with superconducting windings and with limited magnetic flux ranges confined to the above-the-knee region. Using that arbitrary value of 50 for permeability attributable to flux rotation developing at a flux density of, say, 15,000 gauss, the increment HB which equals BH for the normal linear permeability condition can flip to one where a change of B of 1,000 gauss would make HB 20,000, whereas BH is 300,000. As will become evident from what is reported below, this implies a `free energy' power gain of about half of this 15:1 ratio. The reason, as we shall see, is that HB represents energy supplied by a magnetizing
23
winding whereas BH represents energy fed into the system by the aether which sustains the quantum condition of the polarized atoms in the ferromagnetic core. The formal mathematical summary of this situation now follows. First, we perform the energy calculations for normal below-the-knee operation, ignoring domain flux rotation. Let P denote the intrinsic field intensity set up by the ferromagnetic properties of the core, so that: P = B!H (1) Let I denote the current in the magnetizing winding, which has N turns over a total ring length D. The core has a cross-sectional area of one sq. cm. and an air gap of width g, so that the length of iron core is D!g. The winding is tightly wrapped around the core and we can assume this winding also has a cross-sectional area also of one sq. cm. At this point I explain that I prefer to use a system of units which takes the vacuum state as the base of reference, by which it is assigned unit dielectric constant and unit magnetic permeability, meaning the cgs system. It involves use of 4 but avoids other complications that tend to dominate and confuse formulations where the fundamentals of magnetism are concerned. The energy input W to the magnetizing winding is then found by integrating the current I in amps times the induced back EMF E in volts. We write: H = (4/10)(N/D)I (2) !8 and: E = (NB)10 (3) We will work in ergs, rather than joules, and this introduces a factor 107 in the expression: W = (IE)107 (4) From (2), (3) and (4): W = (1/4)HBD (5) By analogy with the derivation of equation (5) one can see that the corresponding amount of work performed by the atoms generating the ferromagnetic state of the core is given by: Wi = (1/4)PBD (6) From standard physics we know that the energy in the air gap is given by: Wg = (1/8)B2g (7) It then follows, from (5) and (8) that: Wg = W (8) if: B = (D/g)H (9) because, given this linear proportionality, the integral form of equation (5) becomes: W = (1/8)HBD (10) It has been the logical assumption, therefore, to accept that energy conservation implies the transfer of the energy input W to the air gap and presume that the action effectively attributes the core-cum-air-gap with an overall magnetic permeability of D/g. This is in no way a proper physical explanation of the energy transfer phenomenon because the flux density B traversing that air gap exists essentially owing to the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
24
polarization by the ferromagnet and must therefore have been powered primarily by the energy represented by equation (6). This equation was not used in deriving equation (8). To proceed, we may add (5) and (6) to obtain, from (1): W+Wi = (1/4)BBD (11) which, upon integration, tells us that overall there is a uniform energy density of B2/8, as we expect. However, this can best be interpreted by saying that the energy supplied to the gap comes essentially from the ferromagnet whereas the energy supplied by the magnetizing winding merely tops up the energy around the whole magnetic circuit to make up for the energy drained into that gap from the ferromagnet. This leaves us now with a new perspective. The energy supplied to the magnetization winding should not be assumed to transfer to the gap. Instead we should study how the ferromagnet, which delivers energy from the aether by the quantum priming processes that keep it ferromagnetic, can deliver some excess energy which we can use in running our motor. It is intuitive to examine how the H-dependent energy component is supplied. There are four components of energy of the forms: HP, HH, PH and PP. The first two are power input from the magnetizing winding and the other components are power supplied from the aether. We see that the third term tells us that by applying current to set up the field H we have tapped some aether energy. Now, so long as P and H are linearly proportional, the deployment of energy into the air gap will be approximately equal to the total energy stored by the first component. Also the first and third energy will represent equal amounts of energy when integrated. Note that the four energy components are pooled and distributed over the whole core-cum-gap length D, but it just so happens that H-dependent energy seems to be mainly deployed into the gap. It is then of interest to consider what happens owing to the non-linearity of the B-H curve. At higher flux levels PH will exceed HP and the difference escalates the nearer one gets to magnetic saturation. The consequence of this is that the H-dependent energy being pooled is drawn progressively more and more from the aether as H is increased. It follows from this that the reluctance motor power that can be drawn from the air gap will be contributed more and more by the aether as we take the level of magnetization to higher H levels. The strict assumption that the energy supplied by the magnetizing coil all goes into the air gap is clearly incorrect. The energy is lost as heat, but we can recover it from the aether owing to the inductance effect and the half-field reaction explained above. More than this, however, we can recover energy well in excess of the amount supplied to the magnetizing coil because, owing to the curved higher range of the B-H relationship of the core, the aether sets up a stronger inductance field than applies for a linear B-H characteristic. It will now be understood why a high level of magnetizing current and the use of a superconducting winding can make this technology commercially viable. It will also be understood why the energy in the air gap exceeds that supplied to the magnetizing winding, as was shown by the experiments reported in Energy Science Report No. 1. Remember in that connection that, whereas Professor Moullin had measured the magnetic flux in the core legs conveying magnetism to the air gap and found that the current needed to drive a given amount of flux across the gap reduced in relation to the gap thickness, I have argued that was not due to magnetic leakage. I say it is attributable to the aether
25
feeding, in effect, its own magnetizing current to keep that flux on track through the gap. I proved this in the experiment I reported by testing the level of flux reaching the bridging yoke. In summary, therefore, there can be no doubt that what has been disclosed above explains how aether energy can be tapped by astute design of a magnetic reluctance motor and the use of superconducting windings to avoid I2R heating. There is good reason to expect a machine of such design to operate with at least a 5:1 power gain by polarization bias to a basic flux density of 1.5 tesla (15,000 gauss) and operating over a cyclic flux density range between 1.5 tesla and 2 tesla in the ferromagnetic core. Note that such flux densities are commonplace in superconductor magnet technology where there is no ferromagnetic core to assist in developing that level of magnetic flux.
To underline the point just made it helps to consider what is shown in Fig. 9. Readers who are familar with the general curved form of the B-H magnetization curve will realise that the curve has been ìdealized' in a straight-line form to facilitate analysis. The B-H relationship is shown to define four separate areas a, b, c, d which represent, respectively, HB and BH over a range of low flux density and then HB and BH over a range at higher flux density. It can be verified by geometrical analysis that the areas a and b are equal. This is because the straight line which separates them passes through the origin at O. However, the area c is between 4 and 5 times smaller than the area d, because the slope of the straight line separating those areas is much reduced and the line intercepts the B ordinate at a high B level. The difference is of vital significance in our òver-unity' motor design. First of all do keep in mind that B and H are not different physical effects acting at right-angles to one another. They act in the same direction. Secondly, note that our forebears who coined the B and H expressions really deceived us. They disguised the formulation by writing it as B equals H plus 4I, where I was stated as being the ìntensity of magnetization'. Yet all that was meant by this was that H is the effect of the ampereturns per cm that we apply to develop the state of magnetization and B!H or B!4I is the
26
effect of the ampere-turns that the ferromagnet itself contributes to the state of magnetization. That source of I in this latter expression is current sustained by the quantum activity which keeps the ferromagnet alive as a source of magnetism. Now, if you were an electron sitting in the core of that ferromagnet or some aether charge form positioned to absorb energy as inductance in the pole gaps associated with that core, you would not know the difference between the ampere-turns producing H or the ampere-turns producing B!H. So, since those areas a, b, c, d are really energy expressions, as we have seen from the above analysis, you confront the evidence that at low flux densities, where a equals b, the equal sharing of energy between core and air gap offers you no power gain helping to drive your motor. However, over the higher flux density range, where d exceeds c by a very substantial margin, that equal sharing of energy puts more power into the air gap between the motor poles than you supply to the magnetizing winding. That is why it is possible to design and run an electric motor which extracts power from the aether. It is simply a matter of understanding your a, b, c and d alphabet as applied to what is shown in Fig. 12! The only problem you have in designing such a motor is one of devising a machine that does not run away with your input power in setting up the strong currents needed to reach the near-to-saturation level of magnetism. It is not the input power needed as inductance energy that is the problem. That is the energy a or c just mentioned. No, it is simply the ohmic heat loss that arises from the resistance of the magnetizing winding, but that is a loss we can eliminate as superconductive windings come to be used more and more in the design of electrodynamic machines. Machines have been devised in the past using superconductive windings, normally in the rotor of an alternator, but the object is to produce the d.c. magnetic field and that application has no bearing upon the òver-unity' machine proposed in this Report. However, the feasibility of using superconductivity in a multi-megawatt machine is established and the way forward towards power generation using the òver-unity' performance of the electrodynamic machine described in Part II of this Report seems now open and welcomes development.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
27
PART IV: Commercial Development of the Invention Readers will now see that I have introduced the expression ìnvention'. This is because the technology is the subject of patents involving the author as inventor. The chances are that the corporate industrial world which has the capacity and the duty to replenish our power generating equipment will not heed the new technology represented by these patents. That world does not yet recognize that òver-unity' is a realistic possibility. So, it seems likely that the patents will serve only the primary purpose for which they were originally filed, namely to show to future historians that we 20th century mortals are part of society which, in spite of its vast knowledge, has still much to learn, but is unwilling to ùnlearn' false doctrines to make way for truth. We belong to a world which was created and which evolves as it is recreated and as energy is recycled. The machine described in this Report can capture energy as it is being recycled by the processes which underlie the aether. I have explained how the end-product of that recycling activity is the creation of electrons and protons throughout space using energy shed as radiant heat and lost to what we term èntropy'. That was the reason I wrote Àether Science Papers' [1996a]. In this Report I have sought to prove that we can intercept energy as it meanders through that process and capture it through the quantum coupling that sustains ferromagnetism in steel cores. The high energy physicist stands aloof from such proposals, even though the physics involved is clear and conclusive in showing how the precise value of proton mass is determined in relation to the fundamental constants of the space medium. Accordingly this Report is offered as a way forward to those in search of a non-polluting new source of power and the patent rights, so long as they stand in force, may have some commercial value in support of that prospect. Otherwise, as the rights lapse, their specifications stand of public record in testimony of missed opportunity in a technological era when we could ill-afford to turn our backs on such inventions. That said, I will now revert to the onward design details pertaining to the multi-megawatt machine, making reference to a patent which relates to what has been disclosed. As will be appreciated, the commercial viability of an 'over-unity' power generator does not just depend upon whether it can operate with a saving on the cost of fuel. It depends upon the investment, the scale of the machine and its reliability. Therefore, it seems appropriate to evolve the design by taking the existing technology of the turbo-alternator power unit as a basis for reference. The future technology proposed here will involve those same alternators as the electrical power generator. They run at 3600 rpm when developing 60Hz. The prime mover, the turbine, however, is replaced by a dynamoelectric machine such as that described by reference to Figs. 5 to 8 above. It needs no nuclear heat source to generate the pressurized vapour powering the turbine. All it needs is an electrical input to excite its pulsed operation and that can be produced regeneratively once the system is set rotating at its synchronous speed. Thus, whereas in a conventional power plant the alternator is brought up to its synchronous speed by starting the turbine, we do need, in this new technology, to provide some kind of drive motor or small turbine unit which can initiate operation. Otherwise, one needs to look to the output alternator or exciter alternator of the system as serving a motor role during start-up. The exciter alternator generates the pulses for the main winding on our machine, as we shall see from Fig. 13, but the overall function, given
28
over-unity performance, is that the exciter alternator puts, say, one unit of electrical power into the winding of the main machine and the latter generates, say, four units of mechanical power, one of which feeds back to drive the exciter alternator and the other of which feeds the output alternator or applies mechanical drive as to a ship propeller.
The patent covering what is here proposed does not require use of a superconductive winding and can avoid that requirement by sacrificing efficiency, but it is assumed that future technology will use the new warm superconductors. In this respect, it should not be assumed that superconductivity is used as a substitute for a ferromagnetic core, that being the normal objective in existing machine technology. The problems of developing very high magnetic fields in warm superconductors not yet overcome. Fortunately, in the technology considered here, we need only moderate fields of a few hundred ampere-turns per cm. to penetrate the superconductor, because the primary magnetic flux that drives the machine is confined to a ferromagnetic core. Our objective here is really one of avoiding unwanted loss, both the VR loss in that main winding and any inductive power loss in exciting the machine. The objective of the patent is specifically directed to the recovery of induction energy and overcoming commutation problems. By having the magnetizing winding on the stator at the outermost position around the rotor of the machine it is easier to keep it cool enough to assure the superconductive state. The primary design problem arises from the high induced voltage per turn of the winding, which could be 1,000 volts in a 100 megawatt installation. For this reason and to provide thermal isolation for the magnetizing winding, owing to its superconductive state, a transformer having a ferrite core is needed. This has one primary winding and several secondary windings, each serving just a few turns of the superconductive winding on the machine. Referring to Fig. 13, the main generator, denoted MG, is coupled to an exciter-alternator A, which feeds a commutated sinusoidal a.c. to the primary winding of
29
the transformer T. this has superconductive secondary windings feeding the turns of the superconductive helical winding on MG. Cooling is via the transformer tank housing T, where the primary winding is thermally insulated, as the metal of that winding can be cooled owing to its conductive connection with the exciter-alternator A, where normal features can be incorporated to cool that machine. The d.c. power supply S connected to sliprings on MG provides the low power input needed to polarize the core, though this may prove unnecessary in practice because of the unidirectional current surges in the winding of MG. The rather special feature of this design, as covered by the patent, is the way in which the a.c. input to the transformer is chopped into complete full-wave cycles, say one in three, in order that the EMF fed to the superconductive winding is pulsed in a timed phase with the stator-rotor pole positioning in MG. In an ideal case, where there is no magnetization loss in the machine (current in phase with EMF) as opposed to just inductive reaction (current in phase-quadrature with EMF), the superconductive winding will allow the magnetic flux change to conform with the a.c. time-integral of the voltage waveform. It will be pulsed unidirectionally with a simple harmonic profile and if this is timed according to the position of the poles so as to assist pole closure, then the machine will operate in the manner already described. Note that the magnetization loss should be much smaller than it is in a normal alternator of similar size and so, having regard to the current strength supplied to pulse the superconductive winding, the phase should not differ too much from the zero-loss condition. There is no electronic commutation or switching in the superconductive circuit. The only commutation is in the exciter-alternator A which supplies the chopped waveform shown in Fig.13 and interrupts the current flow to the primary of the transformer only at moments when the current is zero. It is important to note again that, although there is extensive reference to the prospective use of superconductivity in the main windings of the generator described, it is not essential to over-unity' operation. It is, however, an inevitable development, once warm superconductivity comes to be used in standard design of main power generating equipment. The above technique of using the chopped a.c. waveform with a magnetic reluctance machine biased to polarization close to saturation, all with the objective of running a machine with 'over-unity' performance is already the subject of the author's U.S. Patent No. 4,975,608 dated December 4 1990. The design features involving the single helical winding have evolved since and are the subject of independent patent applications. The abstract title page and claim pages of that U.S. patent were reproduced in the Appendix attached to the first version of this Report published in 1996, but since such the full copy of that patent specification can be see by accessing the U.S. patent office website, http://www.uspto.gov/ , it is not included here in these pages. This Report was first published on November 6, 1996 by: DR. HAROLD ASPDEN SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, S016 7RB, ENGLAND
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
Page 1 of 31

This Report was first published in 1994 at a time when the author was involved in experimental research aimed at seeing if one could tap energy from the vacuum medium. This might seem to be an absurd pursuit but there were certain anomalies in experimental findings and debatable issues of a theoretical nature that needed resolution. As this Report shows, the author was not alone in seeing the need to clarify some of the mystery which clouds our understanding of magnetism. This version of the Report now published on Internet some nine years on from its printed publication in 1994 is an unamended copy of that original text, made available here for historical record of the author's efforts........... Harold Aspden, 18 June 2003
POWER FROM MAGNETISM: THE POTTER DEBATE HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents
Introduction
25.4.2005
Page 2 of 31
Preliminary Background The Kilmister Introduction The Rotating Magnet in a Cyclically-Exited Solenoid Axially Reciprocating Magnet in a Cyclically-Excited Solenoid Preliminary Remarks Step-by-Step Analysis of the Problem Onward Experimentation COMMENTARY ON APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Letter from Frank Potter APPENDIX B: Potter's Reciprocating Magnet engine Proposal APPENDIX C: How Flux Develops EMF in a Solenoid APPENDIX D: EMF Generated in Solenoid by Rotating Magnet
****************
POWER FROM MAGNETISM: THE POTTER DEBATE Introduction This Energy Science Report is written at a time when a surge of activity has developed on the 'free energy' scene concerning the prospect of tapping energy from the quantum action of the vacuum state - the aether. The research claims of New Zealander Robert G. Adams have become the focus of attention owing
25.4.2005
Page 3 of 31
to his disclosure of the design of a motor which performed anomalously and which was said to deliver more mechanical power than was supplied as electrical input. This has been mentioned in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1 in this series and more on the motor topic generally will be reported in later reports. The scenario developing at the present time has become one of contention amongst different proponents working in this field as the struggle for recognition begins to cloud the interpretation of the evidence and results in the withholding of information. The 'free energy' prospect is still an issue of debate awaiting the clear demonstration of a working machine that can withstand all tests and scrutiny by experts. It had been hoped that the Adams motor would have featured in such a demonstration at the Denver, Colorado symposium in May 1994 organized by the Institute for New Energy, but, at the present time, April 1994, that is no longer in prospect for reasons totally unrelated to the technical merits of the Adams development. This author seeks by this Report to draw attention to what, in a sense, has been a 'behind the scenes' secret debate pursued by Frank F. Potter of Croydon in England who has aroused the interest of a few physicists in British universities. His topic is that of calculating the interactions and behaviour between magnets and a magnetizing solenoid. His concern is to get an answer to the question of how the energy involved can be formulated theoretically in a way which allows experimental testing. Potter's intuition has, it seems, followed for many years a track not too different from that which may have inspired Robert Adams and others, including the German, Hans Coler, whose experimental work, after confirmation, became the subject of a secret government report dating from the World War II era. What is so fascinating about the Potter interest is that, although it dates from many years past, it has not surfaced hitherto in a way which has become known to those now interested in the 'free energy' field. It is especially interesting because Potter's correspondence indicates that academics skilled in mathematical physics, though showing diligence in their efforts, have been unable to provide answers that satisfy Potter. The Potter debate provides a new perspective and a new starting point for resolving the 'free energy' issue concerning magnets subjected to solenoidal fields, bearing closely upon the theory of operation of the Adams motor. It is timely to discuss openly the answers to the questions raised.
Preliminary Background It may interest readers to know the background of how it was that this author came to hear about Frank F. Potter. For several years there have been annual meetings held in September at Cambridge University in England by an organization named ANPA, the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association. One theme pursued with great interest by many members of this association is that of calculating the basic physical constants, such as the proton-electron mass ratio, by mathematical techniques involving what is termed a 'combinational hierarchy'. This author has long been interested in the creative activity of the vacuum energy field in producing protons and that research had led to published work on the calculation of the proton-electron mass ratio by methods distinct from those of special interest to ANPA. A spin-off from that research was the theoretical derivation of the measured properties of the deuteron. The author had been especially interested also in the electrodynamic properties of these particles and electrodynamic actions within metal conductors and so, with the advent of 'cold fusion', there was purpose in extending the research with the 'alternative energy' scene in mind. A particularly interesting development was the extension of the theory to the theoretical derivation of the properties of the third isotope of hydrogen, namely the triton and it was the simple derivation of
25.4.2005
Page 4 of 31
the lifetime of triton, which the author saw as confirming his theory, that gave reason for an initiative to attend the 1993 ANPA meeting in Cambridge to present that theory. That latter subject warrants its own Report in this series of ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS and will be dealt with separately. Now, in attending that September ANPA meeting, the author had very much in mind the fact that he had earlier, in April 1993, attended the Denver, Colorado symposium on New Energy and become very interested in the reports on the Adams motor. Also, in August, the author had attended a meeting in Atlanta, Georgia to report experimental progress on energy conversion technology in which magnetism affecting electric free charge carriers in metal can convert thermal energy into electrical output. In a sense, this is magneto-hydrodynamics at work within a solid metal. This is the subject of ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT No. 2 and No. 3. Therefore, although in Cambridge to talk about protons, deuterons and tritons in a theoretical context, the author had become more preoccupied by his interest in the extraction of power from magnetism, as evidenced by the Adams motor technology and as researched somewhat superficially by the author in his own earlier work. It was the Adams situation that gave stimulus for new experimentation, and it was a question of being patient and waiting for Adams himself and others to take that work forward or whether to divert effort into one's own experimental programme. One thought had been to build a kind of recriprocating engine, resembling a steam-engine pistonand-cylinder action, there being a soft-iron 'piston' member moving inside a solenoid and interacting with a permanent magnet to open and close an air gap. Indeed, owing to the fact that there was a corner shop at the junction of Trinity street and Bridge Street in Cambridge, located between Trinity College where the author was lodging and the college venue of the ANPA meeting, the author had pursued enquiries in that shop with the experiment in mind. It had a model steam engine in the window. So it was later that morning that, in a side discussion with Professor Clive Kilmister during a coffee break at the Cambridge meeting, the author mentioned the growing interest in USA in 'free energy', centred on the Denver, Colorado event. Specifically mentioned were the claims made by Adams in his description of the motor as reported in the Australian magazine NEXUS. Surprisingly this evoked the comment from Professor Kilmister that for several years he had been exchanging correspondence with a person named Frank Potter who had been suggesting something very similar. He resolved to tell Potter about my interest in the subject and it was this which gave the basis for this Report. Extracts from some of Frank Potter's letters to this author are to be found in APPENDIX A and B. Having promised Potter a full reply, on the basis that what was said would be published in some way, that reply is documented here as the subject of this Report. It was intended to allow this to evolve with a view to presenting a summary account at the September 1994 ANPA meeting and in the hope that Professor Kilmister might participate in the discussion, but in view of the surge of criticism that is currently affecting the Adams motor project the author has brought this version of the Report forward so as to have it in hand at the May 1994 New Energy Symposium in Denver, Colorado. The reason for this is that it is better to address the basic physics of the subject from a new starting point, one that has background in U.K. and has involved some discussion in academic circles, rather than building a physical account which relies on a version of a motor for which there is no authenticated performance data.
25.4.2005
Page 5 of 31
It could well be that different implementations of the Adams-type motor may function differently, some operating 'over-unity' and some not, this being owing to a lack of design understanding of the basic physical factors that are at work. Hence, a first-principle analysis has merit, especially if it meets Potter's objective of providing what hopefully is a reliable theoretical model on which to base experiment. Finally, as further background, it should be mentioned that research reported by Stefan Marinov is relevant to the subject under discussion and no doubt Marinov will contribute to the later debate which this Report initiates. However, as the sole object here is to answer Frank Potter's questions the commentary below will be confined to that pursuit. The Kilmister Introduction The following is a confirming letter dated September 18, 1993 sent to the author by Professor Clive Kilmister. "Dear Harold, It was very interesting hearing your talk at ANPA and even more so hearing what you say about magnetism. I have for a long time been exchanging letters with someone who is convinced that there is something odd about the energy of permanent magnets and has devised mechanical devices (a bar magnet suspended entirely within a large solenoid for example) to show this. I have taken the liberty of suggesting to him that you might be able to give him some references to other work. Sorry about the handwriting - I haven't been home since ANPA. The man's name is Frank Potter. Yours, Clive." Readers familiar with the 'free energy' research involving magnets, research which is seldom mentioned in the orthodox scientific literature, will understand how it is that there can be questions in this field that really do need answering in open debate but seldom surface for fear of the 'perpetual motion' issue that pervades the subject. There is, it seems, something lacking in our world of education when the doctrinaire background of physics sets up a barrier in the form of statements of physical law, without involving discussion in a tolerant, patient and in-depth way of the factors that govern ferromagnetism at its energy frontier with the sub-quantum world. This is not just a question of classification of what is observed as a hierarchy of quantum behaviour of electrons in atoms; it is really the issue of how the action we associate with such quantum theory delivers energy able to sustain the properties of a ferromagnet. How is it that permanent magnets can suffer fluctuating field influences continuously for decades, if not centuries, whilst keeping their magnetic vitality? The word 'permanent' has meaning, as does the word 'perpetual', but scientists accept 'permanent magnetism', which is, in a sense, 'perpetual magnetism', whilst showing amusement and derision at the idea of 'perpetual motion', even though 'permanent motion' or motion at a uniform velocity is countenanced in mechanics. There is a case to answer and it is hoped that this Report will serve in making that case, if not the answer, clear enough for the scientific community to take this subject seriously.
25.4.2005
Page 6 of 31
The intention in the pages which follow is to follow standard physics to give prediction of what is to be expected in the Potter experiments proposed. We will not restrict ourselves to the short-cut of the doctrinaire route, not because one sees merit in challenging doctrine and discrediting established physics, but more with a view to directing experimentation at what potentially is the key area that has been neglected for too long. Only the subsequent experimental investigation can give the final answer to this probe into energy matters, but we must not allow a restrictive interpretation of energy conservation doctrine, as such, to stand in the way of such experiment. The subject of a new energy source is far too important for us to allow any stone obstructing our path to remain unturned and, even if the 'thought' experiment which is our starting point might not have practical application in the form presented, it is worth scrutiny. The Rotating Magnet in a Cyclically-Excited Solenoid One can conceive building an electric motor by mounting a magnet to rotate inside a large solenoid, so that the plane of rotation of the magnet lies along the longitudinal axis of the solenoid. Then by reversing the current in the solenoid periodically the magnet should turn at the same rate and so be driven as the rotor of a motor. A schematic illustration of such a system is shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1 Solenoid excited rotating magnet motor Readers may say that this is only a special, and rather poor, form of a class of motors known in standard technology where permanent magnet rotors interact with the commutated excitation of a stator winding. Such motors are known to comply with energy conservation principles and perform in accordance with well-established design practices and pose no anomalies. Indeed, their performance efficiences are clearly set out in the commercial literature used to market them and it might, therefore, seem absurd and pointless to even consider the theory of operation of the motor system shown in the figure. However, Frank Potter has a way of putting his question logically, if not concisely, and guiding us into a state of doubt (See Appendix A). To put this in context it is not just a question of observing a real motor performing overall on a duty cycle averaged over a complete revolution of the rotor. Like a tight-rope walker who stays on the rope, one may well perform a balancing trick by which the energy books are kept in balance, but this does not preclude a tendency for that tight-rope walker to fall off the rope and draw on gravitational energy in the fall. If he does not fall off, he is nevertheless constantly exchanging energy with the quantum world that powers gravity, drawing on that as his centre of gravity drops and giving that energy back to Nature's store of gravitational potential as he recovers an erect posture. The overall equilibrium performance disguises the fact that he is a kind of human 'free energy' machine at least for about half the time he is on that rope. So it may be that, if we study the energy action step-by-step as the motor rotates, conceivably the magnetic energy can cause a 'fall-out' which we can use beneficially. Remember that the magnet keeps its magnetic polarization even though it may have done some work and it has its own way of recovering naturally. Our task is to work out how to exploit the energy released in a way which allows us to refuse to give it back, or renders us unable to give it back because the energy has been
25.4.2005
Page 7 of 31
spent, whilst leaving the motor magnetism to recover its equilibrium by drawing on its own reserves in what is known as a 'magnetocaloric' thermal action! It is not easy and not normal practice to calculate energy deployment step-by-step in a real motor without begging the question and assuming non-thermal energy conservation. Designers only think of heat problems in relation to I2R losses and hysteresis loss and do not factor into their design the magnetocaloric effects which are intrinsic to actions where the strong fields of permanent magnets play a special role. Being blind to this possibility they would have little patience with the questions raised by Frank Potter, but his approach is to present a design configuration which, though still far from posing an easy calculation task, nevertheless is one that is amenable to definitive calculation. It is this that characterizes the Potter approach. If the calculation can be done, it should be done and the energy deployment traced step-by-step. There is, as already noted, something special about a permanent magnet. It has an endurance when confronted with moderate demagnetizing fields and not enough is said in textbooks about the real action that underpins that endurance. Giving reason for what is known as 'coercive force', is not tantamount to explaining how a magnet sustains its polarization, even though one can draw a line through a stable state represented in a quadrant of a B-H magnetization loop. Indeed, harping back to the Adams motor, and noting that Adams has used Alnico magnets, one will find that textbook authority on the understanding of the high coercive properties of that particular material reveals some uncertainty as to the physics involved. This author is especially interested in this aspect of the problem, because the thermoelectric conversion devices with which the author is associated as inventor use a laminated structure of nickel and aluminium and exhibit anomalous behaviour in converting heat into electrical action, including the heat-driven internal generation of powerful magnetic polarization. So, it may be understood why the line of reasoning adopted by Frank Potter in his communications in Appendix A has interested the author. Our task is to perform the necessary calculations. One aspect of interest to Frank Potter concerns how a rotating magnet inside a long solenoid of large radius can couple inductively with the windings of the solenoid. There is the question of how a back EMF is generated in that solenoid as the magnet rotates. Potter realises that without a sufficient back EMF there is no adequate way in which energy can be fed into the rotor motion and yet there is a cyclic magnetic field which sets up the forces turning that rotor. Accordingly this leads him to ask for calculations applied to a practical structure of a large solenoid of reasonable length to radius ratio. As will be seen, this author feels obliged to separate that issue concerning back EMF calculation and the large radius solenoid from the more important underlying energy balance question which involves ferromagnetic properties, whether those of a rotating electromagnet or a permanent magnet. However, before entering the calculation phase on that lesser issue, Frank Potter's question which relates more to the practical prospect of an operating Adams-type motor will be introduced. Axially Reciprocating Magnet in an Cyclically-Excited Solenoid If one has a permanent magnet and a soft iron core of an electromagnet mounted coaxially side-byside in-line within a solenoid and the soft iron core constitutes an electromagnet which can reciprocate axially to open or close a gap between it and the permanent magnet, so one can imagine a
25.4.2005
Page 8 of 31
motor which operates by magnetizing the electromagnet on the closing half-cycle of the motion and demagnetizing it during the opening half-cycle of the motion. This is depicted in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2 Reciprocating magnetic reluctance motor In an Adams-type motor the action just described is reversed in the sense that there is no electromagnetic excitation during the closure half-cycle but there is magnetization of the electromagnet in opposition to the field direction of the permanent magnet during the opening halfcycle. However, the calculation task posed by Potter is much the same for both of these configurations. Preliminary Remarks In approaching the question of calculating the actions in which Frank Potter has expressed interest, the author is mindful of the mathematical analysis which he has prevailed upon others to perform and Potter's problem of understanding the methods they used. A valid and correct answer expressed in a 'bottom-line' formula is not convincing to someone who has approached the problem along a different intuitive route and hopes to match the result with that personal perception of what is involved. Yet, one can perform calculations in electromagnetism by using magnetic potential techniques or by routine calculation of inductive couplings or by methods involving systematic field calculation and flux linkage rates of change to determine EMFs. All of these methods give the same results because electromagnetic theory is self-consistent and its techniques are well-established. It is just a question of deciding what form of answer one seeks, whether in terms of energy, force, EMF or whatever. Also, in performing calculations one either has to adopt special finite element methods of computation and pursue rigorous computer analysis or make simplifying assumptions, such as apply, for example, to uniform current excitaton of infinitely long solenoids or solenoids of finite length with simplified geometry for the component acted on within that solenoid. The object of the exercise, however, is to present a case which Frank Potter can understand and verify from his own position, directed essentially at the key issue of the energy deployment. Frank Potter has expressed a desire to see calculations which derive EMFs in terms of field actions and motion affecting field rates of change. In energy analysis he wishes to see inductance energy calculations rather than magnetic potentials. He further insists that the calculations conform with orthodox physics, meaning that the basis of communication has to be that generally accepted. The latter, of course, is the only way in which one can develop a valid basis for any research in this field, but the concern is understandable because the author has given reason in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1 for interpreting energy storage by inductance as a vacuum field reaction. However, that development concerned causal features underlying theoretical physics, a topic touched upon in APPENDIX C, and it in no way affects the proven principles of physics as applied to calculating closed circuital interaction which is the subject now under study. Within these constraints, this author offers the following sequence of argument to set out the scope
25.4.2005
Page 9 of 31
of the investigation here reported. The text used is written as if addressed directly to Frank Potter. Note that the question of the effect of expanding solenoid radius will be dealt with before the primary issue of the basic motor operation. It should be read after some scrutiny of the subject of the Potter correspondence as set out in Appendix A and Appendix B. Step-by-Step Analysis of the Problem 1. Since your ultimate objective is to determine whether energy is conserved rather than determine EMFs or forces, the logical method of analysis is to work directly in terms of deployment of field energy density. This does not preclude calculation of back EMF generated in the magnetizing solenoid, especially if there is intention to perform an experiment to rotate a magnet inside such a solenoid and measure that EMF. However, some general conclusions from this analysis need to be developed first and this is best done in terms of energy as such. I intend to avoid what is known formally as 'magnetic potential' but will need to distinguish energy of a form that seeks to decrease from that which involves a tendency to increase. Thus I will need to refer to the former as having a 'potential' character and the latter as having a 'dynamic' or 'kinetic' character. The way to look at this is to say that if one pushes a ball up a hill it will have a higher potential energy at the top of the hill but as it rolls back down the hill that potential energy reduces as energy transfers into a kinetic form. Magnetic field energy is energy of motion. If we try to describe it as having a 'potential' then we need to bring in a minus sign to convey the message that it tends to increase in magnitude. This is a subterfuge of modern physics. If one seeks to work with equations and wishes energy change to relate to force it becomes a problem if energy of different kinds has to be put on opposite sides of the equation. One wants all the energy terms to be on one side so that the other side is left clear for symbols relating to force action. By making magnetic energy 'negative' it can be deemed to have a 'potential' alongside electric field energy, but one does see a perplexing anomaly in this area when applying Maxwell's equations to a propagating electromagnetic wave. Here there are no forces on empty space and so, given that energy is assumed to propagate with the wave, physicists need to think of magnetic energy as positive in a real sense. The alternative to this is not something we should discuss here, but if that energy were seen as 'negative' in potential terms or as exchanged with electric energy when expressed by real, positive and dynamic terms, so an electromagnetic wave would, in theory, not transport energy by waves as such. Indeed, one would then have to think of the momentum transfer by photons and see the waves as the catalyst in conveying information about the energy activity in a universal standing vacuum energy field. All this is a little complicated but there is an underlying consistency with the prospect of there being a standing energy background. I refer to it because you have urged a need to comply with Maxwell's equations and, if taken literally, that may put the argument in a straight-jacket. I will proceed therefore without further mention of Maxwell's equations but I will comply with the standard teachings on the subject of electromagnetism because, as you may know, most electrical science textbooks adequately cover the basic ground that applies to power circuits before worrying about wave propagation and bringing in the Maxwell wave formulations. 2. Remember now that two magnets attracted into close proximity will exhibit strong field interactions. They have a way of increasing the strength of the magnetic field and, in energy terms, to make sense of this, one must see the action as a dynamic effect arising from charge in motion.
25.4.2005
Page 10 of 31
I will address first the problem of the magnet mounted to rotate within a long solenoid excited to produce a uniform internal magnetic field of intensity H which is reversed cyclically so that the system works as a motor. 3. If the magnet has an intrinsic strength that is constant and independent of the field H and is orientated with its north-south poles producing a field opposed to H, the magnetic energy of the system will be lower than for the pole orientation the other way. The potential energy will be higher. The energy difference between the two orientation directions is simply a measure of the amount of energy fed into the solenoid every half cycle as needed to run the motor. There is no reason whatsoever to suspect that there can be non-conservation of energy. For example, if the magnet itself produces a field component H' at a point in the solenoid, outside the body of the magnet, the energy density there will be proportional to (H'-H)2 and when H' reverses as the magnet rotates to a corresponding reversed position this will be (H'+H)2. The difference 4H'H, when summed within the space bounded by the solenoid, is a measure of the work fed into the solenoid as the magnet is primed to reverse direction. 4. Now, it might seem that I have made this assertion blindly, based on the principle that energy is conserved and not by proving my case, as by calculating the back EMFs induced in the solenoid and then merging this with solenoid current over the half-cycle period to evaluate the energy input. However, let us examine what happens to the mutual interaction component field energy term 2H'H when we reverse H. Note that this applies to the permanent magnet rotor situation. 5. At the point in the field under study, H' is constant and so all the mutual action depends upon the reversal of the current in the solenoid. This current change occurs with no back EMF attributable to induction produced by change of H'. Therefore, in theory at least, there can be no power input surge accompanying that current reversal in the solenoid. How then does the solenoid drive the motor? The answer lies in the fact that H', as a component in the H field direction, increases in that forward direction of H as the magnet turns through 180 degrees. This increase in the H' component, as seen by an imaginary loop circuit at the field location, develops a back EMF which interacts with the now-constant field H to put all the work action onto the power supplied to the solenoid. Note that the ampere-turns comprising the solenoidal excitation operate to produce a uniform magnetic field H within that solenoid and so can be said to comprise numerous contiguous loops of current all having the same current strength per unit length of solenoid. Any back EMF in each component loop which tends to resist the setting up of the field by the current is overcome by the forward EMF transmitted from the solenoid through contiguous imaginary current loops that fill the space within the solenoid. Without such action there would be no basis for explaining how it is that a uniform field component H can be produced and sustained within the solenoid when current is fed into it. I have enlarged on this theme in Appendix C so as not to detract here from the flow of the argument. 6. Consider now the electromagnet rotor. Here, at the point under study, when H reverses, so it is that H' also reverses, but in this case the mutual energy density in the field becomes proportional to H2 because H' is proportional to H. We are assuming that the core has a constant magnetic permeability over the range of magnetization used. In order now to operate the device as a motor we must cause the rotor to turn through 90 degrees with H zero and then switch the power on for the next quarter turn to bring the rotor into line with the solenoidal axis before repeating the action and having a quarter turn with power off followed by a quarter turn with power on. See Fig. 3.
25.4.2005
Page 11 of 31
Fig. 3 Here, the same argument about back EMF applies, because H' is Hcos, where is the angle between the rotor axis and the solenoidal axis. At the moment when is 90 degrees we switch on the current, but the H' component is then zero and so there can be no surge of power drawn from the solenoid or the rotor core at the moment of switch-on, at least so far as feeding the mutual interaction field energy as opposed to the self-inductance field energy. What then happens is that the rotor turns so that the magnetic interaction field energy density increases, but this again sets up the back EMFs in those imaginary current loops that make up the whole solenoidal field and put load on the forward EMF applied to that solenoid. The back EMF is proportional to the factor used to express the added field strength attributable to the magnetic properties of the rotor core. 7. It would seem therefore that the electromagnet rotor case just discussed is one that requires all the motor operating power to be fed in as current overcoming a back EMF induced in the solenoid. It is pertinent to mention that an electromagnetic rotor core can, in theory, be regarded as one of infinite magnetic permeability without changing this argument. The field action in the free space around the rotor is what is governing and that magnetic core will only accept the H' polarization governed by H if H does all the work of overcoming the back MMFs (magnetomotive forces) that apply in the demagnetizing sense in the pole regions. 8. To this point, therefore, there seems no case for suspecting any non-conservation of energy in motor operations for either forms described, but it is stressed that we have not gone out of our way to design a motor that makes unusual demands on the magnetic core and have applied basic physics to proving the case based on back EMF argument, as requested. Although those actual EMF values have not been calculated they are readily deduced, given the necessary design parameters and by working backwards from knowledge of the solenoidal current and the principle of energy conservation. See, however, the alternative treatment in Appendix D. 9. The next question at issue is the problem of how the motor functions with H being the same regardless of whether we use a solenoid that is very large in radius relative to the dimensions of the rotor. The thought that it might be impossible to justify the back EMF and solenoidal power drive coupling if the wire comprising the solenoid is far removed from the rotor is certainly thoughtprovoking. I would certainly expect the motor to run with the same performance regardless of the radius of the solenoid, if one could ignore I2R losses, as you assume. However, though it might seem questionable, I hold to the view implicit in the above argument, namely that the back EMFs in those imaginary current loops in the solenoidal field are propagated back to the solenoid proper so as to prevent the vacuum field from becoming one turmoil of eddies and vortices responding to local EMFs induced in space. Again, I refer to Appendix C. I stress here that it is an experimental fact that EMFs can be induced around loops which are not bounded by wire. A closed circuit through a conductor is not essential to define the action of an EMF. One can have partial EMFs acting around parts of circuits and these can vary in two identical halves of a circular wire loop embracing a varying field. The experiment is one discussed on pages
25.4.2005
Page 12 of 31
119-120 of my book MODERN AETHER SCIENCE. 10. The suspicion that the EMF needed to power the solenoid has to be weaker because the wire is removed from the magnet cannot be supported. The reason is that the physics of the probem is governed by energy supplied to the solenoid to meet the field requirements. The minute back EMF in each cm length of each turn of the wire in the solenoid is balanced by the inversely proportional increase in the overall circumferential length of that turn. 11. The question raised about calculating the actual EMF conditions in a system having a fixed ratio of solenoid radius to length, but on an increasing scale in relation to the rotor size, is one that I aim to avoid because I see no end purpose of value. I will, however, argue the case for a limiting situation, which applies regardless of the extended dimensions and shape of the solenoid. Refer to Fig. 4 and imagine (a) that the rotor magnet and its field H' are confined to a spherical volume of fixed radius in which it interacts with the uniform solenoidal field H and (b) the separate remaining region of a non-uniform field H within the solenoid of bounded extent.
Fig. 4 The total field energy in the latter region (b) will not vary with change of orientation of the rotor magnet whatever the solenoid radius, whereas the total field energy of the former region (b) will so vary but will not vary with solenoid radius. Accordingly, the back EMF induced in the solenoid will not depend upon that radius and the motor will operate at the same power rating set by H and its reversal frequency. 12. There is, therefore, no valid basis for suspecting that the change of radius can cause nonconservation of energy and any calculation by EMF or magnetic potential methods is bound to give the same result, because the latter are based on magnetic induction principles which derive from the changing values and disposition of the field energy density. Of course, owing to self-induction effects, the cyclic switching of current will prove more difficult with the much larger solenoid, but that is a practical consideration not relevant to the problem under discussion. 13. The important point so far as the permanent magnet rotor is concerned, however, is that the magnetization-demagnetization sequence has been symmetrical in its action and energy has merely been 'pumped' from the solenoid current source to the motor output in both half cycles of this sequence. The scenario can be entirely different if the solenoid closely embraces and contains the permanent magnet fixed in a coaxial position with an air gap interfacing with a coaxial soft iron core that can reciprocate mechanically to drive a motor steam-engine-style via a connecting rod and flywheel. 14. However, let us first discuss a situation where the solenoid, as before, contains a rotating magnet but in addition also a non-rotating soft iron core or, alternatively, a rotating soft-iron core and a fixed permanent magnet.
25.4.2005
Page 13 of 31
Here we are looking at the prospect of using the primary solenoidal magnetic field H to produce a controlled magnetic field in the soft-iron core which then regulates the interaction with the permanent magnet resulting from rotation. The problem becomes that of a three-part interaction. 15. Now, contrary to the prior situation, where the electromagnet had to turn through 90 degrees without power input and then be driven by power input over the next 90 degrees of motion, we can have here a situation where the permanent magnet does all the work in driving the motor in one quarter cycle and the input power operates to weaken the electromagnet in the next quarter cycle. This brings the problem closer to the Adams motor principle. The question then at issue is the calculation of the energy needed to be supplied as input in relation to that of the drive generated by the magnet, bearing in mind that rather special interactions between two ferromagnetic cores are now at work. This is not a proposal raised by the correspondence but it warrants consideration as part of the analytical treatment of the question that has been raised, because the same analysis applies to the reciprocating machine of Appendix B. 16. The key mathematical exercise is that of calculating the energy fed by solenoid current in setting up H in the system shown in Fig. 5.
Fig. 5 The magnet is itself equivalent to an air-cored solenoid carrying a constant current Io and the soft iron core defines a region of constant permeability . The field action of the primary solenoid current upon the permanent magnet can be ignored in this analysis, at least initially, because the coercive force of the magnet material is so high that a relatively weak magnetic field could hardly affect its action. The soft iron core can, therefore, itself be replaced by a solenoid carrying a current times that in the solenoid proper and we can dispense with the solenoid for the purpose of calculation. We are left simply with the analysis of the interaction between two coaxial solenoids spaced by a gap width d, one carrying current Io and one carrying current I. It is assumed for convenience of preliminary analysis that the radii of these solenoidal representations of the magnet and the core are the same and that the turns per unit length are also the same. 17. Our problem has reduced therefore to that of working out the mutual inductance between two coils which can move relative to one another along the common axis.
25.4.2005
Page 14 of 31
However, we must be mindful of our objective, which is to see how energy conservation principles apply to this problem. If the only question at issue is whether energy is really conserved we do not need to work out the rigorous mathematical solution giving precise values for the inductances involved in terms of the finite lengths of the magnet and core. 18. As a function of the air gap width d and the radii and lengths of the two solenoids, we could calculate the following quantities Lm, Lc, Mmc, where L represents self-inductance and M mutual inductance and the suffix terms m and c apply to the magnet and the core, respectively. The magnetic energy of the system is then expressed as an energy quantity stated in potential terms as: - LmIo2 - Lc2I2 - MmcIoI This means that if we were to reduce the current we would recover energy because a time differential of - Lc2I2, for example, becomes -L2dI/dt and dI/dt is negative so that the energy change as measured by potential is energy returned. When seen from the viewpoint of the exciting solenoid the factor applies rather than 2 but there is return of energy according to such formulae when current is switched off. 19. Note now that, if d were to remain constant as I varies, the energy fed into or out of these inductances with cyclic change of I is the same on the up-cycle as on the down cycle, so to that extent energy must be conserved by the electromagnetic system. Io is constant. Therefore, if d changes, only the mutual term depending upon d need be considered. This leaves only the term in Mmc as a subject for detailed analysis. 20. Now, we can presume that the magnet and the core, though of finite length are very long in relation to the small gap width d. In this case we can follow standard magnetic circuit theory, where a long magnet has very small demagnetization effects due to free poles at the ends, but we will still develop this to allow for a finite valued ratios of length to radius for both the magnet and the core. Here we are advancing the argument towards a point where we can calculate inductance attributable to an air gap in a magnetic core solely in terms of the field energy known to be stored in that gap. This is a valid proposition in accepted theory because leakage flux is deemed to be minimal and because the gap-dependent inductance energy is nothing other than the sum of the magnetic field energy in the system, this being a quantity that has a negligible component inside iron of high magnetic permeability. However, as that may seem to be an easy way of escaping from the more difficult task of calculating the actual mutual inductance and proceeding from there, I will address the latter problem. 21. First, however, I emphasise that the reason a calculation of air gap energy offers a more direct route to a solution is that the flux density across the gap and through the interface between the magnet and the soft iron core will involve far greater energy density in a unit (vacuum) permeability zone than in the soft iron. The energy density is proportional to B2/ and in the soft iron will be very much greater when is unity. Also, it must be remembered that even if a saturation level of magnetism in the permanent magnet implies a low differential permeability, the fact that it is saturated has predetermined the Bdependent energy density value and so it cannot contribute terms that are d-dependent in any
25.4.2005
Page 15 of 31
significant measure when judged alongside the energy in that gap. 22. Now, having decided to represent the action between the permanent magnet and that of the magnetic core as notional solenoids carrying high currents, one might expect that the mutual inductance between two such solenoids will be very high. A small gap between two sections of a single solenoid does not affect its inductance to any significant degree, but a small gap separating two solenoids that happen to carry very high current can involve energy change in substantial measure. The energy of the self-inductance intrinsic to our notional solenoids is really that of the intrinsic ferromagnetic condition of the magnet and the core and that energy is beyond our reach as it is locked into the atomic quantum behaviour of the atoms of the ferromagnetic material. The mutual inductance energy is what is amenable to our control in our experiments. 23. To provide an interim summary of the purpose of this discourse, it is noted that, whilst aiming to show how the general problem can be analysed mathematically, we are scrutinizing energy conservation processes where we draw motor power from a magnet as the gap closes, then switch on the current I to oppose the magnet's field action across the gap so as to allow the core to be pulled away from the magnet with little energy demand. We expect, on basic physics teaching, to find that we must do work against a back EMF to achieve this condition, work exactly equal to that available from the magnet upon closure of the gap. However, we want to be sure that the accepted theory, when worked out in detail, does sustain this standard energy conservation assumption. Our hope, of course, if we are minded to probe new ground in the search for new energy conversion discoveries is that the energy books will not balance and that we might tap some of that thermodynamic energy resource which powers ferromagnetism at its quantum atomic level. 24. To proceed, the route to determining the mutual inductance will start from the formula for self inductance of a single solenoid which we will then divide into two sections. By way of reference the author will take as a base the textbook 'Electrical Measurements and Measuring Instruments' (3rd edition) by E. W. Golding. It was published in London by Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons Ltd in 1946. It happens to be the university textbook used by the author in his early studies and similar reference data is probably available in other and more recent works, though there is a secondary reference to 'Nagaoka Factors' which feature in a paper by Nagaoka, Journal of College of Science, Tokyo, Art. 6, p. 18 (1909) and the data from the latter may be difficult to trace. In any event the calculations pose no problems to modern computer analysis, but it suffices for the present purpose to rely on the textbook authority which is home-based in U.K. and dates from the era when we were both introduced to electrical engineering studies. 25. The self inductance of a solenoid of circular section and diameter a having N turns uniformly wound over a length D is: L = K2N2a2/D nano-henries. This is given at p. 178 of the Golding book and K is the Nagaoka factor plotted in graphs on page 179 as a function of the diameter/length ratio of the solenoid. For the onward calculation we now need to specify that ratio a/D and I will choose here three ratios for which D/a is 20:1, 10:1 and 5:1. The Nagaoka factors are, respectively, 0.98, 0.95 and 0.91. Now, suppose we chop the solenoid in half, notionally, and see it as two coaxaial solenoids arranged adjacent one another with no gap in between. The overall inductance is then the self inductance of each half plus the mutual inductance between the two halves. Note that in energy storage terms, with
25.4.2005
Page 16 of 31
a current I, the self inductance energy of each half is LI2 and the mutual inductance energy is MI2. So, regarding this as a self inductance energy of a common single solenoid, L of the double length solenoid is 2(L+M) of the two-part configuration. Thus, if D/a is 20 for the overall single solenoid and 10 for each half, N being double and D being double in the above formula gives 2K, where K is 0.98, as equal to 2(K+M/L) with K as 0.95, making M/L equal to 0.03, where L is the inductance of the half-solenoid of D/a of 10. Alternatively, if D/a is 10 for the overall single solenoid and 5 for each half, we find that 2K with K as 0.95 equals 2(K+M/L) with K as 0.91, making M/L equal to 0.04, where L is the inductance of the half-solenoid for D/a of 5. 26. We have now determined the mutual inductance between two sections of solenoid of equal length and, as this holds regardless of the currents in the two sections, we can say that the mutual inductance energy is MIoI, where, according to the choice of D/a ratios, M is 0.03 or 0.04 times the value of L as given by the above formula for the separate sections. 27. This is the amount of energy that can be expected to be extracted by the mechanical pull as the core is attracted from a well separated position to close the air gap between it and the magnet. The formidable question now faced is that of deciding how energy is deployed if we decide to alter the current excitation so as to demagnetize the core before separating it from the magnet. 28. To proceed, we need to enter the territory of field effects from free end poles of a magnet. Suppose that the magnet exists at rest inside the solenoid and no current I is fed to that solenoid. The core is initially at rest spaced from that magnet by the gap distance d. The magnet, unaided, will assert an attractive field which pulls the core into contact. This field will be deemed sufficiently strong to impart substantial polarization and set up a fairly strong level of magnetism in the electromagnetic core. Thus, even with no external exciting current present, there is an effective polarization current in the core of the order of Io/, because the magnetic flux traversing the air gap will be the same on both sides. On this basis we can confine our study of power input to the task of demagnetizing the magnetic core once it has closed into contact with the magnet. We divert therefore to the study of this problem. 29. We have, in effect, a magnet and we have put, as an extension of its length, a soft iron core in contact with it. This means that the magnet will transfer an end pole from itself, and through the core to its outer extremity. The magnet with a D/a ratio of 10:1 becomes, say, an extended magnet with a D/a ratio of 20:1. The question at issue now is that of contriving to drive that pole back to the original position in the magnet proper and before we separate the core from the magnet. Here, we need to keep in mind that a soft iron core needs very little field to determine the direction of its magnetization. The reaction owing to demagnetization effects set up at the free end poles is what makes the demand on any applied field. So, if we look to a mid position inside the core and ask how the adjacent magnet and the pole demagnetization effects and any external field cooperate in deciding a direction of magnetization, we can begin to see what is needed. 30. The demagnetizing field effective on a magnetized bar and equivalent to the offset needed in a magnetizing solenoid is known from data of demagnetization factors found in textbooks. The Golding book referenced above shows such data at p. 360.
25.4.2005
Page 17 of 31
For D/a of 20 the demagnetizing field intensity is 0.5% of the flux density and for D/a of 10 it is 1.6% of the flux density. Now consider what this means in terms of controlling the magnetic flux density through an air gap between the magnet and the core. Firstly, those demagnetizing factors apply to specimens that are not permanent magnets, so response to externally applied magnetic fields cannot be predicted so far as action within that magnet is concerned. Secondly, the soft iron core will respond to net field action and if it were replaced by air we see that the additional demagnetizing field effect that comes into play is about 1.1% of the flux density in the magnet, this being the difference between the two demagnetizing factors. This suggests that, even if the soft iron core were left in position, the additional application of a back field of the same amount, or possibly more corresponding to the 1.6% factor, would drive the pole back into the magnet. If this were so, the energy needed to be supplied to the demagnetizing winding would be of the order of LI2 which compares with the mutual inductance energy of 4% of LIoI. Remember then that Io is of the same magnitude as I and that as it applies here is the magnetic permeability of the soft iron expressed in gaussian units, meaning that it is of the order of 103. Very clearly, on this basis, it needs far less energy to demagnetize the core than we have available as mechanical work from the action of the magnet in closing the air gap. The above figures suggest an energy ratio of the order of 1:100. But are we right in this argument? 31. Firstly, let us assume that we have a correct analysis. What does this mean in terms of energy conservation? Since energy has to be conserved in any physical process it simply means that the magnet can stand up to the demagnetizing field set up by its free poles by calling upon its atomic quantum-powered sources to keep it ferromagnetic, meaning that it gets energy from a thermodynamic interaction with the quantum world. Alternatively, if it owes its permanent magnetism to some internal thermally-related activity, it may simply cool to sustain the magnetic requirement. That may be speculation, but one fact we do know is that the magnet has a way of recovering once we pull away the demagnetized core using very little effort and prior to switching off the demagnetizing current. Secondly, let us assume we are wrong, but then how do we know? We set out to calculate the effect of a magnetizing field on a magnet and a soft iron core and we encountered the problem of deciding how the field set up externally from the free poles of the magnet affected the soft iron core. We had to estimate the back field needed to counter that influence. We know that the free magnet sets up its own back field and have used that as a measure for our calculations. If this is wrong how else can we proceed? 32. The only sensible way forward from this position is by experiment and already it should be said that I would never have begun this exercise had I not heard of experiments that purport to involve permanent magnets and reveal anomalous gain of electrical/mechanical power. However, I have accepted your challenge to perform calculations which might give you some
25.4.2005
Page 18 of 31
satisfaction in your pursuit over so many years to find an answer to your questions and although I think I have gone far enough in that theoretical endeavour I will go one step further. 33. We have considered above how two solenoids having a 10:1 length to diameter ratio, one representing a permanent magnet and one a soft iron core, interact magnetically. A question of interest is that of determining what equivalent current strength I would suffice in an external magnetizing solenoid closely embracing the soft iron core to offset and cancel, at the centre of the soft iron core, the magnetic field set up by the equivalent current Io of the magnet.
Fig. 6 Referring to Fig. 6, the task is to calculate the axial field at a point P set up by a current of i ampere turns per unit length of solenoid. We consider an elemental section i(dx)(d) of the energized solenoid and note that this angular element ( radians) of ring form, of diameter a distant x from P along the axis, will set up a magnetic field at P given by the formula (a/2)(idx)/z2, where z2 is (a/2)2+x2. This field is directed at an angle to the axis, where x is (a/2)tan and (a/2) is zcos. Then, since dx is (a/2)sec2d or (a/2cos2) d, the component field at P attributable to idx over the = 2 range of the ring element is: (4/a)cos3(idx) and, as dx is (a/2)sec2d, this reduces to: 2icosd
This can now be integrated to obtain 2isin and so determine the axial field intensity at P attributable to the whole length of the solenoid representing the magnet, namely from an angle for which tan is 10 to one for which tan is 30. With tan as 10 this gives sin as 0.995037 and with tan as 30 this gives sin as 0.999445 so the difference is a factor of 0.004408. In contrast the same current in the solenoid centred on P would develop a field at P given by the same formula applied between limits for which tan is 10 and -10, respectively. This gives a difference of twice 0.995037 or 1.990074 as the comparable factor representing axial field intensity at P. The ratio of these two field strengths is 451:1, meaning that the field developed by a powerful current Io in the solenoid representing the magnet could be cancelled at P by an opposing current in the magnetizing solenoid of the soft iron core that is only 1/451 of the strength of Io.
25.4.2005
Page 19 of 31
34. It is submitted on the basis of this analysis that it is not at all unreasonable to contemplate that a small current supplied to a magnetizing coil around the soft iron core and directed in opposition to the polarity of the magnet can serve severely to curtail the attractive force between the magnet and the core. This being so there is every reason to expect the motor contemplated to operate by drawing drive power from the magnet and using a relatively small amount of input power to restrain the braking action as the motor reestablishes the gap between the magnet and the core. [This ends the author's formal response to Frank Potter] Onward Experimentation The above discourse has probed the principles of operation of a device which can possibly serve us as a new means for generating power. Machines testing these principles must now be developed to verify what has been suggested by routine application of established scientific principle. The only departure from established physics has been an awareness that there might be a hidden thermodynamic source of energy which could feature in the energy balance calculations, which has meant that we would not rely on taking the short cut of working out our answers by assuming that the only energy action is electromagnetic or mechanical in form. So often, physicists who set out to calculate a result A assume a conservation rule by which A + B = 0 and then calculate B instead. That may well prove to be a very costly mistake that has had a damaging effect on progress in the energy field. One is thereby relying on assumption, albeit accepted doctrinaire assumption, and using inadequate knowledge of the range of the energy components that must be considered. Thermodynamics, meaning the realm of heat energy in some form, even the heat latent in atomic electron activity, is a subject of relevance to electromagnetic machine design that ventures into what seems hitherto to have been forbidden research territory, because, as already stated, researchers fear the stigma of addiction to 'perpetual motion'. Given the kind of question asked by Frank Potter and his persistence in seeking answers after decades of effort, given the motor developments championed by Robert Adams and given the reports of the research of Hans Coler and others on solid-state magnetic devices posing energy anomalies, this author can but share their frustration and this is why this ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT is necessary. One can do experiments, as others have done, but even that will not convince the skeptic who wants to adhere to principles of disbelief. Without a theoretical base moulded around the existing framework of physics one cannot get a hearing, far less attract the interest of those who will advise funding sources to invest in the 'free energy' field. Furthermore one needs a basis on which to understand why those who try to get 'free energy' machines to work may fail. One cannot just throw a pile of magnets together and hope to work magic. It is pointless to take this discussion theme much further, until the necessary experiments have been performed by the author and are duly reported in a sequel to this ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT. Commentary on the Appendices In winding up this introduction to the 'Potter debate', a few points outstanding from the
25.4.2005
Page 20 of 31
correspondence initiated by the Potter letter of 15th October 1993 warrant comment. That letter is reproduced in Appendix A. By letter dated 21st October 1993, Potter, by the following words, acknowledged my expression of interest: "I think I will begin with the phrase in your first paragraph "what you say is right!", which caused me to rub my eyes in astonishment, because it is the first time that any reputable scientist has ever said that to me; not even Professor Kilmister who, although he has been most generous indeed in helping me literally for years past, and has acknowledged that I have been right on some points, is like all mathematicians and scientists extremely dubious about anything touching Conservation of Energy." Later in the same letter: "I was particularly interested in your phrase about a "hidden source that sustains the electron 'spins' in a ferromagnetic material". That is precisely the sort of thing that has been at the back of my mind for a very long time indeed (though I know little technically about 'spin' theory), in fact gradually since 1956. I really got going about 11 years ago with the ideas about which I wrote to you. That was in 1982, which also seems quite a long time ago now, when I approached Professor Kilmister on these matters." In his 15th October letter, Potter had mentioned four issues of debate but disclosed only two. His letter of 7th November began with the words: "Thank you for your further note and the extracts from New Energy News that you kindly sent enclosed. Before going on to some comments upon this very interesting material I would like to present the other two ideas that you said you would be willing to comment upon." "The first one .... involves an experiment. I took a very good quality permanent magnet and wound a close-wound wire coil around it, and then passed a current through it in the opposite direction to that of the current that would have magnetized the magnet. At the start of the experiment, before the current was switched on, there were a number of soft iron tin-tacks adhering to the magnet. I got the result that I had anticipated. On increasing the current there came a point where the tin-tacks flopped off; and on increasing the current still further they jumped on again. All fairly obvious I suppose the two fields cancelling one another. But the puzzle was this: Energy is supposed to be in the 'field' surrounding the magnet (or the coil), and yet, since the tin-tacks were not attracted at the particular level of current there must have been no field there to magnetize them. But there is energy inside the permanent magnet, and the energy must also have been put into the coil in the build-up of its own energy field, this energy coming from the battery. Where have these two energies gone to? On switching off, pretty obviously these two energies come back, though I was not able to check practically the restoration of the energy of the coil to its surroundings. The magnet appeared to be unaffected afterwards." "The last of the four ideas (two in my earlier letter) depends upon the one just given, and concerns a small machine that I had an idea to build, but the practicalities of doing so were difficult with the tools or apparatus available to me; and also later on a possible snag in the idea occurred to me (which I will mention in a later paragraph); so, after doing practical work upon it, I gave it up for the time being and went over to the two ideas in my previous letter to you.
25.4.2005
Page 21 of 31
The machine was this ...." This next portion of the Potter letter is in Appendix B. It is a description of what the author has referred to above in the context of a reciprocating steam-engine-style movement of a permanent magnet cum soft iron core combination. As already mentioned, it is what this author had in mind before that first discussion with Professor Kilmister at the Cambridge meeting. However, whereas the opening letter from Potter had concerned the mathematical task of analysing what could be said to be thought experiments bearing upon the conservation of energy issue, here was a third 'idea' raising questions of energy disposition based on an experiment with a magnet and a fourth 'idea' which concerned a machine that resembles the Adams motor. The difference is similar to that between the early reciprocating steam engine and the four-cylinder rotary engine. In the above discourse, the author has already dealt with the themes Potter raised by his first, second and fourth 'ideas' and wonders now whether to comment on the magnet experiment of that third 'idea'. The disposition of energy when work is done to 'demagnetize' a magnet has already been discussed in this Report. We are talking here about the physics of the process at room temperatures, temperatures well below the Curie temperature. In this situation one never demagnetizes a ferromagnetic substance, whether it is a permanent magnet material or soft-iron. All one can do is to 'depolarize' the specimen under test. Its intrinsic minute magnetic domain constitution becomes randomly directed amongst the axes in the crystals of the material and it merely appears to be demagnetized. So, the primary energy is always trapped by the ferromagnetic state and any modest change that does occur involves, to some extent, that which can occur at the limits of transition as one takes the magnet through its Curie temperature. There is a thermodynamic energy exchange involving that hidden field we associate with quantum theory. As to why Potter's magnet recovered its polarization after undergoing the 'opposed' current effect, as tin-tacks fell off and were picked up again, that is not easily explained without knowing precisely the properties and state of the magnet and the sizes of magnet, demagnetizing coil and current in that coil. If the magnet reversed its polarity it is perplexing if it could reverse back again when the current was switched off. It could not have been one having a high coercive force if a small coil carrying current available from normal domestic sources could perform that polarity reversal function. If, however, the coil wrapped around it did extend, in its influence, to the tin-tack region, we may have here precisely the evidence that shows how a weak field on a soft iron core can affect the attraction of a magnet. In the latter case the commentary above and the calculations which show how a small field action can limit the influence of a magnet interacting with a soft-iron core are very relevant to Potter's tintack experiment. By letter to the author dated 23rd March 1994, Frank Potter acknowledged certain book references that I had sent him showing methods of calculating mutual inductance and included the comment: "The interesting, but to me difficult, calculations that you sent (though, as you say, routine for engineers) are in particular for self-inductance and a lot about mutual inductance. The specific problem that I and my friends have struggled with for so long is
25.4.2005
Page 22 of 31
not that, but rather the induction of EMF by a rotating permanent magnet --- in other words 'back EMF' in a rather special form of motor. This EMF is the thing that seems so difficult to get an exact answer for in this case; and the specific problem is whether the EMF does depend upon the ratio of the length of magnet to the radius of the solenoid. I think it does. I have, as you know, been hankering after a calculation on the basis of the Blv formula; but I shall be most interested in your own calculation, when you can do it, and I can only hope that it is as 'routine' as the ones you kindly sent me." Upon reading this this author wondered about the emphasis placed on the ratio of the length of the magnet to the radius of the enclosing solenoid. In earlier communications the question had been understood to relate to the problem of using a solenoid of realistic (not infinite length) proportions, whilst increasing the radius of the solenoid, but at all times the magnet itself has to be 'within' the solenoid. In other words one should not just imagine something approaching a ring coil with a magnet mounted to rotate about the centre of the coil and having its poles sweeping through an arc protruding from the plane of the coil. Accordingly, it was assumed that Frank Potter was primarily interested in calculating the EMF induced in a solenoid by a rotating magnet having a length that is small in relation to solenoid radius, but yet the length of the solenoid is large enough for it to be said that the solenoid encloses the magnet fully. In other words one seeks to rely on the assumption that the field produced by the solenoid and acting on the magnet is essentially that applicable at the centre of the solenoid. On this basis, of course, one must surely agree with Frank Potter that the back EMF induced in the solenoid owing to rotation of the magnet does depend upon the radius of the solenoid. As to the calculation of this EMF, this poses no real difficulty, but in view of Frank Potter's concern about method of calculation and his apprehension about mutual inductance formulae, the author has deemed it appropriate to provide the additional analysis set out in APPENDIX D. No doubt there will be others who read this Report that have interest in the general problem but are not too familiar with the various methods of calculation that can be used in electromagnetism. Between 7th November 1993 and 23rd March 1994, and later, Potter wrote many further letters to the author prior to completion of this Report, mainly to be sure that his questions were fully understood and revealing his anxiety that, having found someone willing to resolve the issues raised, the main points would not be missed. The other letters bore the following sequence of dates: 26th December 1993 and, in 1994, 14th January, 16th January (two letters), 19th January, 8th February, 26th February, 1st March, 7th March and 7th April. The 23th March letter was followed by one dated 2nd April. All related to the general topic of the four 'ideas' that have preoccupied Frank Potter for so long and all were written before any of this author's response, as provided by this Report, was conveyed to him. It will, therefore, be appreciated by the reader that this question of whether a magnetic machine can be operated in a way which breaches the Principle of Conservation of Energy, as interpreted in the realm of electro-magnetism and mechanics, is one very close to the heart of this 83 year old gentleman. His letters, as quoted, should show the reader that Potter is not a 'crank' experimenter who believes in 'perpetual motion'. No doubt, much that has been said in this Report will not be easy to digest and there will be more that has to be said. The author has suggested to Potter that he should await events and see how the 'free energy' world that is now addressing similar issues progress with the experiments on new machines. Not surprisingly, Potter wants to keep involved and contribute to the momentum of something affecting his brainchild. However, there are limitations in what one can do in a disbelieving world that is competitive in matters scientific and so this Report can only serve to introduce Potter's interest to those few who may read what is said here.
25.4.2005
Page 23 of 31
It is hoped that the 'Potter debate' will arouse interest and lead to progress on the alternative energy field. In bringing a different perspective to the present scene, perspective which complements the ongoing debate that now centres around the claims concerning the Adams motor, hopefully something of benefit will emerge from what this author is contributing by issuing this Report. This author acknowledges Potter's kindness in allowing this material to be presented in this Report form, with text from his correspondence, and ends by wishing him well in his further endeavours, coupled with the hope that he will see feedback as others now take up the debate. 10th April 1994 HAROLD ASPDEN
APPENDIX A LETTER DATED 15 OCTOBER 1993 FROM FRANK F. POTTER Dear Dr. Aspden I hear from Professor C. W. Kilmister that during a discussion with you at Cambridge some weeks ago he mentioned to you my name and my interest in Magnetism and particularly in Conservation of Energy. He did not know your address at the time, but a few days ago he found it and sent me a most interesting letter stating that he had heard from you that some experiments with permanent magnets in USA appear to indicate that energy may not be conserved in some of the phenomena involved --- very remarkable news! He also said that Magnetism is a subject in which you are an expert, and that he thought you would be willing to hear certain ideas that I have upon these matters concerning Conservation of Energy, particularly in relation to Magnetism. So these are the reasons for my letter. For myself, I have (very unfortunately) had no formal training in Science or Mathematics beyond school days 66 years ago, my work having been mainly in other fields, though I was a sergeant wireless mechanic on Ground Staff of the RAF during the War. Some of my main interests have been in Physics and Electricity and Radio and Mathematics and I have dabbled in these, though all at a rather low level in which I have regrettably had to be largely self-taught, though with some help from a few kind friends such as Professor Kilmister in particular. I am now 83. There are two problems in relation to Magnetism and Conservation of Energy that I have discussed with Professor Kilmister for a very long time; or even three or four separate such problems, but it is two of them in particular that I would like to put to you. In fact, in this letter I will concentrate mainly upon one of them, which I think is much the simpler to discuss, but I will give a brief account of the second one at the end of this letter. I would be most happy to tell you full details of this other one (in fact all four) if you were interested to hear and pursue them later on. But in this letter I am keeping mainly to the one, as I do not want to burden you with a mass of material in which you might not be interested; nor do I want to go to unnecessary trouble myself.
25.4.2005
Page 24 of 31
Now to the one main problem: Suppose that an electro-magnet is rotating inside and at the centre of a fairly long (i.e. large length/diameter ratio) current-fed stationary solenoid, the plane of rotation being that of the long axis, the cause of the rotation of this electro-magnet being the magnetic field of the solenoid inside itself. In other words, this is a rather special form of electric motor, in which Motor/Generator theory and 'back EMF' will apply. For mathematical simplicity let it be assumed that I2R heat dissipation can be ignored, since that is energy-conserved and 'wasted' only from an engineering point of view; and in particular let it be assumed that both solenoid and electro-magnet each have their current maintained constant by a separate 'extra battery' in series with the one heating the coils, these extra batteries in this 'thought-experiment' being infinitely and instantly adjustable to oppose exactly the EMFs that will be induced into both solenoid and electro-magnet by the fact that each is moving, relatively, in the magnetic field of the other. This will maintain constant current in both. (To ignore the I2R heat dissipation one could imagine super-conducting circuits). Now suppose, as one would be expected to do, that in this electro-magnetic arrangement (really a special type of motor) energy is exactly conserved. I found it more difficult than I had thought to work out just how this would be, partly because at the end of each half-cycle of rotation the constant currents (or anyway one of them) would have to be switched off for reversal of direction, and the energy 'stored' in the magnetic fields of the two coils during the momentary build-up at the start would need to be 'recovered' from the collapsing fields (or one of them anyway), and whether to switch off both or only one current, and if both in what order or together, and in particular the fact that at the end of the half-cycle the electro-magnet coil would be physically the opposite way around from what it was at the beginning. I found this all rather confusing to try and think out; so let it be assumed that these are just two of Maxwell's interacting currentfed circuits in which energy is conserved overall if everything is accounted for. One important point of my argument revolves around the fact that both of these currentfed circuits are moving in the magnetic field of the other, and as such (a) both coils will experience a force from the other one, but, the solenoid being stationary in the laboratory, the free electro-magnet will be accelerated and will gain kinetic energy from the arrangement; and (b) both coils will induce an EMF (countered by the two 'extra batteries' in order to maintain constant currents) into the other coil, so these two 'extra batteries' will lose chemical energy; and since Conservation of Energy is being assumed, these energy losses from the two batteries will be exactly matched by the kinetic energy gain to the mass of the magnet; and moreover, this will not be only over a period, but pari passu, step by step at every moment of the motion. And the energy 'stored' in the two magnetic fields is assumed to be 'recoverable'. As said, all this is really just ordinary motor and 'back EMF' theory in this special case. Now the really essential part of my non-Conservation of Energy argument is this: It is well known that a long cylindrical permanent magnet can be exactly simulated by a piece of soft iron of the same dimensions with close-wound coils around it, fed by an appropriate constant current --- i.e. an electro-magnet such as in the foregoing paragraphs; and if the two, electro and permanent magnets, were put each into a 'Black Box' it would not be possible to distinguish between them, either in their capacity to attract soft iron, or in their capacity, when moving to induce EMFs into surrounding conductors --- provided of course that the current in the electro-magnet were maintained constant against EMFs induced into it by reaction from outside. So the final step in my argument is to replace the electro-magnet in the paragraphs above by a permanent magnet and repeat the experiment. Everything will be exactly the same, except that the permanent magnet, being self-sustaining, will not need to have
25.4.2005
Page 25 of 31
energy taken from an 'extra battery' to maintain constant current as in the case of the electro-magnet. Hence, Conservation of Energy (whether true or not) having been assumed for the case of the electro-magnet, there is an energy difference here for the permanent magnet, and in fact an unbalanced energy gain. So, how can energy have been conserved in this case? I suggest that energy is not conserved here, and that there is a nett energy gain. Finally, here is a brief account of the other similar but separate problem, about which I am not sending you details (though there is a large amount of it), parallel to the problem described above: The one above was actually the last of the four in time, and arose directly out of the one I am about to mention. But they are in fact two quite separate (though closely allied) problems on their own. Suppose one has an electro-magnetic arrangement exactly the same as above, with a permanent magnet (or maybe it could be an electro-magnet, but let's say a permanent magnet), with as before a solenoid with a large length/diameter ratio. Now the force field formula inside the coils at the centre for such a long solenoid (theoretically an infinite one) is o4nI, which is independent of the radius of the solenoid. Now, keeping everything the same, including the shape of the solenoid, i.e. its length/diameter ratio, vary the radius of the solenoid, let's say, make it larger. What will be the effect upon the EMF induced into the solenoid and opposing the battery voltage and taking energy from the battery? The formula above for the force field H acting upon the mass of the magnet and thus imparting energy gain to it is independent of radius as above. If the EMF induced into the solenoid (still the same shape), despite this increase in radius, is still the same, then the drain on the battery and consequent energy loss for a given current will also be the same as before. Then one can say that this energy loss is independent of radius, just the same as the energy gain is independent of radius, and one would have no reason to suppose that energy is not conserved. However, 'common sense' is not always right (!), and the answer is by no means clear. It is a lot more difficult than it looks. A lot of work of various kinds has been done on this (mainly by Professor Kilmister and myself, but one or two others as well), and there is as yet no conclusive proof, either way. One difficulty, a mathematical one, is the absence of exact integrals in working on the problem. I think, on all the evidence available, that energy is not strictly conserved, and that there is the possibility of an uncompensated gain in energy; but I cannot prove it absolutely. As said at the beginning, I would be very happy to send you a lot of detail about this, if you are interested to pursue it, and especially if you could advise or help in the matter. The other two problems of the total of four are related to both of the above, but are each really an independent problem, three of the total indicating the possibility of non-Conservation of Energy, the one other being simply a puzzling electromagnetic problem. I would be most interested to hear from you, and particularly whether you can give any answer to, or throw any light upon, any of the above matters, or help in any way. Thank you for allowing your name to be passed on to me by Professor Kilmister. If in your reply you include any calculations, particularly calculus, would you please set out the steps in full, since my maths is at a rather low level, though I can often follow the simpler calculations, more or less, provided they are set out in detail. I hope I am not bothering you too much over this. No hurry, of course. With best wishes, Yours sincerely, Frank F. Potter
25.4.2005
Page 26 of 31
APPENDIX B POTTER'S FOURTH PROPOSAL: THE RECIPROCATING MAGNET ENGINE The following is an excerpt from Frank Potter's 7th November 1993 letter to the author: "The machine was this: A good modern permanent magnet has a close-wound coil wound around it in such a way that current can be passed in the direction opposite to that which magnetized the magnet. Standing at a short distance from one pole face of the magnet is a piece of soft iron, which is allowed to be attracted by the magnet while no current is flowing in the coil. The (potential) energy taken from the soft iron and imparted to its acceleration can be taken from it by some means, say by attachment to a crank and flywheel etc. like an old-fashioned reciprocating steam engine. When the piece of soft iron is stopped at the pole face switch on the current at a magnitude that will oppose and exactly balance the magnetism of the permanent magnet. There will be a momentary build-up of stored field energy in the coil, which can be 'recovered' later. But also, there will now be no field outside the permanent magnet and hence no magnetization of the piece of soft iron and no attractive force upon it, and in particular no loss-producing EMF induced by it into the coils by its motion if it is now drawn away from its starting position, and so no electromagnetic energy changes will take place. The mechanical energy used in accelerating it away from the pole face can be conserved by the flywheel. So, draw the piece of soft iron away to its starting position. There will be no magnetic force restraining it and hence no expenditure of electrical energy (i.e. induced EMF) or mechanical energy (which the flywheel has taken care of) in thus moving it away again. Then switch off the opposing current when everything has returned to its starting position and recover the 'stored' energy in the field of the coils (say by discharging into a condenser or by other means), thus at the same time automatically restoring the soft iron to its original condition of being attracted by the permanent magnet. Repeat the operation continuously, using the flywheel to smooth things out mechanically. It appears that on each completed cycle there is a nett gain of energy, so energy is not conserved. Is there anything wrong with that? I did work on this idea, both theoretically and practically, on and off many years ago in the late 1950s, in between many other calls in a very busy life. But I had to give it up, in favour of the other two ideas recorded in my earlier letter, partly due to the lack of time, but more particularly for two other reasons. The lesser of these was that I was by no means a good enough mechanical engineer to get the thing going, and doing it at home anyway. The greater reason, which was the one that really finally stopped me, at least for the time being, was that a possible theoretical and practical snag in the whole idea occurred to me, and I had not the necessarly theoretical and mathematical (particularly mathematical) ability to deal with it. It concerns the 'recovery' of the 'stored' energy in the solenoid coils surrounding the permanent magnet, and it is this: What is the nature of the whole solenoid itself? Clearly it is not a soft iron cored solenoid, in which self-inductance L would be very much larger than that for the coils alone, because in this apparatus its core is a good modern permanent magnet, in which presumably the billions of molecular iron magnets composing it would have little if any room for motion under the influence of an applied field; and as I understand the matter it is this very freedom to move of the molecules of the soft iron that causes the great increase in self-inductance of the soft-iron cored
25.4.2005
Page 27 of 31
solenoid over an air cored one. So, in effect, the coils are an air cored solenoid, because the permanent magnet inside them would be virtually unaffected by the current; or even slightly more than that, a vacuum cored one because the volume of the permanent magnet would replace the air. What all this boils down to is that the self-inductance L of the coils would really be rather small, whereas I had I think been viewing it, more or less automatically, as quite large (like a soft-iron cored electromagnet). Now, what follows from this is the relationship of the piece of moveable soft iron into the solenoid. If it were really a soft iron cored solenoid with high L then the position of a relatively small piece of soft iron just outside it would make little difference to its large self-inductance. But in the case of the virtually vacuum-cored solenoid there might be quite a significant relative difference between its rather small self-inductance, say L1, when the piece of iron is at the pole face, and its also small self-inductance, say L2, when drawn away. Hence, keeping the current I constant during the whole half-cycle of withdrawal of the soft iron, and the formula for 'stored' energy of self-inductance being LI2, there would be some difference between the energy put in at the start and that recovered at the end of the second half-cycle, i.e. I2(L1 - L2). So, there would actually seem to be some energy loss here, insignificant if the solenoid were really soft-iron cored (as I had been more or less assuming), but possibly significant as it actually was constructed. So, the final question was whether it were possible and, indeed, likely that this energy loss would exactly balance out the very evident kinetic energy gain that would be obtained on the first half-cycle by the permanent magnet attracting and moving the soft iron? I did not think the loss would be sufficient to balance out completely the gain, leaving Conservation of Energy valid; but I could not be at all sure. So the real difficulty came down to a question of theory, and in particular mathematics, in default of laboratory proof one way or the other. And I had no idea at all what the relative magnitudes were, i.e. whether the figures would be significant or not, and how this difference could be calculated, even possibly by a mathematician, let alone by myself, since obviously it would not be a very easy problem, even for an expert; and I think for many people it would come under your own "sweeping under the carpet" principle (!), assuming Conservation of Energy and thus conveniently forgetting all about it. Naturally enough really; though I would not have been happy about that, but did not know what to do. As said, much later, after a difficult period with other work etc. in my life, I went over to the other two ideas of my previous letter." Though this led into the remark "that explains my four different ideas" this letter from Frank Potter went on for a further four pages on issues such as whether Clerk Maxwell's theories had extended to permanent magnets.
APPENDIX C HOW CONCENTRATED FLUX DEVELOPS EMF IN AN ENCLOSING SOLENOID One needs to explain how a magnetic flux change concentrated in a central core region of the space within a large solenoid can develop induced EMF in the solenoid.
25.4.2005
Page 28 of 31
It is not a sufficient answer in the quest to explain the nature of magnetic phenomena and induction to say that the EMF is simply the rate of change of flux d/dt enclosed by each circuit loop (or winding turn) of the solenoid. In practice, space itself is, in a sense, a 'perfect' conductor [See footnote at end of this Appendix] in that elemental regions of empty space can be said to be bounded by a closed flow path and any d/dt action in that bounded region will also produce a circuital EMF. Since there is current flow, essential to develop a field reaction, and since no I2R energy loss is involved, we know that either R applicable to the loop is zero or something else is effective to set up a cancelling EMF in opposition in that loop of space. That 'something else' is the circuital component of an EMF set up in an adjacent loop region of space, which, for the purposes of this discussion, is deemed to be subject to its own d/dt magnetic flux exchange process. For there to be current flow in this adjacent loop and a negligible EMF driving that flow, the R factor applicable to space must be virtually zero as if it were a superconductor, and yet this is not a strict analysis because the space medium is able to sustain oscillations of electromagnetic field. The current flow in the adjacent loop corresponds to a net zero EMF comprising a component EMF adjacent the inner loop that balances the d/dt-related EMF and a component EMF now in the outer section of the outer loop that keeps the balance. In mathematical terms, imagine a sector of the space within the solenoid to be that of an arc of angle bounded between inner and outer radii r and R, respectively. See Fig. 7.
Fig. 7 Elemental arcuate sectors of a solenoidal field The EMF induced by d/dt in the central core sector with a segment of inner radius r will be: (d/dt)/2 The EMF induced in a closed loop sector between r and R is zero, because all the flux is deemed to be concentrated within radius r. In order that the EMF acting within the inner core sector should not do work on the 'nothingness' of space, the outer loop responds by setting up a back EMF in the arc segment of radius r which is exactly cancelled by a forward EMF in the arc segment of radius R. It is therefore the response of regions of vacuum space in developing circuital loop reaction currents in a non-resitive medium that is the cause of a transfer of action outwards to the winding of the solenoid by virtue of the back-to-back EMF response in contiguous sections of adjacent reaction current loops. Once the EMF finds itself trying to develop current flow in the wire of the winding of the solenoid, then it does meet resistance and normal circuit theory applies, but the action could not occur without the buffer response of virtual current activity in the intervening space. It is essential that this very important point should be well understood as, otherwise, we are left with experimental mathematical formulae that convey no explanation of the true energy activity involved
25.4.2005
Page 29 of 31
in magnetic inductance. The explanation here is provided because Frank Potter has questioned whether the enlargement of the solenoid radius to realms far removed from the seat of the flux change activity d/dt can result in a restriction on the induced EMF, meaning the back EMF, if the power supplied to the solenoid is what causes rotation of the magnet developing the d/dt flux change. Footnote: Note that each element of a 'perfect' circuit could have inductance L and capacitance C and develop finite currents and an EMF even if resistance R were zero. Each cell of space must be regarded as a parallel-connected LC circuit and, as applied to the vacuum medium with its non-dispersive properties in wave propagation, one also needs a self-tuning resonance effect in response to rates of change of signal disturbances in transit. However, as back-up for this, there is the further property that steady reacting current flow is possible owing to the orbital motion of the vacuum charges in their quantum states. Readers interested in this should refer to the author's article 'The Ether an Assessment', in the U.K. magazine Wireless World, 88, pp. 37-39 (1982), which discusses the self-tuning property of the vacuum medium. The steady-field reacting current flow has been discussed in ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 1.
APPENDIX D EMF GENERATED IN A SOLENOID BY A ROTATING BAR MAGNET
Fig. 8 Reference is made to Fig. 8. The calculation of induced EMF in a coil is based on the rate of change of magnetic flux linkage through the area of that coil. Thus, if the 'coil' is really a rectangular loop with one side of length l expanding outwards at a speed v in a plane perpendicular to a steady field B, the EMF will be proportional to Blv. Alternatively, if the loop area A is fixed so, the EMF induced will be proportional to A times the rate of change of B. The 'linkage' is what is meant by 'mutual inductance', in the sense that, whatever circuit or source produces B, that will have a mutual inductance vis-a-vis the circuit loop of area A. Suppose, for example, that B is produced by a current Io then the EMF induced in the loop of area A will be proportional to the time rate of change of MIo, where M is mutual inductance. To calculate M for a particular interaction one really is doing nothing other than working out how B produced by Io links with an area A. Now, there are two ways of going about this calculation. Because the action is 'mutual' it has a
25.4.2005
Page 30 of 31
certain recriprocity and one can take either component of the system as the generator of a field B and work out how this links the area of the other component. Obviously, since both must give the same answer for M, by symmetry of action, it is logical to choose the easier of the two possible calculations. In the case of a bar magnet rotating inside a solenoid it is not difficult to proceed in either way, but there is sense in taking the solenoid as the field source. The reason is that the field produced by a bar magnet is that of its two poles and is a rather complex function of magnet length and distance from the centre of the magnet, whereas the field acting on the magnet and produced by the solenoid is a uniform field in the case under analysis. Having in mind that this Appendix is written to meet the concerns of Frank Potter, it is stressed that 'mutual inductance' means just that: the mutual action by which energy can be transferred by induced EMF between two interacting circuit elements is one that works either way with no nett gain or loss of inductance energy. Indeed, if the mutual inductance favoured one or other of the circuit components in this exchange of energy, so one could design a transformer or oscillator that would be nothing other than coils of wire in air and yet would generate electricity continuously without the aid of any external agency. Whilst we do have in mind the issue of energy conservation with the bar magnet itself being a prospective coupling with such an external agency, the problem at hand is one of orthodox electrical engineering calculation of mutual coupling between two circuits aimed at deriving an EMF value. Hence, the logical route to finding that answer is the calculation of mutual inductance M in the problem under study and we shall do this by working out the field linkages from the solenoid to the magnet, rather than the other way around. That said, and referring to Fig. 9, we shall now substitute the rotating bar magnet by a small coil of area A carrying current Iosint so as to produce its field along the central axis of the solenoid and a similar small coil of area A carrying current Iocost arranged at right angles so as to produce its field along a radius vector from the centre of the solenoid.
Fig. 9 Note that this represents a circuit having a magnetic moment IoA which is chosen to equal the magnetic moment of the magnet, the latter being its pole strength times its length. The eventual EMF to be calculated will need to be expressed in terms of this magnetic moment. The action described represents a magnet rotating with an angular frequency . Now, first, looking at the effect which the current Iocost has in inducing an EMF in the solenoid, we can see by symmetry that this is zero, because the field diverges in opposite directions in each half of the solenoid and so the flux linkages will be such as to develop a clockwise EMF in one half of the solenoid and an anti-clockwise EMF in the other half of the solenoid and these will back against one another to sum to zero nett EMF. Therefore, that tells us that the mutual inductance for the configuration including the cost component is zero.
25.4.2005
Page 31 of 31
The task next is to calculate the field produced by the solenoid that links with the other notional coil of area A. Let the current in the solenoid be denoted I. If the solenoid were of infinite length then, assuming vacuum permeability o, the axially-directed field intensity in the solenoid is oNI, where N is the number of turns per unit length of solenoid. Note that in the gaussian system of units used elsewhere in this Report the permeability would be unity with a 4 factor added. The flux linking the area A is then A times this quantity and the flux per unit current I is simply AoN, which therefore is the value of M, the mutual inductance. Now, by the reciprocity argument concerning the 'mutual' nature of this inductance, the same value of M applies if we regard the rotating magnet as the source inducing an EMF in the solenoid. EMF is rate of change of flux linkage or M times rate of change of Iosint, which is M times Iocost. The EMF produced in the solenoid is therefore (AIo)oNcost. Had we assumed that the solenoid has a finite length D and a diameter a, then the field at the centre of the solenoid is reduced by the factor D/(D2+a2)1/2, and the EMF is accordingly reduced by the same factor. The derivation of this latter factor can be confirmed from the analysis given in section 33 above. The sine of the angle is the factor just mentioned. It is unity for a solenoid of infinite length. It follows, therefore, that if the radius of the solenoid is progressively increased to a very large value, then provided the length of the solenoid increases in proportion, so the EMF induced in it by the rotating magnet will be unchanged. However, N, which is the number of turns on the solenoid per unit length, must be the same so that the total number of turns must increase in proportion as well, otherwise the EMF will be reduced. In effect, one is here seeing the fact that the field from a bar magnet drops inversely as the cube root of distance, whilst the area of a solenoid turn increases as the square of distance, so unless the number of turns increases in proportion to distance the flux linkage rate will not be sustained with change of scale. Note that this Appendix is added purely to answer a question raised by Frank Potter. It has no relevance to the prospect of building a motor that can conceivably perform anomalously in energy terms, because the interaction under study is the standard interaction between a magnet and a current in a winding. As explained elsewhere in this and other ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS on magnetism, the prospect of generating what is termed 'free energy' is one that comes into sight where we have a magnet and a ferromagnetic core interacting under the control of a current in an external winding. That is a scenario where the third party to the action disturbs the 'mutual' reciprocal action which otherwise implies symmetry extending to energy exchange processes and it is that which brings a new dimension into energy research.
25.4.2005
Page 1 of 34
POWER FROM MAGNETISM
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents Introduction 'Free Energy': Defining the Field of Investigation 'Over-Unity' Power Generation The Power Converter Ferromagnetism Air Gap Reaction Mystery Energy Source: The Energy Balance Sheet Magnetic Leakage Flux and the Adams Motor Breakthrough on a Thermoelectric Route to 'Free Energy' The Solid-State Energy Probe Experiment Appendix A: The First Law of Thermodynamics Appendix B: Analysis of the A-Field Reaction Appendix C: Magnetic Core Drawing from U.K. Patent
POWER FROM MAGNETISM Introduction This is the first of a series of reports which are intended to serve as a technical briefing helpful in the evaluation of invention rights by expert opinion more familiar with conventional technology. It is, of course, not to be expected that technical experts, however, skilled in their own research field, have the necessary in-depth training that applies to discoveries extending beyond what is currently taught in academic institutions. The specialists of the world of 'invention' are really those who are professionally skilled in patent matters, whose approach is not that of 'peer review' in a scientific sense but rather one which embraces, without bias, what an inventor claims to have created and then judges on novelty and merit with attention focused on the prospective practical implementation and the technological significance.
25.4.2005
Page 2 of 34
The purpose of these ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS is to bridge the gap between the disclosure of invention, the province of the patent specification, and a few misconceived but established scientific doctrines that might otherwise make it difficult to understand the new science involved. Without such a briefing, technical advisors called upon to comment on the commercial viability of a 'new science' invention, especially one that is at the 'drawing board' stage, could not undertake a meaningful assessment. No doubt, this report will be read by individuals who are enthusiastic on the 'free energy' front and are searching for new experimental ideas to take that interest forward. Those readers should, however, understand that the intention here is not to communicate project details aimed at the 'free energy' movement generally. The intention, very simply, is to provide the reader with enough technical and scientific educational insight so that he or she can grasp the significance of what is represented in the patent cover that will later be associated with this report. In short, this report is intended as a marketing aid preliminary to presenting invention rights for prospective exploitation by corporate or entrepreneurial interests. It follows therefore that this report should in no way be deemed to confer any implied right of use in connection with what is disclosed, as all possible proprietary rights are reserved, consistent with this report being made available on a non-confidential but restricted circulation basis. 'Free Energy': Defining the Field of Investigation The words 'free energy' used in the introduction need explanation. This is an expression which has come into use in an international communication network. It simply means a prospective source of clean energy that is in abundant supply and not subject to territorial or climatic limitations, but one that has yet to emerge on the industrial scene. In a sense one can imagine that engines running on 'free energy' would be classified as 'perpetual motion' machines, but here one needs to clarify terminology and concept. 'Perpetual motion' may be defined as that which, owing to a cosmic influence communicated via the action quantum named after Planck, results in a sustained energy activity in matter which arises from an equilibrium state as between matter and a 'field' medium in space. Thus, there is perpetual motion in us all. The human body comprises atoms in which electrons move ceaselessly with quantized motion. Even if we die and our bodies are cooled to absolute zero of temperature, to a temperature below the 2.7 K of cosmic space, that motion persists, because those electrons never stop moving. The atoms with their electron motion have perpetual life unless transmuted by the E = Mc2 rule into a pure energy form that then dissipates into space. There is, evenso, a regenerative process in Nature by which forms of matter can be created and the secret of all this activity lies in the understanding of: (a) the nature of gravitation (b) the nature of magnetism (c) the nature of the photon, and (d) the nature of the aether. The scientific establishment has not, as yet, provided any accepted explanation for any of these physical phenomena. For example, until there is an accepted and valid derivation of the measured quantity 137.0359, the 'over-unity' version of the fine-structure constant, which is the key to the photon action and the energy quantum already mentioned, those 'experts' cannot deny energy transfer from vacuum to matter via the quantum process. Any such denial would only amount to a declaration that obtaining energy from space to serve a useful end is 'contrary to experience', meaning no more than that the fruits of future invention implicit in this pursuit have not yet come to market. As to gravitation, all that has been offered by those who claim authority on that subject is that it arises from the distortion of space-time, which is another word for 'aether'. Yet, the aether is the
25.4.2005
Page 3 of 34
space medium that is alive with energy, and the relativistic philosophy avoids the vision of the aether as an energy source and gives us instead Einstein's four-dimensional space-time as something that is 'distorted' in a way that leaves us completely in the dark on the energy front. E = Mc2 is, by the way, merely a formula derivable from classical pre-Einstein electrodynamics and representing the fact that every individual electric charge comprising a body's mass contributes to the inertial property of that mass by resisting acceleration in just such a way as to preclude loss of its intrinsic electric energy by radiation. In short, every elementary component of the universe resists change of motion in an effort to conserve energy. Einstein did not understand the real nature of gravitation, meaning its essential electrodynamic connection, nor did he ever conquer the mystery of inertia. The question of primary concern in this Report centres on 'magnetism'. Here, even though you, the reader, might think that scientists understand magnetism, the sad truth is that the phenomenon of magnetic induction which was discovered by Michael Faraday, and which is at the heart of the whole of electrical power engineering, is not understood by the 'experts'. The simple question of how the energy we feed into a magnetised solenoid is stored by that process has no adequate answer, at least in the standard teaching curriculum of academic establishments. Yet the answer to this question is crucial to the research to be described in this Report. So, I begin by making a statement about the energy involved in magnetic induction and I challenge any scientist to refute what I say. When an electric current is supplied to a solenoid the energy stored by induction, which is a mutual action set up between between numerous electric charges in motion, is dissipated into the thermal background of the aether itself. However, the action of that current in the solenoid is to deploy the motion of some of the aether electricity that constitutes that thermal vacuum background in such a way that an opposing magnetic reaction is established inside that solenoid. When the current is switched off it is as if this magnetic system is then a transformer with that reacting vacuum field becoming, in effect, a primary winding and the solenoid itself becoming the secondary winding. Energy is then fed back to the solenoid drawing on the thermodynamic state of the aether, which is left in a cooler condition, until, by a process of thermal equilibrium, energy commensurate with that originally dispersed migrates back through the aether to restore the status quo. The reader should not think of this as a transformer action depending upon alternating current effects. It is an action that applies also with d.c and, of course, with electromagnets and permanent magnets, where the atomic electron activity that polarises the magnet is that of atomic solenoidal current effects. There is no question that this is a correct description of the phenomenon of induction. We see here an action by which the aether has the ability to transfer its energy to matter. Magnetism provides the means for tapping into the vast sea of energy that fills space. However, the 'temperature' of that aether is not something we can measure by a thermometer, though one can sense it indirectly by its spectral effect on the radiation background. The experimental work to be described has been founded on the author's insight into the physics of magnetic induction as outlined in his book MODERN AETHER SCIENCE (see particularly pp. 113124). If the reader prefers instead to be guided by orthodox textbook teaching, which is different, then a word of caution is appropriate. There are many excellent textbooks and they will tell you about the laws of Faraday and Lenz. Not all will be 'truthful' in the sense that they will tell you that scientists lack knowledge in this field. The book that stands out in my mind as a very readable text is that entitled 'THE NATURE OF PHYSICS' by Peter J. Brancazio (City University of New York); publisher Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc., New York. On page 328 one reads:
25.4.2005
Page 4 of 34
"At the present time there is no real understanding of why charges are set in motion by a changing magnetic field. Thus electromagnetic induction must also be regarded as an unexplained law of nature." The reader will see that a choice has to be made. On the one hand, there are the sterile teachings that accompany acceptance of Einstein's theory. These eradicate belief in the reality of an electrical energy-active medium in space that transports electromagnetic waves. On the other hand, we have the alternative of an aether that accommodates to our energy needs by storing inductive power in its abundant low temperature heat sink. If the reader seeks an independent way forward on the question of induction that reader could come to terms with the facts expressed, as recently as December 1993, in the Engineering Science and Education Journal issued by the Institution of Electrical Engineers. The cover of this journal shows (a), as the past, the statue of Michael Faraday in the IEE's headquarter building in London, (b), as the present, two students who face an uncertain energy future and (c), as that future, an illustration of a lightning discharge set alongside one showing a battery 'farm' of wind-power generators. The relevant article of reference is one on pp. 273-280 by John Carpenter entitled 'Understanding Electromagnetism'. Here are some quotes from Carpenter's article: "A great many electrical engineers, when challenged on such matters, confess to a considerable unease with their grasp of electromagnetic fundamentals." "One of the most familiar 'consequences' of a magnetic field is the property of inductance...What do we mean by 'inductance'? We define it by the voltage which is caused by a change in current, and 'explain' the voltage in terms of flux linkage, part of which represents the magnetisation (i.e. the electron spins). It is these spins, acting like the electromagnetic equivalent of little flywheels, which interact with the conduction charges in the wire, and increase inductance. That is, they increase the electromagnetic inertia of the conduction electrons. But, we account for the voltage by some rather mystical quantity, denoted B, in empty space, and this is nothing whatever to do with electron spins. We represent B by lines on a diagram, provided with arrow-heads, and argue that B is the 'cause' of inductance. The type of student who always makes a nuisance of himself (or herself) may ask 'what is meant by B?' The student can be told to shut up, but the teacher may have been given pause for thought. Electromagnetic theory might be characterised over the last 100 years, as a progressive retreat from the idea of the aether as some form of 'medium' needed to convey the electromagnetic interactions." Such, indeed, is the sorry plight of education in electrical science, bearing in mind that that 'aether' is the fountain from which flows all the energy that we see in our universe. Even though Carpenter discusses the question of inductance in such a critical way, he does, in developing his own thesis about the nature of inductance, avoid bringing to bear that full-bodied aether that is essential to resolving the problem. He too gives way by falling into line with that spirit of retreat from the aether concept. The Carpenter interpretation depends upon current 'interactions' as between currents in matter, disregarding current flow in the aether itself. This is at the very heart of the problem. Does induction energy, the magnetic energy we know is stored when current flows in a coil, reside in the inertial motion of the electrons which carry that current or is it 'stored' in the aether in the sense that it is held captive at the seat of the action? We are all familiar with storing money in a bank. That money we deposit is not kept in a box waiting for us to come back and withdraw the same money. Once deposited that money dissipates into a sea of action that is pooled and spent, just as energy dissipated as heat spreads itself through space. Banks rely on equilibrium which means a return on investment, an inflow balancing an outflow and
25.4.2005
Page 5 of 34
compensating for what is spent. We get our money back because the bank has kept a record which 'polarises' the bank's money 'field' in our favour. That record is something left in that bank, that is not the actual money we deposited, but which can be triggered to release money to us from the limited part of the money pool kept by that bank. Inductance is a property by which energy transactions occur in an aether, replicating, in effect, the way in which money transactions occur in a bank. Understanding how the aether 'record' registers an energy transaction is the challenging question and, if we can understand this, with our energy future in mind, we might unlock Nature's energy secret and then be seen to be, as they say, 'laughing all the way to the bank'! Whilst students, therefore, engage in the mysteries of understanding B and not then understanding how energy is stored by inductance, the task of harnessing inductance to provide an entry route for tapping energy from that aether is one warranting our attention in this Report. I must now assume that the reader is ready to accept that magnetic inductance may have some important energy secrets to disclose and now trust that we can move directly to the experimental evidence without the reader feeling that in talking about 'aether' I am leading that person along a blind alley.
'Over-Unity' Power Generation A brief word is necessary on the theme of 'over-unity'. Readers will have seen this expression used above in connection with the fine-structure constant. This is a fundamental dimensionless physical constant as used by atomic physicists. In that 'over-unity' context it refers to the version of in its reciprocal form 1/, a quantity that is slightly greater than 137. In dealing with atomic situations and spectral analysis, the 'below-unity' form for which is 0.007297 is more familiar to physicists. This digression does have a connection with aether energy, as the reader may see by referring to this author's contribution entitled 'The First Law of Thermodynamics', which has appeared at pp. 340342 in the November 1993 issue of the U.K. Institute of Physics Journal 'Physics Education' (See Appendix A to this Report). The expression 'over-unity' has come into general usage by researchers interested in 'free energy'. For a device to be said to operate 'over-unity' its power input (usually electrical) must be exceeded by the power output, whether the latter is electrical or mechanical or thermal. This reference to 'thermal' should not be confused with the 'heat pump', by thinking that conventional heat pumps operate with 'over-unity' performance. It may be that one joule of electrical energy can transfer 10 joules of room heat from a lower to a higher temperature, but that is not an 11 to 1 'overunity' performance since the true input then is 11 joules and the output is also 11 joules. The reverse Carnot efficiency factor of merit or 'coefficient of performance' applies to such a process. By 'over-unity' in this report what is meant is the output of more useful energy than is supplied as useful energy input. In this context, those 11 joules of heat output are not as 'useful' as that 1 joule of electrical input and so the heat pump is not an 'over-unity' device. If, however, we run a device or a machine and it produces an excess of electrical output or an excess of heat at a temperature so elevated in relation to input heat that the Carnot criteria are surpassed, then we have 'over-unity' performance. Our energy future is secured once we have the technology for this latter kind of operation. These Reports are being written because that technology is now in sight and there are, indeed, several alternative routes to that objective, all warranting our attention. There are versions of the motor developed by Robert G. Adams of New Zealand, which have already
25.4.2005
Page 6 of 34
been demonstrated in 'over-unity' operation, measured strictly in electrical input and electrical output terms. The Nexus magazine published in Australia has pioneered the news on the Adams machine and the Editorial in their January 1994 issue said that in 1993, since the Adams story had appeared: "Nexus has been contacted by hundreds and hundreds of people from all over the world, and, yes, quite a lot of people have now successfully duplicated the device based on the information we published. In other words, there are now quite a few small-scale free energy machines running successfully out there, in the process of being made into large-scale devices. If you have shares in oil companies - get ready to sell soon!" The Adams machine will be discussed briefly in a section of this Report and in much greater detail in a later Report in this series. However, at the request of Robert Adams, and in order to deal with a troublesome question that has emerged, I need to comment here on claims of 'over-unity efficiency'. It was said in one early text about the Adams motor that it had a 270% efficiency and 700% was mentioned in a recent magazine report. The question posed concerns proof of such claims by evidence not relying on calculated interpretation of current and voltage measurements. The crucial and usual question is whether the output from such a machine has been fed back as input so that the machine, once started, runs and delivers output power with no input, at least until some component or connection ruptures or otherwise fails. That would be a 'perpetual motion machine' demonstration. With such performance it is then absurd to discuss an efficiency measure because the efficiency becomes infinite. Therefore, the expression 'over-unity' has meaning as a classification rather than as a measure and the question is more related to the amount of 'feedback'. It is suggested, therefore, that 'over-unity with 20% feedback' could be one way of saying that 4 units of useful output are generated from one unit of internal feedback. Such a machine or device made available commercially should not be rated by its 'efficiency' but rather by its net power generating capacity, its power rating being its ability to deliver net power continuously. It is also of relevance here to report that, on present experimental indications, yet to be fully researched, the Adams machines are delivering power which fluctuates with time of day. It is as if whatever is providing that coupling with the aether energy source is dependent upon the orientation of the device in relation to a spin axis characteristic of that aether. This latter subject is rather special and it too will be covered by a later Report in this series. However, it is noted here that this 'discovery' was, in fact, anticipated by the author, based solely on aether theory, and became the subject of a preliminary patent filing lodged even before the news of the phenomenon was communicated by Robert Adams. This is an appropriate point at which to interject the statement that, whilst Robert Adams has become the focus of attention, and deservedly so, we owe it to NEXUS magazine for initiating the tidal wave of action that will soon deluge the electrical engineering community. The wave of action will bring with it news of inventions, many of which are already covered by granted patents, but lie unappreciated amongst the dust-gathering information records of our technological age. One very relevant example of this is the U.S. Patent No. 5,227,702 (Inventor: Peter M. Nahirney), dated July 13, 1993, and drawn to my attention by Toby Grotz, the President of the recently formed INSTITUTE FOR NEW ENERGY, the professional society which was created in Colorado in April 1993 when we had, amongst other developments, debated the Nexus article publishing the design details of the Adams motor. This Report will now deal with experimental results showing how magnetism provides an aether energy access route. In this, our attention turns away from 'free energy' motor developments, as such, and looks at steady-state devices. U.S. Patent No. 4,687,947 (Inventor: Melvin Cobb) is relevant to
25.4.2005
Page 7 of 34
the theme developed next and warrants the reader's attention after digesting what is now to be described.
The Power Converter An established technique used in d.c. power supplies involves using electronic switching to chop an input signal into pulses at an audio frequency and feeding those pulses through a ferrite-cored magnetic inductor coupling to transform the voltage before merging the output pulses into a smooth regulated d.c. output. This process is highly efficient and the power systems are compact in construction and offer high power rating in relation to bulk and weight. The question now addressed is that of exploiting such technology with a view to incorporating the secret that will allow us to tap aether energy so that we get more electrical power output than is supplied as input. The point to keep in mind is that the above-described technique will be assumed to be of a form which operates with a 'flyback' coupling in that it uses the inductance to store input energy in a time period separated from that in which the inductance releases energy to the output. Also, what is to be described experimentally is not based on the use of a ferrite core but rather on a laminated sheet steel core, inasmuch as it is only the principle of operation that needs experimental demonstration for the purpose of this Report and it so happens that a convenient non-ferrite core assembly kit was available. We are not therefore, in this Report, going to get into the details of product design and the related costing of materials and specification of a proposed product. Readers will appreciate that if we can gain some 'free energy' each time we drive a magnetic core through its magnetization cycle, the faster we can do that, the more energy we gain. The ferrite core permits higher frequency operation and, based on use in existing variable voltage regulated power supplies, there is good reason to expect that what is described below, and which works for laminated steel cores, will be eventually implemented in ferrite-cored systems as a preferred product form. The following disclosure is also more concerned with the structural form of the magnetic core and its function energy-wise rather than the detailed way in which magnetizing coils are wired into an electronic control circuit. There are many variants and design possibilities for the latter, and such design does not pose unusual problems, but the core design depends upon the secret of that energytapping function and that does involve us in some new physics. I also remark that there are many who have wondered about the effectiveness and indeed the purpose of using bifilar-wound coils, with currents in the respective portions of the winding that merely cancel each other electromagnetically. The word 'flyback' used above bears upon this question and I leave the reader to ponder on that as a puzzle that I shall answer in a subsequent report. To proceed, we need first a brief lesson in simple ferromagnetism as it applies to a magnetic core having an air gap.
Ferromagnetism Ferromagnetism is Nature's way of giving us something for nothing in energy terms. Build a solenoid which has a non-ferromagnetic core and measure the inductance energy which has to be supplied in a.c. current and a.c. voltage terms and then, with the same voltage, see what magnetizing current is needed if the core is replaced by one that is ferromagnetic, say soft iron. For the same
25.4.2005
Page 8 of 34
voltage, that magnetizing current is proportional to power in reactance terms and so to the energy stored at times of maximum current. With the ferromagnetic core present we need far less current to secure the same voltage. The reason for this is that the ferromagnetic core itself is making up the energy difference by virtue of the 'perpetual motion' of those atomic electrons in the iron that endow the core with its ferromagnetic state. Now ask how a power transformer works. We have two coils on an iron core. The object is to put energy into one coil and take energy from the other. By using the iron core we find that we can transfer energy between the two coils using a far smaller magnetizing current than would otherwise be needed. That current flowing in a copper coil means a loss owing to the resistivity of the copper and so, to reduce weight and cost, and assure efficient operation with minimal loss, one really must have a ferromagnetic core linking the two coils to assure minimal magnetizing current. Now, rather than being satisfied that we know how a power transformer works and so have little to learn from that technology, let us ask how that transformer works if the two coils are separated at a distance along the length of a core or are on different sides of a square core, as depicted in Fig. 1. We find that, somehow, that iron core has the ability to carry energy from A to B. Without the iron core very little of the energy supplied to A would be recoverable from B. Now, it is a fact connected with the nature of ferromagnetism that, if one could see inside the iron looking at microscopic sections, the iron would everywhere be seen to be fully magnetized to saturation. Inside each crystal there are what are termed 'magnetic domains' in which the magnetism is directed along one of the three mutually orthogonal crystal axes each of which is an 'easy axis of magnetization'. The intrinsic miniature solenoids that represent the magnetic state of such domains each carry the maximum equivalent current associated with the related atomic electron motion and the normal process of magnetizing the iron macroscopically is one of causing these solenoids to reverse direction.
Fig. 1 It needs very little externally applied magnetizing current to promote the reversal of magnetism in a magnetic domain. Essentially such current as is needed is used to overcome the back reaction effects of non-magnetic inclusions in the iron or of the thin boundary wall regions separating domains or any air gaps built into the core as a whole. These 180o reversals occur with very little work being done and, as the level of overall magnetization builds up owing to overall domain magnetism becoming predominantly in one general direction, so one approaches the stage where the magnetism exploits the possibility of a 90o transition between 'easy axes of magnetization'. This needs a stronger magnetizing influence. Thereafter, from about 70% of saturation onwards, any further increase in polarization has to involve a very demanding action where the domain 'solenoids' are literally forced to turn to come closer into line. However, in this process the externally applied current finds itself assisted by the mutual action of the domain solenoidal effects and this is now a stage where the underlying energy which feeds the
25.4.2005
Page 9 of 34
motion of those electrons is contributing very substantial amounts of energy to bring about that increased state of magnetism. Saturation occurs only when all the solenoidal effects intrinsic to the domains are forced into a common direction and each, like a spring under stress, has a will to revert to a position along one of the 'easy axes of magnetization', but is held in place only by that externally applied current. Now, when this is summed up, we see that, provided the level of magnetization in an iron core with no air gaps is moderate, there is very little external energy needed to control the magnetic flux which is present in the core. Therefore, a primary coil at A can assert its influence in transferring magnetic action to a secondary coil B without too much of its magnetizing force being used to overcome the back reaction of those non-ferromagnetic inclusions and domain boundary walls. It is better if the primary winding and secondary winding are wound around each other, meaning that A is at B or vice versa. However, 'better' in this sense means better from the viewpoint of avoiding the reaction that goes with harnessing the intrinsic power action of the core. In our 'free energy' pursuit that is not the 'better' course, since it means that we have deliberately avoided the source of that 'free energy'. It is only by making the inductive coupling process difficult so that the intrinsic ferromagnetism of the iron core has to work harder in its 'flyback' role that one can tap into its 'free energy' potential. To proceed further, we now need to ask how an air gap in a core interferes with the ability of a magnetic core to carry the magnetic flux. Air Gap Reaction Effects Suppose (Fig. 2) that a magnetic core has a quite large cross-section in relation to its loop length but a very small width of air gap in the vicinity of B, say 0.1% that of the core length. One would think that all this would mean, as a loss of 0.1% of the iron present, is that the magnetic flux set up by a given current excitation in a coil at A would be reduced by 0.1%.
Fig. 2 This is not the case. Indeed, by taking that 0.1% of the iron away, even for iron which is very poor in terms of its magnetic properties, meaning it does not have large crystals and does have impurity inclusions, it can easily be that the magnetic flux is halved in this situation. It seems obvious, on reflection, that this is not just a question of actions occurring in that iron core. If the magnetism developed by that iron, thanks to a current in coil A, sees nothing to resist it in that air gap, then it should have no difficulty traversing that air gap, especially as it is has still 99.9% of its original strength. Common sense tells one that the air gap is extremely active in its own right, as if an enormous current is flowing in an imaginary vacuum coil at B directed in opposition to the influence of the coil at A. The vacuum devoid of aether cannot, however, be something in which current can be said to flow, especially a d.c. current - or can it? The way in which to decide this is to replicate that flow of aether current at B by tests involving a
25.4.2005
Page 10 of 34
coil placed at B, very close to that air gap, and see what is involved in neutralizing the magnetic reaction effect in the gap. When this is done, the simple truth is that we discover that there is an asymmetry in the following sense. We establish a state with a given magnet flux traversing that air gap, regarding coil A as primary and see what current is needed in A to set up the flux with no current in identical coil B. Then with coil B as primary acting to set up the same magnetic flux across the air gap in the same direction we find what current is needed for this purpose. It is found that less current is needed in B than was originally needed in A. Now look at this from the viewpoint of inductance energy storage. To power a coil at A we need more inductance energy input than is needed by one at B to achieve in the air gap the same magnetic condition. What accounts for this discrepancy? The answer is that for both conditions there is actually a current flow in the aether at the air gap, which current is virtually equal and opposite to that in coil B. Therefore the aether reaction current and the current in coil B complement one another in terms of their role in setting up a store of inductive energy. It needs very little discrepancy between the two currents to stimulate the magnetic polarization in the continuity of the iron core and so, what is represented by this situation is a magnetic flux condition in the air gap with no leakage flux around that gap. Virtually all the energy supplied to coil B is stored in that air gap. With coil A excitation and no power on coil B, a greater input of energy is demanded by the inductance of the system, because the energy state represented by the air gap proper is supplemented by that of flux leakage, as depicted in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3 However, the question at issue here is how the energy gets from coil A to the gap, given that it needs very little action to influence, either create or suppress, the magnetic polarization in the iron. If all the action is by virtue of those 180o or 90o domain transitions any reaction field from the gap region would preclude a change in magnetic flux when coil A is energized. This poses no problem for the coil B excitation because there is nothing around the iron circuit path to resist a change in magnetic flux, but it is a major problem if the coil A excitation has to work against an air gap in a remote section of the core. The answer lies in the need to set up an internal magnetic field inside the body of the core between A and B and this means that there has to be at least some domain flux rotation, necessitated by the direct action of the coil A current in urging flux rotation by domains which do not have their host crystals with easy axes of magnetization orientated along the coil axis. Once this scenario develops we are entering the realm of 'free energy' and so it is of interest now to report an experiment which involves an accounting of an energy balance sheet. We shall see that we need to bring into account some energy from that mystery source we have called 'the aether'. Mystery Energy Source: The Energy Balance Sheet
25.4.2005
Page 11 of 34
I invite readers to perform the following simple laboratory experiment, one which I feel should be part of a teaching curriculum for anyone who aspires to understand electromagnetism and its energy implications. All one needs, in addition to a voltmeter or oscilloscope, an ammeter, and a variable voltage 50 Hz or 60 Hz power supply is a standard inexpensive transformer assembly kit, some cardboard and a little wire. A suitable 100 VA transformer kit is one available, as distributed in U.K., from RS Components U.K. (P.O. Box 99, Corby, Northants NN17 9RS). Stock Ref. No. 207-734. There will be a corresponding source of supply available from the local distributers in many other countries. The transformer has an E-shaped core and a bridging yoke as shown in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4 The experiment involves assembling the kit several times, using a different number of card layers to form an 'air gap' or rather a 'pole gap' of 10 different widths, ranging from 0 to 9 card thicknesses. I used card of 0.25 mm thickness. The object of the experiment is to compare the reluctance energy or inductance energy stored in the air gap at moments of maximum flux density with the integrated reactive volt-amp measure of energy input to the magnetizing winding over a quarter cycle period. Standard teaching requires that the input energy represented by that volt-amp-time measure is necessarily greater than the energy stored in that gap. The latter is a measure of the mechanical work potential attributable to the mutual attraction of the magnetic poles, as available if they were allowed to move to close the gap. The wire is used to wind a search coil or secondary on a part of the transformer core adjacent to the gap where it can provide a measure, given some flux leakage, of the actual magnetic flux traversing the pole gap. One can, as a physics exercise (see energy balance analysis below), calculate the pole gap energy in terms of the flux density, area and width of the gap. One can also calculate the reactance input energy for the quarter cycle over 1/200 second at 50 Hz or 1/240 second at 60 Hz and compare the two. That is straightforward physics, but the beauty of this experiment is that no such calculations are needed. For each of the several tests one measures the current supplied to the magnetizing coil, which is the standard primary coil supplied with the kit. The current capacity of the coil is the limiting factor on the flux density so one is obliged with this test apparatus to operate well below the knee of the B-H curve. This current is adjusted by the variable a.c. voltage supply so that the same voltage is induced in the search coil for each test. This means that the gap flux density, and so the force across the gap,
25.4.2005
Page 12 of 34
is the same for each test. Therefore we have two variables. One is the input current and the other is the number of card thicknesses defining gap width. We plot a graph of current against gap width (Fig. 5) using the data in Table I. TABLE I cards 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 gap mm. 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 amps 0.038 0.162 0.221 0.279 0.338 0.382 0.421 0.472 0.516 0.538
Fig. 5 If we input more energy than is needed to set up the mechanical potential energy of the gap then the plot of current versus that number of card thicknesses will show an upward curve, inasmuch as there will be progressively increasing flux leakage with increasing gap width. However, assuming (a) energy conservation, (b) no loss and (c) no flux leakage, by our standard physics principles, we expect no discrepancy and that means a straight line relationship. If there is flux leakage, increasing with gap width, but still no energy loss, the inductance energy stored by that leakage will demand more current as input and so the current curve observed will climb away from the ideal linear relationship. That is, unless the 'free energy' source is so overwhelming in its power that it can pull that curve down below the linear norm. What one finds, in fact, is that, even in spite of leakage effects, the relationship between current and the gap width curves down well below that linear relationship. This means that, with increasing gap width, the reluctance energy in the gap becomes progressively greater, indeed far greater, than the energy supplied as input. This evidences a clear and direct breach of the law of energy conservation unless we can embrace the concept that the ferromagnetic core has a way of borrowing energy from a source not contemplated by our textbook teachings. To determine the energy gain and so a measure of the 'free energy' potential, one does need to work
25.4.2005
Page 13 of 34
out the reluctance energy input. We can then draw the straight line expressing the theoretical reluctance energy as a function of current versus card thickness in Fig. 5. I calibrated with 3 card thicknesses and found that a primary voltage 76.9 V gave a search coil induced voltage which had an arbitrary amplitude suited to a chosen grid range on the oscilloscope screen. The above current readings were plotted by using the same test amplitude to set the input voltage for all card thicknesses. The voltage signal sensed in the series-connected coils B, each of 20 turns, shown in Fig. 4, had a peak value of 1.5 V for this test. Note that the effect of an air gap is to cause the inductance of the primary winding A to become linear in the sense that the non-linear distortion by signal harmonic components often found when the hysteresis of the iron governs the core response is virtually obscured by the dominant air gap reluctance effect. This means that we can reasonably assume a sinusoidal variation of voltage and current. It is also feasible to ignore the phase shift which occurs owing to resistance in the primary winding, at least for the immediate purpose of proving that there is a very substantial 'free energy' anomaly. This can be justified by keeping track of the proportionality of the relationship between primary and search coil turns ratio in relation to voltage induced and voltage supplied. In any event the ohmic resistance effects can be allowed for in the analysis since primary current is measured and the primary resistance is known (17 ohms). Such considerations do not affect the substance of the analysis presented below. The inductance energy for a current I is expressed as LI2/2 which, becomes LI2 if I is the root mean square current value and the inductance energy is that at moments of peak current strength. We therefore shall calculate the energy in the air gap for the flux density Bmax corresponding to a sinusoidal a.c. current I. Note that the root mean square value of the voltage V applied to the magnetizing winding is represented by LI so that the inductance energy supplied to the gap at peak current times is VI/, where is the angular velocity corresponding to the power frequency. In the reported test the central core area or total cross-section sensed by the combined search coils was 8 sq. cm. but, owing to the flux return, the total pole face is 16 sq. cm. Each 20-turn search coil embraced a 4 sq. cm. cross-section. The magnetizing winding specification was rated at 240 volts and 3.7 winding turns per volt. The magnetic flux density needed to produce the 76.9 V is, therefore, about one third of the normal operational flux density of the transformer. At 50Hz this corresponds to a maximum flux density of 0.4875 tesla or webers per square meter. However, this is the flux density in the part of the core at the primary winding location. With that three card thickness air gap of some 0.75 mm there is a substantial leakage of flux not reaching the pole faces and so traversing the gaps. We know this because the central core flux density at its maximum amplitude is that giving a 1.5 V signal in 40 turns embracing half the 8 sq. cm. area of that central core. This, at 50 Hz, is 0.2985 tesla. Bear in mind that this 0.2985 tesla is the flux density that governs the energy stored between the pole faces across a 16 sq. cm. or 0.0016 sq. m. cross-section and it applies over the full current range shown in Fig. 5. Note further that this flux will be non-uniform across the area of the pole faces, which means that the stress energy we calculate as the mechanical potential of that gap will underestimate substantially the true energy potential should we rely on that 0.2985 tesla as being uniform. Our energy balance sheet must now take as, energy input, the quantity VI/ and decide how much of this inductance energy input is stored in the leakage flux zone, where the flux traverses long paths through air, to bridge the legs of the E-shaped core, and how much of this inductance energy goes directly into the small-width gap between the pole faces where it can be 'seen' as part of that 0.2985
25.4.2005
Page 14 of 34
tesla field. Our calculation will be based on unit card thickness of 0.25 mm. The card has a permeability which is virtually that of the vacuum, namely 4x10-7 H/m. B is 0.2985 tesla. The energy density is B2/2 and so the total energy the gap between the pole faces is then 0.0016x0.00025 times this energy density. This works out at 0.01418 J on a per card thickness basis. If there are N card layers in the test giving the data in Fig. 5 so we have stored inductance energy in the pole gaps given by (0.01418)N joules at instants when the flux density peaks at the level set by the tests. In fact, the energy stored and available for doing mechanical work is much greater than this, because the flux density has to be non-uniform and the root mean square value needed for energy conversion is so much larger than the mean value. Now, what energy have we supplied? The energy supplied is VI/, where I is the primary current and V is that portion of the primary back EMF which can be said to relate to magnetic flux linking the search coil. The rms primary voltage that corresponds to that 1.5 V maximum is 76.9 V and, for 5O Hz, as the angular frequency of the power supply, is 314 rad/s. There is analogy between EMF in a resistive circuit and the effects of primary current in producing magnetomotive force (MMF) in a magnetic circuit. The magnetic flux is analogous to electric current and what we term 'reluctance' substitutes for resistance. By this analogy, our inductance energy input is apportioned to the pole gap region, as if the supply current develops the magnetomotive force which sees a reluctance component that allows a peak flux density of 0.2985 tesla, whereas 76.9 V corresponds to 0.4875 tesla. Therefore, 47.1 V is a measure of V that applies to the primary current in determining reluctance energy fed to the pole gaps. This energy quantity is (47.1)I/ or, for 50 Hz and as 2(50), (0.1499)I J. This applies to a test with three card thicknesses and the energy then known to exist in the pole gaps is (0.01418)N J, where N is 3. Therefore, the corresponding value of I for a perfectly balanced energy account, is I = 3 (0.01418)/(0.1499) A or 284 mA. Table I shows that the current measured was, in fact, 279 mA. Accordingly, in choosing the pole gap width of 0.75 mm or three card layers, we have fortuitously demonstrated a calculation that applies at the departure threshold where the energy does, in fact, balance. The point now of relevance is that, in progressing in the Fig. 5 tests to values of N above 3, the pole gap energy component increases linearly, whereas the input energy reduces in relative terms. With N of 9 the primary input has increased to 100 V and the primary current is 538 mA, but the component supplying the pole gap region is still that 47.1 V. In effect, therefore, the input power feeding the pole gaps has doubled but the energy stored in the gap has trebled. The downward curve in Fig. 5 tells us that, if we cause the magnetic circuit to require more MMF, so the ferromagnetism of the core becomes subject more and more to domain flux rotation and then it sheds energy and makes it available as a form of inductance energy we can tap mechanically by closing the pole gaps. We do, therefore, have here, in this experiment, the means for probing the 'free energy' resource afforded by ferromagnetism. This account, under the title 'Mystery Energy Source', was offered for publication to "Physics Education". It ended with the following quoted text:
25.4.2005
Page 15 of 34
"I therefore see this experiment as a standard experiment which will be used to show future generations that the ferromagnet is a catalyst which gives us access to a new and plentiful source of energy tapping into the vacuum energy source that determines the Planck action quantum. However, that is too taxing a concept for physics teachers to absorb in view of its startling technological implications, so I will end by simply challenging readers to do this experiment and to try to reconcile what they find with what is currently taught about energy conservation principles. I add that, for those who lack the pioneering spirit and prefer to rely on the authoritative work of others, it is appropriate to refer to Fig. 113 at p. 173 in the 'Principles of Electromagnetism', 3rd Edition, Oxford, Clarendon Press 1959 by Cambridge Professor E.B. Moullin. Such an experiment is there reported and for a 7mm gap in a rectangular core 4 times larger in linear scale than the one I used, and so corresponding to my 7 card thicknesses, the data presented show that the reluctance gap energy is then twice that supplied as inductance energy. However, Moullin kept the applied voltage constant and did not use a separate search coil. Professor Moullin was not averse to the 'aether' concept but, in discussing leakage flux effects, he missed the full significance of his experiment. Only a discerning reader, having reason to suspect the intruding hand of something akin to the Maxwell Demon, would have cause to give special weight to Moullin's statement: "We have seen reasons for supposing the leakage flux does not change very much with gap width". I only became such a 'discerning reader' after nearly 30 years possession of this book, when I heard of 'crank' claims that certain forms of homemade switched reluctance motor, which, when the magnetization was switched on only for a period before pole closure, could deliver more power output than is absorbed as power input. It was no easy task to turn one's formal education around. I therefore urge readers to pay attention and repeat the experiment I describe. My earlier communications on 'The Law of Perpetual Motion' and 'The First Law of Thermodynamics' were not based on ignorance or philosophy but were intended to pave the way forward to something of major importance now developing on the alternative energy scene. This 'energy from magnetism' theme, as it evolves into technology, need not take those who teach physics by surprise, especially when so simple an experiment can put one's physics education back on track." ___________ Although my comments on the possibility of 'Perpetual Motion' and energy conservation as needing an aether to avoid breach of 'The First Law of Thermodynamics' were accepted and published in the July and November issues of Physics Education, my 'Letter to the Editor' entitled 'Mystery Energy Source' was rejected by the 'peer review' process. The reasons given in the referee report may interest the reader: "Aspden presents his results as evidence of a fundamental flaw in the accepted theories of physical phenomena. These have proved so widely and exactly verifiable that something more than a few simple tests is needed to shake one's faith. It is necessary to show that no reasonable theory will account for the observations, and nothing like enough has been done to justify his ambitious conclusions. One needs careful measurements of current and voltage, observations of phase angles, as well as such simple things as remove the yoke altogether, or at least increase the number of cards
25.4.2005
Page 16 of 34
until the limiting behaviour is clear. Until such tests have been made it would be mischievous to publish his letter." The implication of this is that I must be wrong and that my measurements are subject to question. I am told that I must show that no reasonable theory will account for the observations, even though I quoted the Oxford, Clarendon Press treatise of Professor Moullin and that text shows that the nearest one can come to explanation by accepted theory is not satisfactory. Moullin did extend his tests to removing the yoke! My answer, therefore, as a physicist, is that I have made my contribution to the world of learning and have not been heeded and so, my task now is to concentrate as an engineer and develop the technology of this 'free energy' opportunity, leaving the physicist to the comfort of an erroneous and stagnant, but 'acceptable' world. I believe that the 'free energy' experiment I have described above will eventually become a standard experiment which will be used to show future generations that the ferromagnet is a catalyst which gives us access to a new and plentiful source of energy by tapping into the vacuum energy source that determines the Planck action quantum. Magnetic Leakage Flux and the Adams Motor It is not intended that this Report should provide any details about the design of the Adams motor, but some comments are necessary. Firstly, it was said in connection with the transformer experiment already described that, to get ferromagnetism to supply that 'free energy', we had to weaken the coupling between the primary winding and the part of the core in the vicinity of the pole gap. Secondly, it was said that our experiment was limited in the flux density that could be generated across the pole gap, because the 100 VA transformer kit only allowed primary magnetizing currents that could sustain 0.3 tesla and this meant operation well down on the B-H curve, where the 'free energy' was not forthcoming in great measure. Both of these factors are crucial to the successful design of an Adams motor. The latter problem is overcome by using permanent magnets to replace the action of the primary winding and the former feature is built into the Adams prototype machines by an open core soft iron stator design, with control windings mounted on the stator pole members near the pole gap. The motor operates with 'over-unity' performance, showing that the 'mystery energy source' is contributing to the pole gap energy and much of that energy is then used to provide output power by being prevented from reentry to the ferromagnetism of the permanent magnets. The underlying concept is to operate the motor in a way which transfers intrinsic ferromagnetic power to the gap between the pole faces, where it is stored by inductance and held for 'flyback' return when output coils are switched into circuit after pole closure, but in advance of pole separation. The pole gap and leakage flux around that gap are key to the Adams motor operation and it is therefore appropriate to comment on that remark by Professor Moullin: "We have seen reasons for supposing the leakage flux does not change very much with gap width". A small gap in a magnetic circuit can have an enormous effect on reducing the magnetic flux in that circuit. It should, by accepted theory, not produce any significant amount of flux leakage, in the sense that flux escapes from the circuit. Yet, our experiments suggest otherwise, depending upon the core configuration used.
25.4.2005
Page 17 of 34
Consider a simple small-width gap in an elongated section of a ferromagnetic core (Fig. 6). Tha gap adds an enormous capacity for storing inductance energy using a winding on that core and yet the inductance is decreased, not increased. The ferromagnet sets a limit on flux density but the gap allows the core to accept a much greater magnetizing current at that limit of flux density. The LI2/2 energy is related to a flux density proportional to LI and so energy capacity increases linearly with current I, whereas, if L decreases, the energy can increase for the same LI value.
Fig. 6 The energy stored in that gap is represented by a very powerful reacting current flow in the aether in the gap. This current is powered by the aether energy sea. It is a kind of diamagnetic thermodynamic reaction state polarised by the presence of the primary magnetization of the main iron core. This is not a flux leakage phenomenon but one by which the composite magnetic flux, that from the main core and the circulating flux induced locally around the aether current reaction, is effective in appearing as a diversionary agency. The main core flux is partially diverted so as to jump through air external to the main core path whilst the remainder crosses directly between the pole faces. Now, of course, this reacting aether current flow is what serves in the Adams motor as the means contributing to the weakening of the direct attractive pull between the two core sections, whilst at the same time augmenting the 'flyback' action and serving to deliver energy should the output be taken off electrically rather than mechanically. The point made here is that Professor Moullin had drawn attention to the curious fact that a small air gap in a ferromagnetic ring core could drastically affect the flux traversing the gap and could cause significant flux leakage around that air gap, but yet by the standard principles of electromagnetism that he knew so well, that should not be. The solution to his problem was unknown to him when he wrote the referenced book in its third edition in 1954, but it was discovered by this author shortly after graduating Ph.D. in that very year for research on ferromagnetic reaction currents, research conducted in Professor Moullin's laboratories. There is what the author terms a 'half-field' reaction effect set up inside metal or in air gaps or in vacuo when magnetic fields are present. This is the way the aether reacts at the equilibrium interface between aether and matter in the energy exchange that we are here discussing. Physics that does not countenance the 'aether' is physics that has turned its back on the sea of energy in that aether. An electrical engineer of the stature of Professor Moullin had to deal in unsolved mysteries in energy technology because his professorial associates disciplined in physics and mathematics had created a climate of opinion that would not allow aether science to develop. It was, of course, such frustration that caused this author to write and publish "MODERN AETHER SCIENCE" in 1972. And it is now, following decades of frustration, that technology is ready to take us forward on the track of ferromagnetism to a world which affords access to that energy in the aether. At this stage, and to underline the importance of the 'half-field' reaction theme, the author could even go further back in years and draw attention to his first printed publication that discloses the way in which the vacuum reacts to store a magnetic field. Chapter 9 of 'THE THEORY OF GRAVITATION' dated 22 November 1959 discusses the gyromagnetic ratio of the aether itself and explains the anomalous factor 2 found in gyromagnetic phenomena. The reaction energy of the magnetic field in vacuo is the thermal kinetic energy stored by the aether.
25.4.2005
Page 18 of 34
Some few copies of that printed text are still in the author's possession and are available to those who wish to study the history of these aether developments. This is also mentioned here because, as many readers may know, an initiative launching a 'free energy' company seated in Rapperswil in the vicinity of Zurich in Switzerland in 1993 and offering shares to the public has been based on the aether of a deceased researcher named Oliver Crane. This venture Raum-Quanten-Motoren AG which plans to produce 'free energy' generators in the very near future is associated with the publication of a magazine MAGNETIK which declares itself concerned with electromagnetism and gravitation. In the January 1994 issue there was a 'Focus' (Brennpunkt) editorial entitled: 'Erdmagnetfeld ist Ein Gyromagnetischen Effekt' and mention of Barnett's research and the linking connections with Monstein's experiments and Oliver Crane's 'quantum-space' motor developments. The aether connection between the gyromagnetic ratio and the Earth's magnetic field, and the intermediating quantum-of-action in space were the starting points for this author's theory, as can be seen from the following photocopy of the 'Contents' page of that 1959 'THE THEORY OF GRAVITATION':
THE ABOVE IS THE TABLE OF CONTENTS OF H. ASPDEN'S 1959 BOOK, 'THE THEORY OF GRAVITATION' (48pp BOOKLET) For readers who wish to see a more up-to-date disclosure of the 'half-field' gyromagnetic reaction effect, a mathematical analysis analogous to that Chapter 9 in the 1959 work, showing the way the aether vacuum reaction is translated into a reaction inside a metal, has appeared in a very recent patent specification. APPENDIX B at the end of this report reproduces the mathematical appendix which was at pp. 2528 of the author's U.K. Patent Specification No. 2,267,995 published on December 22, 1993. That invention is entitled 'Thermoelectric Heat Transfer Apparatus' and it concerns a development relating to the thermoelectric topic below. Breakthrough on a Thermoelectric Route to 'Free Energy' This Report is written following publication of an article launching the author's entry into 'free energy' experimentation. In the work "Three Experiments on Free Energy" the author announced that more details would follow in this first ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT. I must honour this commitment. Having dealt with the first of those experiments, we will now address the second, even though it departs from dependence on aether technology and there is so much yet to disclose on the developments of solid-state magnetic 'free energy' devices on that aether front. The latter will feature in further ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS which will begin to issue in the near future.
25.4.2005
Page 19 of 34
The author has been involved in developing a new technology by which heat and electrical forms of energy are mutually convertible by solid-state methods operating with extremely high efficiency. It has been realised for some time since the first prototype was demonstrated that there had to be some new physical principles at work in this technology, or at least a very special application of existing physical principles that had come about fortuitously and had not been fully understood. The 'second' experiment which I will now discuss is one performed expressly with the object of a diagnostic testing of a possible principle concerning the physics of that thermoelectric device. In the event it has revealed a regenerative energy process which, when developed and implemented in one of the forms originally contemplated in the granted patents, promises to be one we can classify as 'free energy' and 'over-unity' operation. Ferromagnetism provides the catalyst for tapping thermodynamic activity in the vacuum medium and generating useful electrical output from the heat input. In contrast, where we draw heat from a material source, a magnetic field, which need not be enhanced by ferromagnetism, can serve as the catalyst by which that heat is converted into useful electrical power. The well-known power generating technology involving this latter action is that of magnetohydrodynamics, where a hot ionised gas flows along a channel (x axis) a magnetic d.c. field acts transversely (y axis) and an electric potential supplying current is set up in the mutually orthogonal direction (z axis). The magnetic field deflects the ions one way or the other in the z axis according to electric charge polarity. The heat, as the kinetic energy of the ion motion, is thereby diverted to produce a voltage which supplies current output. A solid-state implementation of this occurs in a steel lamination to set up a potential between its opposite surfaces (z axis), provided there is a temperature differential in the plane of the lamination (x axis) and the lamination is magnetized in the other planar direction (y axis). The electrons carry heat and in so doing, being ions in motion in a transverse magnetic field, that intrinsic to the internal ferromagnetic state of the steel, they are deflected to set up that voltage potential between the opposite surfaces of the lamination. When current of an externally-connected circuit is allowed to flow in the z direction, the lamination cools as the EMF so generated delivers power. The advantage of using the steel lamination or nickel, as in the main prototype experiments, is that the strong intrinsic magnetic polarization of the domains in the metal avoids the need to provide externally-powered magnetizing windings. Thus one witnesses a very efficient technique of refrigeration using a solid-state technology, provided, that is, that one can (a) assure that heat flow in the metal and (b) a transverse current flow that does not provide for a concomitant loss of heat in that transverse direction. As part of the research effort involved in this thermoelectric project, the author has experimented with a magnetic core comprising bimetallic laminations composed of steel and nickel, meaning steel film plated with a layer of nickel on one surface. The principle of the experiment is to induce magnetization loss in the laminations which produces heat. The heat is conducted away by flow confined within the laminations. A transverse current flow exists near both edges of each lamination, being that of the circulating eddy-currents associated with the induction. That z-axis flow at the edges, plus the y-axis effect of the intrinsic domain magnetism on the x-axis heat flow carried by electrons, combine to offer flow paths through domains which serve to set up a forward EMF augmenting that current flow. In effect, one can hope to set up a negative resistance which allows the device to become regenerative as heat input produces electrical power, which, in turn, unless we can tap into it and take some away, will dissipate as ohmic heating in the central portions of the laminations.
25.4.2005
Page 20 of 34
The question addressed by this experiment is whether this scenario can be demonstrated experimentally as a basis for onward development. Note that what is being considered is a process for converting heat into electricity with no Carnot limitation, that is, we are contemplating a heat to electricity conversion that potentially is 100% effective. It would operate as an 'over-unity' device because waste heat at ambient temperature could be converted into useful electricity to result in overall cooling. The breakthrough resides in the fact that the experiment does show the regenerative action. Where the thermoelectric EMF plays a role we are not here dealing in energy stored by inductance, but rather with energy loss or energy gain by resistive effects causing heat dissipation or negative resistance effects causing heat energy recovery. Imagine then an electrical transformer core wound with a primary winding and a secondary winding used only to sense induction and consider the eddy-currents induced in the core laminations. It is as if the laminations themselves form the effective secondary winding. A 50 Hz or 60 Hz a.c. current is fed through a resistor connected in series with the magnetizing winding (Fig. 7). The resistor feeds the X plates of an oscilloscope with a signal proportional to its potential drop, giving an oscilloscope trace measure of H. The secondary winding is connected as shown with the Y plates receiving a signal from a 2 F capacitor in series with the 100,000 ohm resistor. This provides a time integral of the time rate of change of the magnetic core flux density B and so the oscilloscope indicates also the B measure.
Fig. 7 For normal transformer operation this circuit will provide a normal representation of the B-H hysteresis loop, which develops into an ellipse as the eddy-currents increase (Fig. 8). However, suppose that there is something special about the laminations by which the resistance of the eddycurrent path becomes predominantly negative in one section owing to heat being converted into an EMF acting in a forward sense around that eddy-current path.
Fig. 8 In this case, provided that action is strong enough, the effective secondary winding provided by that eddy-current path can, conceivably, take over the action and become the primary power input source, energized by input heat. To feed power to the circuit including the resistor used to measure H, the induced EMF would need to derive from a B flux varying in antiphase with H. Accordingly, the B-H
25.4.2005
Page 21 of 34
loop would convert to one of the form shown in Fig. 9.
Fig. 9 It follows, therefore, that the regenerative heat-to-electricity conversion potential of the device under test is easily inspected, simply by examining the B-H loop as the current in the magnetizing winding is progressively increased. Now this is exactly what was found to happen in preliminary tests on a transformer assembled with its main limbs comprising steel laminations plated with nickel. This means that there was here sight of a new technology by which bimetallic ferromagnetic laminations can serve to convert heat into electrical power. Before describing what was observed, by adopting the same text as was presented in my article 'Three Experiments on Free Energy', I have to explain that, upon rebuilding the experiment using a more powerful current source aimed at driving the circuit to a higher power level, the staged trigger action of the flip between the Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 B-H loop forms did not occur. Instead, the action was as if there was an enormous activity confined to the Fig. 9 state, characterized by a very wide elliptical form of loop and, on analysis, showing that the power energy action per cycle was extremely high in relation to what could otherwise represent magnetization loss. Note that with the earlier situation and the loop change from Fig. 8 to Fig. 9 as current excitation increased, one knew that there was regeneration. I now suspect that the test core, which originally exhibited bistable operation, has become conditioned by internal thermal activation, that may have resulted from coupling a capacitor to form a resonant load circuit, so as (this being speculation!) to become locked in its state which precludes Fig. 9 operation. In my urgency to complete this Report before reworking the apparatus with new laminations, I shall leave this particular issue open for clarification in my next Report on this subject. I am bearing in mind that the power of the B-H loop and phase angle measurements show really enormous magnetization loss per cycle if the device is not acting regeneratively. There are certain other fascinating aspects linking with hitherto unexplained experimental phenomena which will be reported in due course, and which give good reason to interpret the action as regenerative. Special test rigs have now to be built to prove this beyond doubt by extracting that power as output, notwithstanding confinement to the Fig. 8 state, and here we have the leading evidence from the basic experiments on the prototype devices which used films of bimetallic coated polymer. They demonstrated regeneration of electricity from heat convincingly by showing an electric motor running from the thermal effects of ice melting in a room temperature environment. The experiment now under discussion is part of a research programme aimed at improving and simplifying that technology whilst aiming to convert to power delivery accompanied by energy-balancing refrigeration action via a magnetic rather than a capacitative circuit coupling. ______________ The following text comprises paraphrased sections quoted from 'Three Experiments on Free Energy: "At the mountain retreat where we had a private brainstorming session involving many of the speakers, I mentioned the thermoelectric project in which I was involved and
25.4.2005
Page 22 of 34
showed a video demonstrating the quite remarkable speed at which ice can form with very little electric power input and how electricity is regenerated with high efficiency drawing on the energy of melting ice. That Colorado meeting was a landmark event in the history of new energy developments as it marks the beginning of an escalation which will lead to a bonanza on the energy front. In the intervening period, since we met in Colorado in April, I attended, in August, the 28th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference in Atlanta, Georgia. I presented an update on the thermoelectric project, emphasizing its mode of operation as a very powerful solid-state technique of refrigeration avoiding CFC pollution. That Atlanta conference lacked the excitement of the Denver event, but it has opened doors that can help in onward progress. From a personal viewpoint I felt at a disadvantage in that I have, for the past five and more years, been following the new energy movement from a theoretical standpoint. The 'jewel in the crown' that inspired me from a patent and business motivation viewpoint was my interest as co-inventor in the thermoelectric technology that my associate Scott Strachan was working on in Scotland. His work has been funded and my hope has been to see that venture become the revenue earner that could take the other energy research forward in a business sense. However, funded only by my pension income and savings, as we older 'free energy' enthusiasts usually are, I did find myself at the meeting in Atlanta, with no update technical input to report from Scott Strachan, and wondering why I was there with no recent personal hands-on experimental facts at my disposal. Indeed, in talking to Patrick Bailey at that Atlanta meeting, I vowed not to attend another such conference unless I could report on my own experimental work. So, having exercised my professional skills and established a patent position on several energy inventions that I was unable to demonstrate as working devices built by myself, I set to last month and began my experimental program with a very limited funding resource. I say this because I feel that some of your readers will wish to repeat the experiments I report below and I simply wish to stress that very little outlay is involved. My object is to demonstrate the scientific basis and technical feasibility of three 'free energy' projects. I direct my comments at those who profess to pass on knowledge to future generations. I am not here going to explain how what is described can be implemented in a practical machine. That will follow later when I progress to that stage. I know what I say has a practical end product because my sole objective is to bridge a knowledge gap to cover the true science lying in that zone between orthodox doctrinaire belief and the working 'free energy' machine. The target objective for the first of my three basic experiments is: The curious fact that our thermoelectric refrigeration device is built with an inherent functional symmetry and yet it always cools on its exposed test heat sink surface, it being noted that the electrical operating unit is mounted on the same panel that constitutes the second heat sink surface. The latter gets hot as the former cools, but, unless Scott Strachan builds a version that separates the electrical operating unit from the second heat sink we shall have to await the clear experimental evidence that, in truth, both surfaces are cooling as the device delivers electrical power! The idea that one can build a power transformer which draws in heat and so cools a
25.4.2005
Page 23 of 34
housing in which it is enclosed and at the same time converts that rejected heat into electricity fed along wires leading from that housing is one that seems beyond belief. It defies the second law of thermodynamics, but that should not deter a pioneer who has in his possession the device mentioned above. The object of the experiment is to test a suspicion that current circulation within a bimetallic lamination can, under certain circumstances, result in cooling for current flow across the thickness of the lamination. The experiment acknowledges that such cooling would produce an EMF and put electrical power into increasing the current flow in the plane of the lamination, unless deflected from the lamination, transverse to its width. This means extra heating and anomalous loss augmenting the eddy-current loss, but such an anomaly is direct evidence of that underlying cooling and electrical generation. The prototype devices all used thin film bimetallic layers of aluminium and nickel and involved that transverse 'deflection'. The 'circumstances' stated are that the lamination includes a ferromagnetic layer of thickness less than the 100 micron dimension, the size of a magnetic domain formed within the larger crystals of the material. In the subject experiment, there was no transverse deflection but the other condition was met. Commercially available steel foil (known in the trade as 'shim steel') of 2 thousandths of an inch in thickness was obtained and an electroplating firm was asked to coat one face with nickel using an electroless plating process. The nickel coating was 0.7 thousandths of an inch in thickness. It was found that this could be cut into small rectangles for assembly in a 100 VA transformer core, supplied in kit form (eg. R.S. Components in U.K.). Thin card placed between the laminations was used to insulate them from each other. The arrangement was as shown in Fig. 10, with legs A and B being formed by the bimetallic pieces. Primary and secondary windings, respectively series-connected in pairs, were formed on each of the legs A and B. The test involved observing on an oscilloscope the changing shape of the B-H magnetization loop as primary current input increased. To present the B-H loop on an oscilloscope screen the secondary winding was connected across a 100k resistor in series with a 2 F capacitor and the Y input to the oscilloscope was taken across the capacitor terminals. The H input was provided by incorporating a series resistor in the primary feed circuit and taking the X input from the potential drop across that resistor. What I was intending by this experiment was to estimate the eddy-current loss resulting from the bimetallic lamination feature. Having done Ph.D. research studying anomalous eddy-current losses experimentally I was particularly curious as I had never heard of anyone ever before testing a transformer built using bimetallic Fe:Ni laminations. Moreover I knew that I was using laminations that were much thinner, though more conductive, than is customary in transformers. Added to this, I knew from my Ph.D. research days, during which I measured the loss factors in different elemental sectors of the B-H loop, that there was a particularly high and inexplicable loss in a part of the loop where it was least to be expected.
25.4.2005
Page 24 of 34
Fig. 10 In the event, what I found was astounding in the light of my experience. I did not have to do any calculations. With such thin laminations magnetized well below saturation at mains power frequency, the B-H picture on the screen at low current was a straight line angled to represent the magnetic permeability. The fact that it was a line meant that there was negligible loss, which is what I expected until a certain threshold was reached. My reasoning was that the transformer action would introduce heat into the core and that heat would be conducted away. I had planned to arrange for the heat to flow one way so as to set up a temperature difference across the laminations and then my presumption was that a d.c. current would circulate thermo-electrically and affect the form of the loop. Indeed, a d.c. bias would displace the position of the loop on the screen both in the X and Y directions. Note that a B-H loop with little eddy-current has a rather special shape representing hysteresis effects. An over-dominant eddy-current effect makes the loop elliptical and the width of the loop, in tending to fill more and more of a bounding geometrical parallelogram form, is a measure of the loss portion of the reactive volt-amp input. Remember that magnetic energy is stored as inductance energy and, in oscillating, this energy sheds the loss which is represented by that loop. Now, what happened was astounding because, upon bringing the current input up to near mid-range, the B-H loop became very wide and quite elliptical. Furthermore, as expected, it shifted laterally by a small but very apparent amount (about 15%). However, the ultimate surprise was that, as the current input increased, the loop began to topple and turn clockwise until, with a greater current, it actually went over so far as to lie in the 'top-left-to-bottom-right' sector of the oscilloscope screen, whereas it began at low current in the conventional 'bottom-left-to-top-right' orientation. This means that the transformer core having the bimetallic laminations has either become a capacitor, which it is not, or the phase governing the power and magnetomotive force reaction has inverted through 180o. This is an obvious indication that the core wants to act as a generator by which heat sustains a current producing its magnetization and, instead of demanding input current to set up the reaction to the changing magnetic flux, it produces current in a forward direction augmenting that magnetic condition. In the experiment, of course, all that extra current drawn from heat goes into enhancing the eddy-current losses enormously. This is why the loop gets so wide. So, here was confirmation that there is a process involved in the magnetization of bimetallic laminations that enhances energy transfer productive of anomalous current flow. The source of energy is heat input, but if we dissipate the electricity before taking it off for useful purposes, so we see nothing abnormal in the overall energy action. What we see in this experiment is that toppling B-H loop! There is the clear evidence and
25.4.2005
Page 25 of 34
here, at last, from this experiment, emerged the confirmation of my suspicion of the secret as to why our thermoelectric device works in its incredibly powerful refrigeration mode. That device has its own a special way of taking off that electricity before it develops those very high eddy-currents. Here, in fact, was a new development, a discovery which had eluded the author's Ph.D research and which could have enabled the author to build a 'free energy' device decades ago, had this insight been apparent in those early years. But who would have thought that a transformer built from laminations of iron and nickel bonded in layers could tell us anything new about electromagnetism? It must be said, however, that the 'special' way of taking electrical energy from a stack of bimetallic laminations, as used in the prototype devices, involves building those laminations into a parallel plate capacitor. That is not an easy task and to take it from the demonstration prototype to the commercial world needs the support of a major semiconductor partner. The task is much easier with this new understanding of the physics involved and attention is being given to the possibility of drawing the power off by magnetic induction. It is in this regard that Scott Strachan, the Scotsman who has built the three prototype devices to date, did become preoccupied by a new discovery not yet published by which the thermoelectric action can be controlled with negligible power input, much as a grid in a thermionic valve can control the current between anode and cathode. However, progress on that is extremely slow and, as the need for a new refrigeration technology cannot await Strachan's solitary endeavours, so I am disclosing by this letter my own experimental findings to arouse interest and expedite onward development. I see the experiment just reported as one that very clearly indicates that heat can be converted into electricity to provide refrigeration technology which, at the same time generates electrical power. The one step essential to the completion of this picture is the verification that if Scott Strachan, or others who now replicate the device, builds a fourth prototype device in which the electrical power circuit is not mounted on the 'hot' heat sink, then that heat sink will also cool. The above is also my message to those companies now expressing interest in researching this project. This, together with a copy of a specification I can supply to interested parties, points the way forward in a research venture that should provide the best and most effective method of efficient refrigeration and bring, miracle though it might seem, the added bonus of being self-powered electrically." __________ The Solid-State Energy Probe Experiment This was the section title under which I introduced the third experiment in my article "Three Experiments on Free Energy". The article was written as an open letter addressed to Don Kelly, Editor of the Space Energy Association's Quarterly Space Energy News, where it was duly published in December 1993. It is also scheduled to be published in Nexus Magazine early in 1994. It seems appropriate to reproduce first the relevant text from that article: "The third experiment which tells me that I am on the verge of a breakthrough in penetrating the barrier giving access to 'free energy' in a solid-state device has yielded its own surprises. Here I built a form of transformer that is intended to serve as an exploratory test rig. I shall, owing to the developing length of this communication, curtail the constructional details and leave something for future reporting.
25.4.2005
Page 26 of 34
The test involved setting up a d.c. magnetic bias in the x direction and an a.c. transverse magnetic oscillation in the y direction. Again I used the above-described technique of studying the shape and form of the B-H loop developed by the a.c. flux. The a.c. excitation was of low magnetic flux density amplitude so that the eddy-current losses should be negligible, as should hysteresis loss. I was operating in the flux rotation zone and above the B-H knee where rotational hysteresis loss diminishes rapidly to zero. I expected the B-H 'loop' to show as a line on my oscilloscope and, indeed, such a line did appear. I had to expand it off the range of the screen by increasing the x deflection sensitivity substantially in order to trace the small capacitive contribution of my circuit for integrating induced EMF to derive the B signal. I could find no trace of a loss. Moreover, the line was not curved; it was very straight, which meant that the incremental permeability effective in the direction transverse to d.c. polarization was virtually constant. This was as expected from my theoretical reasoning, but there was a surprise in that the transverse permeability was smaller than I expected, by a factor of ten. Now, if you are wondering what this means, note that my object is to store 'reluctance' energy by that transverse excitation, meaning energy that goes in as inductance energy and is recovered without loss on the down quarter cycle. By making that transverse oscillation stronger and stronger the object is then to deflect the primary polarization so that the intrinsic ferromagnetic power develops flux oscillations in the axis of the primary coil. The aim is to tap energy from that deflected 'reluctance' energy source, most of which is powered by the atomic spins in the ferromagnet, and use that energy on the up quarter cycle. This process then allows the polarizing bias, which could be that provided by a permanent magnet, to reset as the tranverse current diminishes, but the short-fall in the stored 'reluctance' energy given back to the magnetizing coil in that transverse direction has then to be made up by the magnet. The experiment I report here goes no further than showing that the transverse excitation is a pure, virtually loss-free, inductive process which involved a characteristic magnetic permeability indicating a 30:1 ratio of ferromagnetic power input compared with external power input. That is the starting point which will, I am sure, lead to the fourth experiment in which that energy is diverted and used without affecting the input magnetization circuit. Then the recovery of energy upon demagnetization of that latter circuit will occur, but as it cannot take used energy back from a load, the polarizing magnetic source simply has to do the work and so leave the quantizing vacuum field in a cooler state. Rather than wait until I am ready to report such further progress, I thought it appropriate to inform you and via you the readers of your Newsletter at this stage." ________ I now intend in this Report to extend my disclosure on developments from this experiment but, since this particular project promises the best route to tapping aether energy by solid-state apparatus, and there is much research now needed before the patent cover is secure, I will limit what is said. My object here is to attract sufficient interest from major corporation research laboratories based on a non-confidential disclosure by pointing the project effort in the right direction, whilst withholding enough to give basis for mutually beneficial negotiation adequate to reward my contribution. This may be an untimely step to take, but there is urgency and 'free energy' development must proceed with all speed, in order that the pollution by our existing energy generation methods can be minimized. If others who read this Report decide to pursue the R&D also, in their independent ventures, that can
25.4.2005
Page 27 of 34
but be for the common good, but again it is stressed that this Report should not be taken as granting any rights under what may be proprietory and subject to patent protection. Copyright in this report is also preserved. As to the principles of the experiment, firstly, the object is to work a ferromagnetic core in such a way that its windings do not cancel the action and so defeat the purpose of allowing the core to contribute some of its intrinsic energy to our output circuit in each successive magnetizing cycle. Secondly, the core has to work hard in this effort and so it must operate at a level of magnetization above the knee of the B-H curve or even close to saturation. Thirdly, as much of the core as possible should be involved in this exercise, not just a small portion in a large magnetic circuit. Fourthly, our technique for accessing that energy is to contrive operation so that the input circuit responds as a pure linear inductance whilst the ferromagnetic core acts as a catalyst to feed thermodynamic power to the output circuit electrically. The drawing in APPENDIX C illustrates a core structure that serves this purpose. The illustration of Fig. 3 should be self explanatory. It is an extract from an early U.K. Patent No. 855,907 dating from April 1956 and of which the author was inventor in his employee capacity with a major U.K. electrical company. However, though there are technical features of that development which the author has called to mind in developing this 'free energy' application, the specific mode of excitation needed to tap that 'free energy' were not disclosed nor, indeed, thought of at the time of that early invention. A spiral wound steel film coated with insulation has a cylindrical form and is wound around an axially central conductor. A solenoidal winding encompasses the core. Current I in the solenoidal winding produces a magnetic field parallel with the core axis, whereas current I' in the central conductor produces a magnetic field in a circumferential sense. The thin steel film constituting the cylindrical core is everywhere subjected to the cross-field magnetization effects of two fields acting at right angles to each other. The currents I and I' must, acting together, be sufficient to set up a near saturation condition in the core. The central conductor winding is d.c. biased and excited with a.c. of smaller amplitude to function as an inductance setting up a circumferential field with energy cycling in and out and subject to very little frequency-dependent loss. There is some I2R loss in the winding. The intrinsic ferromagnetic energy that corresponds to the near saturation state is represented by a spin state that precesses, in effect, during the cyclic reorientation. In so doing, it induces an EMF in the solenoidal winding and this puts output power into a load connected to that winding during both half cycles of the a.c. oscillations. That output power taps the ferro-magnetic spin energy that the aether supplies by thermodynamic cooling in keeping the ferromagnet its its low minimal energy potential state. The way in which one should see this is that, looking in any direction of strong magnetization, with the precession moving away from that direction, the BH component is reducing without returning all that energy to the aether system. Instead it transfers some to the load circuit. With the precession moving into that direction, the BH energy component builds up by input of aether field energy accompanied by thermodynamic aether field cooling and, at the same time, sends some of that energy to the load circuit. A normal transformer runs solely on the HB energy transfers that are conservative in the material system. The 'free energy' future transformers will conserve energy too but will extend the conservation territory to that of the space medium. The author intends to say no more on this subject until the time comes when a design specification can be disclosed with operational performance data.
25.4.2005
Page 28 of 34
On the general issue of 'free energy' from 'aether' reaction in responding to magnetism, there are a few experimental indications now emerging which suggest that the 'free energy' input can be dependent upon orientation of the apparatus in the inertial space frame. Researchers who find performance variations that can change with time of day, as the Earth rotates about its axis, should be alert to this possibility. The underlying scientific reason for such effects and the evidence will be covered by a later Report in this series. The reader may now find APPENDIX A interesting, as a 'peer-reviewed' November 1993 communication published in the U.K. Institute of Physics journal 'Physics Education'. It has not been presented in its full printed version for copyright reasons. The substantive content of the author's original text only is reproduced and certain sections are presented in bold type, the emphasis being added specially for this Report. 20th February 1994 DR. HAROLD ASPDEN ENERGY SCIENCE LIMITED c/o SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB ENGLAND
APPENDIX A THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS: PHYSICS EDUCATION 28, 340-342: 1993 Whilst strongly supporting the view expressed by Moore (Physics Education, 28, pp. 228-237; 1993) that greater emphasis should be given to non-equilibrium processes in teaching thermodynamics, it is submitted that such teaching gets off to the wrong start by the very prescription of the First Law of Thermodynamics as the governing doctrine. It is the Principle of Conservation of Energy that should be declared as fundamental. The First Law of Thermodynamics, if retained in the physics curriculum under that name only serves as a 'number one' precedent to the 'number two' law. A thermal system with no heat flow would be at a uniform temperature. A purely thermal system with heat flow can be in equilibrium with heat flow. Non-equilibrium processes imply actions which are not solely concerned with the flow of heat in a system. In presenting his case, Moore begins by reciting that First Law as having a meaning expressed by: E=Q-W where E is the change in energy, Q is heat flow and W is work done. Note the words 'change', 'flow' and 'done'. The Principle of Energy Conservation requires that a change of energy between its various states, such as heat, electric potential, gravitational potential or kinetic energy sums to zero and I do not see why a student should have to have to learn this as a law of 'thermodynamics'.
25.4.2005
Page 29 of 34
At the outset of his argument, Moore defines 'heat' as 'the interaction that occurs between two systems, or between a system and its surroundings by virtue of a temperature difference'. This is not correct, because 'heat' is a form of energy - a scalar quantity, whereas a temperature difference has direction and so is a vector. 'Heat flow' can be said to have the prescribed definition. This shows how careful one needs to be with words in teaching the fundamentals of the subject. In his following sentence Moore states: 'A temperature difference can be further defined in terms of lack of thermal equilibrium between two systems ...' Later he says 'A new generation of physics textbooks will probably be needed to cope with the fundamentals involved in the teaching of nonequilibrium thermodynamics at a base level'. However, I suggest that the question at issue is whether we are concerned with the physics of temperature difference or whether we are erring in using 'thermodynamics' to relate to something that is not strictly 'thermal'. Physics today, and science generally, covers such a vast field and there has to be economy in teaching techniques, whilst conserving fundamentals. We need to understand how energy can redeploy and how order can evolve from chaos, but that is not the subject of thermodynamics. Thermodynamics has only become involved because, historically, it has been used to draw an arbitrary line between the possible and the impossible, but this is a line which is not holding steady. The energy that does cross that line in going from chaos to order is not heat, as such. However, it can create heat after making the transition. One has to distinguish between the physics of heat flow that involves a temperature differential and the physics of energy conversion generally. In stating the fundamental principles underlying that First Law of Thermodynamics, with examples in mind, one really needs to set the stage for the student who may progress and have to face the following two problems. Firstly, when a ferromagnetic substance cools down through its Curie temperature it releases heat over and above that associated with its normal specific heat. This extra heat happens to equal the sum of the magnetic energy which is thereby established, meaning the energy needed to set up the same field conditions in an air-cored solenoid as exist in the saturation state of the magnetism created in each ferromagnetic domain, and the additional work done in setting up the mechanical strains associated with that magnetism. Readers will find, on considering this, that, notwithstanding misguided attempts to bring in magnetism as a negative potential, the First Law of Thermodynamics does not hold. We do not have here a situation where the work done requires a loss of heat. The only system we recognize as present is the substance of the ferromagnet. Unless there really are two systems inside one another, one that supplies energy from a source we cannot see or sense in temperature terms, there is no way of keeping an energy balance according to that First Law of Thermodynamics. So, turning to the Principle of Conservation of Energy, we need to admit that our 'system' comprises an underlying sub-quantum field medium as a coextensive system having its own reserve of 'zeropoint energy'. One presumes that there are in that field medium quantum effects at work in priming those spins in atoms that we say establish the ferromagnetic state. Secondly, although one finds in books on cosmology that one can ask such questions as 'is the vacuum gravitating?' (see section 11, chapter 1 of Novikov's 'Evolution of the Universe', Cambridge University Press; 1983), one does not see the equally important question 'does the vacuum have a temperature?'. Yet, when we look into the space enveloping body Earth there is evidence of thermal equilibrium manifested by the 2.7 K radiation. For some reason this 'heat energy' is deemed to be a residue of the Big Bang in the scenario of the expanding universe.
25.4.2005
Page 30 of 34
What is rather curious is that cosmologists try to apply the principles of energy balance to the assumed gravitational interaction within the vacuum acting on itself, forgetting that if the vacuum does contain something that can gravitate it must contain electric charges in some neutral composition. The pure vacuum, devoid of matter, must have its own quasi-static equilibrium and probably will not exhibit a temperature. Here, the word 'probably' is used because, in common with so much that is theorized about in cosmology, one really does not know the certain answer, but we need to imagine the likely scenario in our effort to solve the riddles of Nature. However, assuming that, if matter did not exist, the vacuum would have no temperature, what cosmologists then fail to do is to apply the Principle of Energy Conservation or that First law of Thermodynamics to the straightforward question of how matter, that we know exists, interacts gravitationally and thermally with that elusive vacuum medium. Consider the energy balance equation: m + kT = 0 or: m + mv2/2 = 0 where m is the mass of a virtual particle deemed by Novikov (in following Zel'dovich) to constitute the vacuum medium, T is the temperature of the particle, k is Boltzmann's constant, v is speed and is a measure of gravitational potential attributable to matter within gravitational range of the particle of mass m. The equations apply in a physical sense because, by analogy with magnetism in the first problem, gravitational potential is said to be a negative quantity, though really it is a manifestation of an exchange of energy with that hidden field system. Now, much as we think we know all there is to know about gravitation, we really have no adequate reason for believing that gravitation can act over a range exceeding a few hundred light years. Indeed, if gravitation has a limited range of action that could explain why stars form in separate space domains rather than converging into one central core to set up a reversal of the Big Bang scenario. The gravitational coupling across a galaxy can be one that is a chain coupling linking stars that are separated by less than the critical range of action. Note again that the words 'can be' are used deliberately, because students have much to gain by being shown that we are uncertain, which leaves them something to delve into in finding their own way forward in physics! From a teaching viewpoint, it is then of interest to estimate the gravitational potential at the centre of the sun, based solely on the solar mass. We know and so can derive v, the speed imparted to the mass m. When this calculation is performed that speed v is found to be much the same as the translational speed of our solar system through the cosmic background. Therefore, if the formation of the sun meant that gravitational energy was shed, then that could have been taken up as kinetic energy by imparting a translational non-thermal motion to mass seated within the sun. Should one view the relationship as coincidental or does it have significance cosmologically? The teacher cannot offer the certain answer to this question and so that may be a reason for not telling the student. However, physics education should not just be about what teachers know but should also give students an insight into what teachers do not yet know! Looking at the equation involving T, one may apply this to the vacuum medium in the near vicinity of Earth. Here the gravitational potential can also be calculated. The effect of the sun dominates that of Earth by a factor of 14, so we need not be too rigorous about specifying an altitude in making this calculation.
25.4.2005
Page 31 of 34
The energy kT is used because it is assumed that there are only two degrees of freedom in the vacuum medium, inasmuch as its action may resemble the properties we associate with antiferromagnetism. However, the exact numerical coefficient is not too important in making the proposition that the 2.7 K cosmic background radiation temperature is local evidence of the Principle of Conservation of Energy or that First Law of Thermodynamics in the vacuum itself. The known gravitational potential attributable to the solar system in the vicinity of Earth, plus that 2.7 K temperature as measured, lead us, from the energy conservation equation, to derive a 'measured' value of m. The mass of the virtual particles forming the vacuum medium can, therefore be shown to be approximately 0.04 times the mass of the electron*. The main thrust of these remarks is that the Principle of Conservation of Energy is a sufficient statement of whatever is intended by the First Law of Thermodynamics and it does have the merit of embracing actions that are not exclusively thermal or temperature-related. However, in its application we need to be open to energy exchanges involving the vacuum medium and we must then come to terms with the problem that so many physicists think it best to avoid, namely delving into the properties of a real vacuum medium. This is forbidden territory because it is outlawed by the theory of relativity. In summary, whilst students need to know how internal combustion engines and electric kettles conform with the principles of thermodynamics, the laws of thermodynamics must no longer be presented as barriers which preclude exploration of new energy fields. One governing condition suffices, the Principle of Conservation of Energy, and its application to a physical system embracing the total field environment and if we hypothesise laws of thermodynamics by appeal to 'experience' we should keep in mind that students of the future may yet 'experience' something that past textbook authority did not 'experience'. _____________________________________________________________________ * It is beyond the scope of this commentary to show in detail how one can confirm this value m by an independent test, save to say that the vacuum has the ability to define the value of the fine structure constant in terms of the ratio of the mass m to the mass me of the electron: hc/2e2 = (108)(4m/me)1/2 A derivation of the above is presented by the author in Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 40, 53-57 (1984). See also the derivation as equation (19) on p. 354 of 'Quantum Uncertainties', Nato ASI Series B: Physics Vol. 162 (Plenum Press) 1986. Footnote for this Energy Science Report: This value of m, the mass of the aether particle, was shown to be 1/25 of the electron mass at page 24 in the author's 1959 work entitled 'The Theory of Gravitation'.
APPENDIX B ANALYSIS OF THE A-FIELD REACTION 'A-field' signifies the 'aether' diamagnetic reaction field set up in space by gyromagnetic reaction of aether charge in response to the normal B-field. The experimental evidence from classical physics research on gyromagnetism in ferromagnetic rod specimens presents physicists with an experimental anomaly in that the observed change of
25.4.2005
Page 32 of 34
magnetic moment in relation to angular momentum has twice the value expected. The Dirac abstract 'spin' mathematical route to this factor of 2 is wrong and has led science away from the 'free energy' opportunities. The alternative is to accept the simple explanation as a diamagnetic reaction from free conduction charge in the metal. Then one is confronted with the need to extend the argument to the vacuum medium and accept that the aether contains charge in motion that can set up a reacting magnetic field, even under steady d.c. field conditions. This latter proposition has now been verified by experiment reported earlier in this Report. An insight into the formal theory as applied to reaction in metal is presented below, as it recently appeared in the author's U.K. Patent Specification No. 2,267,995. ___________
To determine the strength of the A-field reaction in a metal conductor one needs to note that each conduction electron moves at a high velocity and is subject an electric potential mainly sourced in the positive residual electric charge of the atoms which have shed those conduction electrons. These atoms are locked into the metal crystal structure and so the free electrons move under the constraint of a local electric force F(r) which has a component constraining the electron to move between collisions in general orbital paths of radius r centred on the atoms. If a magnetic field of strength B is also present this supplements the electric force by a component force Bev, where e is the electromagnetic charge of the electron and v its speed in circular orbit about an axis aligned with the direction of B. Note that the force F(r) is a restoring force proportional to displacement of the electron from a notional position of rest, assuming it has no motion. The restoring force factor depends on boundary shape but is the same throughout any metal structure having parallel planar boundaries, regardless of the direction of charge displacement. Its value is halved within a cylindrical metal structure provided the displacement is in a plane at right angles to the cylinder axis. Therefore a displacement through a distance r will involve adding potential energy of F(r)r/2. The force equation, assuming that B is zero, is simply: F(r) = mv2/r ............. (1) If one now sums the effective kinetic energy component attributable to v for all the free electrons in a unit volume of the metal and write that as energy density W, the equation gives: F(r)r/2 = mv2/2 = W .......... (2) Now bring in the action of the B field. This adds the force term in Bev to the left hand side of equation (1) and so changes equation (2) in the following way: F(r)r/2 + F(r)r/2 + Bevr/2 = W + W ........ (3) Next, note that the terms in F give rise to a potential energy and it is appropriate to bring the energy terms together on the right-hand side of the equation into a single energy density function that depends upon B. Denoting this energy density function as E, equations (2) and (3) combine to give: Bevr/2 = E ..............(4) The expression involving evr/2 is a measure of the reacting magnetic moment of each conduction
25.4.2005
Page 33 of 34
electron. It develops a back-field or reaction field which is denoted the 'A-field' and which, if scaled by a factor g, has the value: A = 4gevr/2 ................ (5) The B-field acting on each conduction electron is, therefore, a combined field effect produced by a primary field which we write as gB and this is offset by the field of strength A. Note that the same scaling factor has been used to modify the B field as is used to modify the reaction field. Reasons for this will be apparent in what follows, but one needs to keep in mind that a unity value must be assigned to g to comply with orthodox teachings on this subject. One can now write: B = gB - A .............. (6) Combining equations (4), (5) and (6): E = (gB - A)(A)/4g ............. (7) which is a simple relationship representing an energy quantity which tends to maximize because its negative potential energy component tends to a minimum. The variable in the equation is the value of the A-field. Differentiating equation (7) with respect to A shows that the energy density attributable to the B-field is a maximum when: gB - 2A = 0 .............. (8) which shows that the strength of the A-field reaction is exactly half of gB and, from equation (6) this means that g is precisely 2. Then, from equation (7) this, in turn, means that: E = B2/8 ............. (9) which is the conventional magnetic field energy density formula in the units we are using. The result of this analysis is that when a primary magnetic field acts on the free conduction electrons in a metal there is, inevitably, a half-field reaction, the A-field, which is opposed to that primary field. Since, in the past, one has been able to work with theory which presumes there is no such reaction, then the B-field which is known to be effective in the metal must owe its action to a magnetizing effect twice as strong as the B-field. The half-field reaction has passed unnoticed in experiments because one has failed to double the primary field action before halving it. Therefore, the moment of electric current attributable to the electron, which is represented by a term such as (evr/2), and which would otherwise be deemed to represent the reaction, must also be incremented by that same g-factor. This explains why the g-factor was introduced in equation (6). It makes sense of an otherwise impossible situation. Note that the half-field reaction is sensed in gyromagnetic reaction measurements, where observation based on reversing the ordered electron activity which is associated with magnetic polarization causes a proportional reversal of angular momentum. The ratio of the electrical current moment to the angular momentum, as measured, is twice that expected from conventional theory based on the known charge/mass ratio of the electron. This gyromagnetic ratio factor of two is the g-factor deduced above. The experiment confirms the theory presented. Note also that the interpretation of the gyromagnetic reaction in terms of the 'A-field' is indisputably strong, but it does require the concomitant recognition that there is an A-field vacuum reaction involving the charges which account for Maxwell displacement currents. This A-field reaction in the vacuum or aether is the basis on which inductive energy is stored as a magnetic field. Physicists have for most of the 20th century, at least until recent times, sought to avoid referring to the aether or recognizing it as an active energy medium, and this has been to the detriment of innovative energy
25.4.2005
Page 34 of 34
technology.
APPENDIX C
25.4.2005
POWER FROM SPACE: INERTIA AND GRAVITATION HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents Section Title Introduction Why is Inertia Important? Creation of Matter What is the Cause of Gravity? Personal Footnote by the Author APPENDIX A: The Energy-Mass Formula APPENDIX B: 'A Theory of Proton Creation' APPENDIX C: 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant' APPENDIX D: 'Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer' ***** page 1 2 6 8 10 14 15 16 17
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
POWER FROM SPACE: INERTIA AND GRAVITATION Introduction This Energy Science Report is one of a series concerned with new energy technology and the fundamental energy science that is involved. Much of that science is of record in published papers that lay dormant on the shelves of those university libraries that have kept abreast of the source tributaries that might eventually flow into mainstream physics. However, for some mysterious reason that science historians will one day need to explain, the physics community has built a dam which blocks much that could flow more rapidly into the knowledge stream. In particular it stands aloof and ignores evidence which tells us there is energy in abundance in a real space medium that regulates the quantum world. Those few scientists that have become aware of the enormous energy resource pervading the universe and extending into our immediate environment have, in the main, failed to see its technological potential. Being a pioneer who has researched this subject for more than forty years, and published comprehensive theoretical accounts of the way in which the vacuum field energy governs gravitation, inertia and determines all the fundamental constants of physics, this author has become well accustomed to 'peer review' rejection. Institutional interests fend off the intruder who does not want to build on their sinking foundations and who points to better ground on which to build. And so, those who profess to be the scientific establishment hold firm in their beliefs, not expecting the Earth to shake in any way which may force them to rebuild on a new base. This somewhat cynical introduction is presented in the hope that it will make readers pay more attention and cause them to help in bringing the world to its senses on just a few points about physics, before we are swept along by a tidal wave of technological change involving us in 'free energy'. The author, some time ago decided to arrest the research on his theory, realising that no one really cared and that the only way forward was for that research to await the emergence of a related technological breakthrough which could help mankind generally. Mankind has been made well aware of the genius of Albert Einstein and the importance of the relativistic equation E = Mc2, which says that energy E has mass M provided one is able to 'see', with the constant speed c of light referenced on one's own self, what it is that has that mass. There are those who know why E = Mc2 is relevant to
2 nuclear power, but the scientific genius of those 'expert' even in that field has not yet solved the mysteries of the true causal nature of gravitation and the property of inertia. Occasionally, of course, there are those who claim to understand inertia and confront us from time to time with their interpretation of their solution to that great mystery. Yet, always it seems, the opinions which penetrate the 'peer review' are those which 'conform' to tradition and go out of their way to comply with what is termed 'Lorentz invariance', which fits too closely in the Einstein mould and accounts for his failed attempts to explain inertia. It is because a group of scientists (Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff: Physical Review A 49 pp. 678-694, 1994) have now claimed attention by asserting a new Lorentz-invariant account of inertia in terms of the universal energy background and implying prospect for tapping that energy resource that this author feels obliged to write this Report. Why is Inertia Important? Inertia is the property which relates mass and motion, just as gravity is the property by which mass is drawn to other bodies by a force of mutual attraction. Ignoring the imaginary 'quarks', electricity is a property possessed by all truly fundamental particles of matter, in equal measure, represented by a universal unit of charge e, and we know that like polarity charges interact by mutual repulsion, whereas opposite polarity charges interact by mutual attraction. Inertia, gravitation and electricity are properties that are absolutely basic in Nature. They are the manifestation of energy that has suffered disturbance and is in search of equilibrium, whether seeking to avoid redeployment or seeking to become redeployed. One can always start with Einstein's ideas, but then do remember that he tried and failed to discover the unifying links between electricity, inertia and gravitation. One can heed what is said about the inertial theory of Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff by Robert Matthews writing in Science, vol. 263, pp. 612-613, 4 February 1994 under the title: 'Inertia: Does Empty Space Put Up the Resistance?'. Matthews discusses Einstein's failure in this quest and goes on to say: "Now three researchers think they have found the source of inertia - and it turns out to be much closer to home. Inertia, they say, comes from the apparently empty space that surrounds us all - or rather, from the buzz of activity that, according to quantum theory, fills even a perfect vacuum, where sub-atomic particles are being created and annihilated in the blink of an eye. It is this ever-present sea of energy that the researchers believe resists the acceleration of mass, and so creates inertia." So, we have our attention drawn to the notion that that sub-quantum sea of energy in space is the underlying essential activity that endows a particle with its inertia.
3 One has to imagine a particle, when accelerated, being pushed and shoved by that sea of energy in space with the result that it exhibits a property of preserving its motion and evidences inertial 'resistance' when accelerated. Now, it is this author's experience, based on the development of his own theory, that Nature prefers the simple life and does not, as it were, ever 'put the cart before the horse'. Whatever fills that empty space with energy will, at least so far as simple physics requires, have itself to comprise component particles. It is no use talking about 'radiation' when one does not understand 'energy' and one can hardly preach knowledge concerning 'energy' without nucleating that energy on a 'particle'. Remember, we are talking about 'motion' and, to say something moves, that something has to have a position and an existence. 'Fields' are expressed as mathematical symbols and exist in man's thoughts, but Nature has no way of knowing what we mean by a 'field'. Nature builds on particles and their motion and that then leads us to recognize what we call 'energy'. So, how can we really expect the particle to derive its inertial property from a background that is nothing other than other particles? No, the inertial nature of a particle has to be something intrinsic to that particle! What else is intrinsic to that particle? It has an electrical charge. We then can argue that the particle has form and is bounded so that that electric charge is confined into a limited volume of space centred on the particle. That gives it a measure of intrinsic energy, by the teachings of electrostatics, without us yet having spoken about motion. The word 'motion' if expressing speed or velocity is meaningless unless we can refer to a frame of reference. Such a frame, as an electromagnetic reference frame, is not intrinsic to the particle. If the 'motion' is an acceleration, a rate of change of velocity, then, and only then do we have a property intrinsic to that particle, because that electric charge in its confined state suffers internal disturbances as its electrical energy adapts to the accelerated motion. Such disturbances, as measured within the body form of the particle, are undoubtedly propagated within that body at a finite speed, which we denote c, and so, still intrinsic to the particle, we have energy E and speed c. We need something else to take our understanding forward and so we ask the question of how we would ourselves respond if Nature made us a single particle in a mystery environment that we could not see or sense. The answer, or at least this author's answer, is that we would do everything possible to resist our destruction. In short, we would conserve our energy. Nature must prescribe, therefore, that the third and governing element affecting that particle under normal conditions is that it will conserve its energy unless physically transmuted, as by breaking into three particles and sharing energy with a newly created particle pair.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
4 What does that particle have to do to conserve its intrinsic energy, as opposed to the other energy we think it has because it is moving relative to some external frame of reference? (This latter energy is 'kinetic energy'). The answer is that it must not shed energy by radiating disturbances through the empty space surrounding it. We now begin to see the link with quantum theory, not one where quantum theory explains the inertial property, but one where the particle's own conservative property can explain quantum theory, the latter being a feature imparted to the particle population constituting at least some of that background sea of energy in space. Physicists will now tell you that Larmor derived a formula which 'proved' that an electron when accelerated must radiate energy. Yet, if those wise physicists read up on the subject they will see that there is no 'proof' because the derivation is based on unproven assumptions. There are two assumptions. One is that energy is, in fact, capable of being 'radiated' as a wave or 'field' disturbance. Note that we now think of energy transfer in terms of particles (photons). The other assumption is that the particle is 'accelerated' by unspecified means or means, which if specified, are promptly eliminated from the analysis by relying on the energy supposedly radiated to the remote wave zone where the accelerating cause is not to be seen. The latter puts even further emphasis on the first assumption. Now, what this means is that we, in looking for the real truths, have substituted for the Larmor assumptions the simple attribute of 'energy conservation' and so denied the energy 'radiation' possibility. We can then rework Larmor's analysis and keep in place the influence of other charge which has to be present and influential in promoting the acceleration of the particle under study. Readers who perform this calculation (see Appendix A) using the correct formula relating electric energy E (proportional to e2) and the particle radius confining that charge e, find that there need be no energy transfer across that boundary of charge confinement. There is, however, a condition which emerges from the analysis. This is that the accelerating force, as known from the local action of the accelerating field, necessarily factored into the field energy equations, must be 'resisted' by the particle in a measure formulated by an expression in which E/c2 relates force and acceleration. Mass becomes a derived inertial property as does the formula E = Mc2, and both stem from the simple fact that Nature allows each and every particle in the universe to act conservatively in preserving its existence by denying radiation of energy. So, inertia is understood in the simplest possible way and E = Mc2 owes nothing to Einstein's imagination and everything to energy conservation principles. The background sea of space energy is not a party essential to give account of this basic property. The latter only features in the collective actions and particle collision processes as energy is pooled by electrodynamic activity.
5 Concerning the latter, note that collections of charged particles sharing oscillations, as in a radio antenna, involve mutual effects. For N charges e, accelerated together, the intrinsic conserved energy accounting for the mass of N particles relates to Ne, whereas the mutual interaction in electrical energy terms, given an overall confining space for the cluster of charge, is proportional to (Ne)2. It follows, therefore, that since we do not think in terms of the mass properties of mutual interactions, or 'mutual acceleration energy', we confront three prospects: (a) The radio antenna can be a transmitter of energy as a function of charge acceleration, but only in proportion to N(N-1) and not in proportion to N2. However, since N is measured in countless billions, this poses no practical problem and shows why one can dare to challenge the Larmor formula without upsetting the radio physicists. The 'mutual acceleration energy' of a cluster of like polarity charges must add to the inertia of that cluster, but note that the particles have a very small radius whereas the cluster is relatively very large, which diminishes the inertial contribution. When particles are part of a vast sea of action characteristic of space, in a neutral mix of positive and negative polarities, they must involve energy that one might classify as 'mutual acceleration energy' subject to fluctuation and yet, somehow, form part of a system in which equilibrium is preserved. Given that inertia is dependent upon action intrinsic to a particle, one can then contemplate mutual actions as giving a base frame for collective reference of electric actions. In other words it seems probable that the locally applicable frame of electromagnetic reference is that set in a frame associated with the collective energy activity of a local sea of vacuum particles, otherwise known as the 'zero-point background field'.
(b)
(c)
In summary, the property of inertia is not dependent upon interaction with the vacuum field and the energy in space as suggested by Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff. That space energy background is, however, likely to play its role in determining the frame of reference for the energy of motion (speed) of a particle. This becomes a probability when one brings to bear the argument that the energy added to a particle owing to its motion is energy added in creating its satellite companions in the nearby field. This activity takes the form of a statistical presence of created particle pairs, leptons, typically electrons and positrons, which can become quite prolific and add enormous supplementary mass as a core particle acquires a speed close to that of light. The so-called 'relativistic mass' increase with speed then becomes an attribute of inertia possessed not by the core particle or by the zero-point energy background but by its satellite companions in their individual form. From a practical energy viewpoint, the author sees no route to tapping 'free energy' by this link between the inertial property of particles and the sea of energy in space. The only link which can give access to that energy is via the quantum coupling of that medium,
6 its so-called 'Zitterbewegung' or jitter motion, with electrons in atomic orbits and particularly with ferromagnetism. The latter is the subject of the 'Power from Magnetism' studies in this Energy Science Report series. Creation of Matter The fact that the basic particles, protons and electrons, which form matter exist and have inertia and mass in compliance with E = Mc2 means that Nature has its own way of giving up energy to create those particles. Is this really a one way process? The proton and the electron are not listed in particle data as having a finite lifetime. Do they really live for ever? If so, then one can think of the universe being created once and only once and not existing in a background seething with energy that keeps some kind of equilibrium with matter whilst fluctuating transiently to shed and recapture energy as some of that matter is created and annihilated. Given that we can 'see' that when matter is created it comes to us in two 'stable' forms of different charge polarity, the electron and the proton, of greater mass by a factor of 1836, we have the clear evidence that Nature sheds energy which is seen to materialize in these particular forms, presumably only because they have the longer chance of survival than the myriad of other particle forms that one could conceive. It is only logical, and involves very little thought, to recognize that if the proton and the electron were to decay and return their mass energy to the background activity in space, so, in immediately reasserting energy equilibrium as between matter and that background, those particles would be recreated. They may not be created in the first instance as a proton-electron pair, but they could develop from a kind of chemistry of reactions involving leptons in various forms, and particularly muons, and in the end the stable particle forms of proton and electron must emerge. In short, one must accept that the proton and the electron do have their own characteristic lifetimes. They need not be created and annihilated in paired relationship because the electron will undoubtedly decay and be recreated numerous times between events involving proton creation. Given that this is the case, the question of energy radiation by an accelerated electron might seem to be of no importance and merely an academic issue. One then finds, using the Larmor formula already mentioned, that if it were applicable to the electron in orbit in an atomic electron shell and if the intrinsic self-energy of the electron were to be radiated, the lifetime of the electron would be of microsecond order. Yet the electron lifetime is most certainly of the order of 10-13 seconds, as can be inferred from its ability to 'tunnel' through potential barriers as if such a time factor has meaning. It 'tunnels' through that barrier by the expedient of decaying on one side of the barrier and finding it desirable energy-wise to reappear by creation on the other side of the barrier.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
7 However, if we use this argument to discount the need for challenging the derivation of the Larmor formula, so we lose that physical basis for understanding inertia as expressed by E = Mc2. It is a trap we must avoid falling into, because understanding inertia is so important as it is the stepping stone for the onward understanding of the physical connection with gravitation. In particular, by deriving the property of inertia as having a 'first principle' dependence upon the energy conservation response of a discrete electric particle when subjected to external influence, we know that all such discrete charge forms, if truly fundamental, will exhibit a mass property. It follows that the background sea of energy in space must have mass and yet we cannot sense that mass directly in the usual way, which is by its weight. The energy in free space has, therefore, some unusual properties in a gravitational sense. A factor in this is the consideration of form. A body having weight we can measure in a laboratory has shape and is bounded in some way. It has a centre of gravity that can be identified. Boundary conditions are important when calculating gravitational interactions. As with an electric charge within a uniform continuum of charge, the forces exerted on that charge when displaced a unit distance depend not just upon the charge density of that charge but upon the shape of whatever it is that limits its boundaries. A charge displacement in a spherically bounded charge continuum is subject to one third of the restoring force rate of a charge bounded between two planar surfaces of virtually infinite extent. Who, however, is ready to say how that background continuum of the world of zero-point energy is bounded? It does matter, because a 19th century theorem bearing the name Earnshaw has well established the fact that the aether cannot comprise electrical particles in a neutral combination whilst exibiting any stable form that could define a structure. Yet, the latter is needed to give basis for determining the universal constants and particularly the finestructure constant. The one form that eludes Earnshaw's theorem is that for which the particles in the structure all have like polarity and are set in a background continuum charge of opposite polarity. The boundary conditions limiting the space energy are, in this author's opinion, planar and each such plane defines the separation between domains of 'space' and 'antispace' in the sense that protons and electrons predominate on one side, whereas positrons and antiprotons predominate on the other side. Proceeding, from this we need to understand how gravity comes into the picture, but our starting point is that there is a mass property throughout empty space and, for some reason, we cannot sense the linear momentum property. It is almost as if one is dealing with a perfectly incompressible fluid in which energy can be stored by motion but transfer to matter of a net linear momentum is impossible, though spin of a spherical body of the fluid can occur with energy storage and angular momentum.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
8 What is the Cause of Gravity? It is extremely easy for the author to carry on in this style and give account of the nature of gravity but there is little point in rewriting what is of record in refereed and published scientific periodicals. Suffice it to say that, just as no mechanic could contemplate building a machine which failed to take account of dynamic balance, so Nature in providing a dynamic sea of energy subject to that 'Zitterbewegung' oscillation could not possibly avoid also providing the counterbalance feature. That counterbalance feature is provided by a population of particles dedicated to that objective. The quasi-stable structured background of space gives the firm basis on which Nature builds to determine the fundamental constant of action we name after Max Planck, but that is merely a catalyst regulating the interplay between the background space energy and matter. The space energy is mainly seated in mu-mesons, which are quite distinct from the particle system that defines the vacuum structure. However, the third essential part of this space 'machine' system is the graviton population which provides that dynamic balance in a way that involves minimal distortion of that lattice structure. That 'distortion' is small because the gravitons have greater mass than protons and so displace only a minute amount of continuum charge, but as they have motion spaced away from the main lattice, the latter determining the frame of electromagnetic reference, so, in measure related to the mass they balance dynamically, they give rise to forces of mutual electrodynamic attraction, namely a 'force of gravitation'. This is an extremely simple account of the nature of gravitation, the real challenge being that of showing how the precise value of the Constant of Gravitation G can be derived to conform with the theory. Of course, one could not come to this picture of the underworld of space without thinking as a mechanic with some electrical skills. The mathematicians who dominate physical theory and seek to develop equations displaying properties of symmetry and having aesthetic properties are not thinking of a real world in which the 'balance' is inertial and not necessarily symmetrical. One has only to take note of the blind reliance which mathematicians place upon Maxwell's wave equations to realise how easy they have found it to wander away from and out of the real world. How can an electric wave displacement propagate through space by its lateral oscillations if the field has energy and so mass and yet do this without that counterbalance? Where in the Maxwell equations do we see the formulation of the dynamic counter-balance, the wave which must accompany the propagating primary wave as an anti-phase partner? If one says it is not necessary then one is not thinking in terms of a real physical environment but indulging in fantasy by presenting a form of mathematics which may seem to work in some limited situations but yet fails to give that physical account needed to understand why it is that the universe holds together. Without the dynamic balance in
9 energy transfer across space and in energy storage in space and, indeed, without the consequent property of gravitation, the violent universe, like any violent out-of-balance machine, would break up into chaos devoid of form. As it is the universe gives us Planck's constant and the Constant of Gravitation and these are very easily explained and derived, once we have found the secret of why a particle has inertia. At least, this author has found that task somewhat easy, in the formal analytical sense. What has been enormously frustrating and excessively difficult has been the obstructive effect of the Einstein doctrine and the related disbelief in the existence of a aether. It is, to this author, quite remarkable to see so many errors perpetuated by so many scientists who live in the belief that the vacuum is empty of energy, that Maxwell's wave equations have sufficient meaning without there being something missing to explain dynamic balance and go even further in thinking that a photon can convey energy at the speed of light, when a particle travelling at the speed of light has infinite energy! It is incredible that the scientific community has been willing to tolerate the socalled 'wave-particle duality' problem, thereby giving up on resolving why it is that waves promote energy transfer in a sea of energy, as if carried by a particle travelling with the wave through space from A to B. Surely everyone should realize that the wave disturbance is all that 'travels', whereas the energy background absorbs energy quanta at A and sheds energy quanta at B, as if that energy has moved at the speed of light. If one takes away the energy background, the aether, and then finds that particles of photon energy have to travel at the speed of light one has immediately been inconsistent in ignoring the fact that mass energy becomes infinite at that speed. On the other hand, if one thinks of a wave as a disturbance of the energy in space but not as a transporter of energy, so the photon becomes an event in demise at A and an event in creation at B, and the question of the Larmor radiation of an accelerated charge is solved ab initio. There is no energy radiation and the E = Mc2 expression for inertia then emerges as a derived expression based on energy conservation, which was our starting point. A discerning reader might see the 'mechanic' as being in trouble in building his model of the vacuum energy machine with three major components, a structured electrical particle array moving inertially in counterbalance with a graviton system and an intermediate virtual mu-meson system occupying the inertial intermediate position. How can there be electrodynamic interaction from the gravitons and not from the charged structure? Well, the answer to that is again simple. The inertial frame is that in the intermediate position and the frame of reference having physical effect is that determined by the moving charged structure. In physics we have assumed that the inertial frame and the electromagnetic frame are one and the same, but we have not proved it. On the contrary, though experience on a macroscopic scale and Einstein doctrine tell us that there is something in common between these two frames, there is other evidence linked to Heisenberg's Uncertainty
10 Principle and quantum theory. This has been interpreted as a situation where the motion and position are both uncertain but they relate in a manner connected with Planck's constant. Imagine the 'structure', which we take to be the frame we sense electromagnetically, to move in a quantum orbit around the inertial centre, dynamically in balance with that graviton system. The 'structure' has a position that is uncertain in measure related to that orbital radius and a momentum that is uncertain in measure related to speed in orbit. That speed and that radius when multiplied together is a finite and fixed quantity; it is certain, yet position and momentum are uncertain! The 'mechanic' knew this when he built the machine and Heisenberg suspected the design 'principle' without realising that this very point is the real clue to the nature of gravitation! The 'mechanic' can also be seen to have built a universal timekeeper in that the orbital motion has to be one that is synchronous on a universal scale, as otherwise the structure that is moving will be distorted and will break up. Therefore, time itself is woven into the fabric of the space energy background and, again, one wonders how it is that 'time dilation' based on different observers in relative motion can be tolerated in physical theory and why Lorentz invariance has become a law unto itself. The author can but hope the reader will research this subject in his or her own way, beginning by reference to the few of the author's papers appended to this report. Whether or not the reader accepts what is said is of little consequence, provided, however, that the reader has at least seen a glimmer from that raging quantum inferno of energy that is there in our immediate space environment. Such a reader will, it is hoped, then be ready to be attentive to claims made by those now working in the 'free energy' field when they come to declare 'Eureka'. Personal Footnote by the Author The above account about the Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff inertia theory began by referring to the article in 'Science' by Robert Matthews who writes for the Sunday Telegraph in London, England. It was of interest to me to read in that article: "Their argument draws on a curious quantum vacuum phenomenon first described by the British physicist Paul Davies (now at the University of Adelaide in Australia) and William Unruh of the University of British Columbia in the mid1970s. If you move at a constant speed through the quantum sea of virtual particles, it looks the same in all directions. But as soon as you start to accelerate through it, theory predicts that the vacuum gives the appearance of being a tepid 'sea' of heat radiation." "Cosmologist Paul Wesson of the University of Waterloo, Canada, an authority on the links between the subatomic and cosmic worlds, is 'glad that someone is trying to return to the question of inertia again'. But he is concerned about 'the astrophysical and cosmological implications of the work'. Wesson's concern centres on the cosmological constant, best known as the add-on to Einstein's
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
11 equations of general relativity that endows free space with extra energy and gives it a gravitational effect." So here we have two authorities on the subject, one declaring that the energy of the vacuum appears hotter 'from the viewpoint of a particle' simply because that particle accelerates, and the other who is 'concerned' and is 'glad' that someone is trying to explain inertia. Much of what I have described in the above Report is the subject of my 1972 book 'MODERN AETHER SCIENCE'. It was Paul Davies, I believe, who at that time was called upon to review that book, branding it as 'Physics in Fairyland'. Yet I would say that it would indeed be a 'fairyland universe' if it were seen to glow with heat when someone sitting on an accelerated particle is looking at it but yet appear to cool suddenly if that acceleration ceases. If Davies is right it would seem that all we need to do to extract heat by allowing the vacuum medium to shed energy by cooling is to cause matter to oscillate and become a receiver of energy! This I do not believe, but I do believe, as I have explained on page 116 of 'MODERN AETHER SCIENCE' that "when a charge is set in motion it will have to find its own equilibrium via the catalytic action of the aether, exchanging energy with other free charge present ... the net effect being that the catalytic action can transfer kinetic energy between the charges, a phenomenon we well know from the behaviour of the electrical transformer." It is my contention that before we waste time trying to understand imagined apparitions of heat deployment in space, we should first explain how, in the laboratory, energy devoid of the independent observer as a local carrier of the action, finds its way from an electrical circuit into the vacuum medium as electrical inductance and then comes back again when we switch off the current. There is no point in scientists thinking they can explain the cosmology of the universe when, as is blatant fact, they cannot explain the nature of the energy processes involved in electrical inductance. The explanations on offer are empirical, just as if there were no such thing as 'cosmology' but only observation of stellar objects. If inductance requires acceptance of a real aether medium and not just a mathematical four-space formulation, so much of cosmology, with its reliance on symmetry and invariance, is open to question. One needs, as said above, to avoid forcing an argument forward by putting 'the cart before the horse'. Paul Wesson, I remember as a young scientist who had read about my theory and came to my home to discuss it even before beginning his graduate research study. I recall that he was impressed by my account of gravitation and tried to pursuade his academic supervisors at Cambridge to allow him to pursue the theory as his Ph.D. thesis subject, a request which was firmly denied!
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
12 So, should Paul Wesson come to read the above account, having stated that he is "glad that someone is trying to return to the question of inertia again", I send my greetings and invite him to look up and reread my account of inertia that was in my 1966 book 'THE THEORY OF GRAVITATION'. It is still the same, 28 years on, as a theory which says that an accelerated charge does not radiate energy, leading, as equation (1.18) on page 15 of that book, to: Electric field energy = mass of the field times c2 followed immediately by the words: "The realization that an electric field has the property of inertia is fully supported by the derivation of that equation". I have provided in Appendix A an extract from pages 80 - 84 of my 1980 book 'PHYSICS UNIFIED' to show the reader the formal analysis by which E = Mc2 is derived as an account of inertia based on energy conservation by accelerated charge. I have in APPENDIX B, by my paper 'A Theory of Proton Creation': Physics Essays, 1, 72-76 (1988), shown how the mu-meson energy sea in space is active in creating the proton. Similarly in APPENDIX C, by my paper 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant': Physics Essays, 2, 173-179 (1989), I show how G is determined by the space energy medium. Then, to round off the subject of this Report, I present by APPENDIX D, my paper 'Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer': Hadronic Journal, 11, 169-176 (1988). This latter paper solves a problem I struggled with for many years as I sought to deduce the full physical basis for steady-state electrodynamic interaction and explain how there could be balance of action and reaction forces in the electrodynamics that connects with gravitation. The propagation of action at the speed of light with all the mystery of the retarded 'solutions', the mathematical equations which confound textbooks on the subject and are never applied in practice, is clarified by this paper. Written in 1988 the paper complements my efforts to advance my earlier research into hadron electrodynamics, meaning my interest in the anomalous energy behaviour of heavy ions in electric discharges. However, for the general reader I commend study of the paper, having in mind the age-old question about action-at-a-distance forces and Newtonian interaction versus the propagated action that features in Einstein's theory. The action is summed up in the title of the paper. There is instantaneous action-ata-distance with spontaneous energy transfer both at the action source and at the seat of the distant reaction, but that action is with the local space energy medium and is followed by
13 a retarded adjustment of energy in the zero-point energy background as equilibrium of that sea of energy takes its time to recover. I conclude by thanking the Editors of Physics Essays and Hadronic Journal for permission to reproduce the appended papers. 26th April 1994 DR. HAROLD ASPDEN ENERGY SCIENCE LIMITED c/o SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB ENGLAND
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
14 APPENDIX A The Energy-Mass Formula In the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 6, published in 1994, this Appendix comprised a copy of a section of text between pages 80 and 84 of the author's 1980 book 'PHYSICS UNIFIED' published by Sabberton Publications, the distributers of this Report. It begins with a four-line quote from Einstein's 1905 basic paper. However, in this 2003 PDF version of the Report, it suffices to provide a link to those book pages as they are of record, also in PDF form, on the authors website. To see those five pages use the link below: http://www.aspden.org/books/Pu/pupp80to84.pdf
15
APPENDIX B A Theory of Proton Creation In the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 6, published in 1994, this Appendix comprised a copy of a paper printed in the Canadian periodical Physics Essays. This paper, published in 1988, presented the updated version of one of the primary themes of the authors theoretical work. Understanding the creation of the proton in the onward progress of our understanding of the physics which governs our universe. It is a key feature now included as Chapter 4 in the authors new work: The Physics of Creation, which now (June 2003) appears in full on the authors website www.aspden.org. However, here the object is to provide, for the record, a copy of Energy Science Report No. 6 and this Appendix, to be complete, requires access to that Physics Essays paper. To see that paper in PDF format use the link below: http://www.aspden.org/books/Asp/1988c.pdf
16
APPENDIX C The Theory of the Gravitation Constant In the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 6, published in 1994, this Appendix comprised a copy of a paper printed in the Canadian periodical Physics Essays. A mention of energy in transit in the copy of this paper that was included in that printed version of Report No. was marked with an asterisk drawing attention to an added footnote. This footnote was: [* Energy in transit has to be seen as a ripple in a large pool of energy. Just as a ripple in a pool of water travels at the wave velocity, so the energy ripple travels at the speed of light, but neither the water in the pool nor any energy moves at that wave velocity.] This related to the discussion of the electrodynamic action in the context of its relevance to gravitation, it being essential for energy to deploy in the field medium, which, absent an aether as such, requires energy to travel at the speed of light, whereas matter travelling at that speed would need to have infinite mass. The presence of the aether as an energy medium is essential if one is to interpret the empirical evidence in a way that makes sense in physical terms. To see that paper in PDF format use the link below: http://www.aspden.org/books/Asp/1989b.pdf
17
APPENDIX D Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer In the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 6, published in 1994, this Appendix comprised a copy of a paper printed in the U.S. periodical Hadronic Journal. At the time this paper was written, it was deemed by the author that understanding electrodynamic interaction as between particles of matter and their associated graviton accompaniment was vital to an in-depth understanding of the true nature of gravitational force. Although the author has, in the new book The Physics of Creation mentioned in Appendix B above, given reason for modifying his opinion on the role of electrodynamics in gravitational action, this paper warrants consideration and needs to stand on the published record of the authors work. Note also that it was written at a time when the author had been distracted by some fascinating observations by E. W. Silvertooth (now deceased) who had claimed to sense motion through the aether. This was mentioned on pp. 312 and 313 of that paper, but, nevertheless, in presenting the paper as Appendix D of Report No. 6, the author had reason to include the following footnote as an addition at the end of that paper: [* Although the author has anxiously waited for the Silvertooth Experiment to be confirmed or disproved, there has been no final clarification reported. Therefore, at the time of writing this Report (April, 1994), the author has decided to consolidate his theory, adhering to the position expressed on the EM (electromagnetic) reference frame in his book Physics Unified] The latter book is now of record in PDF form on the authors website www.aspden.org whereas the paper, the subject of this Appendix, can also be seen in PDF form by using the following link: http://www.aspden.org/books/Asp/1988a.pdf
Page 1 of 37

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1996
Sabberton Publications P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England ISBN 0 85056 016 0
Contents Preliminary Remarks The Correa Project The Root of the Problem The Dilemma Confronted Operational Characteristics of Correa Discharge Device Performance Data of the Correa Discharge Device The Vapour Reaction Hypothesis The Author's 1977 Plasma Discharge Device Spence's 1986 Energy Conversion System Chernetskii Vacuum Energy Breakthrough A Concluding Note APPENDICES: I: Why the Earth is not a Self-Excited Dynamo II: The Thunderball - An Electrostatic Phenomenon Listing of Published Work of Dr. Harold Aspden
*****
25.4.2005
Page 2 of 37

Introduction This Energy Science Report is one of a series concerned with new energy technology and the fundamental energy science that is involved. It is devoted exclusively to the research findings of Dr. Paulo Correa and Mrs. Alexandra Correa of Concord, Ontario, Canada and seeks to explain the fundamental physics underlying their remarkable experimental discovery. The Correa technology pioneers one of the four routes now opening up and promising to give us access to a plentiful and abundant source of what is coming to be termed `free energy'. These all can contribute in their various ways to an energy future free from pollution, but all, at this time, trespass on forbidden territory, as judged by orthodox physicists and so are not attracting mainstream scientific interest. This leaves the field open for exploration and exploitation by the few who do have the needed technical competence, the inspiration and an independence of spirit. The four avenues can be classified as (1) cold fusion, (2) ferromagnetism (3) vacuum spin and (4) electrodynamics. Each involves a mysterious input source of excess energy and each is destined to impact the world of technology in the near future. It is debatable at this time whether events will confirm true nuclear 'cold fusion' as the source of heat in the well publicized pioneer work of Fleischmann and Pons. It may in fact be another manifestation of the 'vacuum spin' phenomenon, by creating in an aqueous electrolyte, or even in the cathode itself, conditions somewhat analogous to those prevailing in the Correa apparatus. Indeed, there seems to be no doubt that the Correa technology itself bridges two of the above 'excess energy' categories, electrodynamics and vacuum spin. The Correa method is probably the most advanced of these emerging new energy technologies, being fully reproducible, well researched with its test findings well documented in and protected by granted U.S. patents. It already allows us to tap energy from space itself, or rather the vacuum field activity that fills space, and in contrast with the alternative methods it offers what may prove to be a mobile light-weight power source compared with the heavy apparatus needed where magnets and rotating machinery are involved. Unlike 'cold fusion' which generates low grade heat output, the Correa technology generates electricity at power voltage levels. The physics involved in understanding the source of energy in the Correa discharge tube is as basic as that required to understand the energy source which sets up the force of gravity. Both are seated in an electrodynamic action involving, in the main, heavy ions and, indeed, the electrodynamics of the interactions between heavy ions are not well understood by scientists. This is why they have failed to solve the mysteries of gravitation and the problem of field unification and why they have missed seeing the way forward to the new energy technology which we are about to discuss in this Report. Below we will come to describe the operating principles of the Correa invention and the action by which energy is extracted from the aether. The reader who is impatient and curious to learn some details about the technology may wish to jump ahead to read the section between pp. 6 and 8 and then from p. 17 before coming back to read what immediately follows. The sceptical scientist who does not expect to believe what is evidently being claimed will be served best by following the discourse as it now develops. Preliminary Remarks Having just stated that "the electrodynamics of the interactions between heavy ions are not well understood by scientists" I see it as important to justify this statement before I venture to criticize other aspects of basic physical theory relevant to the new energy field. I will simply quote a few
25.4.2005
Page 3 of 37
passages from the published specification of British patent application GB 2,002,953 which I, as inventor, applied for in 1978. The title of the patent application was 'Ion accelerators and energy transfer processes'. Textbook doctrine on the subject has not progressed since that time. "Electrical engineering has developed using the simplest formula (for electrodynamic interaction between electric charges in motion) and few today would concede that there is any question about the universal validity of this formula, the so-called Lorentz formula. More informed teachers of electrical engineering have kept the problem in mind and express caution. Professor E. B. Moullin, who was President of the Institution of Electrical Engineers and Professor of Electrical Engineering at Cambridge University at a time when the applicant was engaged on Ph.D. research in electromagnetism (1950-1953), wrote in the 1955 edition of his 'Principles of Electromagnetism': 'It is useless to speculate about the effects of electricity moving in a particular piece of circuit until we have discovered further laws of electromagnetism' This appears at page 26 of this Oxford University Press publication." "In a book by A. Von Engel entitled 'Ionized Gases', 1965 Edition also by Oxford University Press, there is the statement at page 285: 'There is no final answer to the question of whether the primary electrons find in the plasma an artifice which without extracting too much energy is able to transform the more or less uniform electron energy into an energy distribution which is needed to satisfy ion production in the gas. In fact it has been suggested, as a result of certain probe measurements, that there is a strong positive space charge accumulated in front of the cathode, so intense that the space potential is considerably higher than the discharge voltage and at least higher than the lowest excitation potential. How this space charge develops and how electrons have random energies sufficient to overcome the retardation in the negative field between the space charge and the anode is still an open question.' Earlier on page 273 he wrote: 'One of the most puzzling problems of the arc discharge is the functioning of the cathode of the cold arc. Cathodes of Cu, Ag, liquid Hg, and many other metals are examples of this type. It can be stated from the very outset that no final solution of this problem has yet been found.' Berneryd et al (Direct Current, vol. 6, 1961, pp. 81-85) studied instabilities of discharges and found positive ions to have energies very much higher than suggested by theory. Benford et al (New Scientist, vol. 56, 1972, pp. 514-516), writing about electron beams in relation to fusion, declared that a 1.3 MeV electron system accelerated gas ions to energies as high as 20 MeV. They said that the origin of the fields was a subject of speculation. Stock (Journal of Physics D, vol. 6, 1973, p. 988) found that ionization current calculated from electron energies were up to one thousand times smaller than those observed." Now, in quoting the above I have added the underlining to the marked passages to emphasize my point that the scientific èxperts' in the field do not understand the reason for these energy anomalies produced by electrical discharges through ionized gas. The scenario giving these problems is one where the discharge involves a predominant presence of heavy ions rather than the mere arc discharge of electrons freed as by thermionic emission. It applies to current in what are termed 'cold cathode' discharge tubes. The passages quoted above should be kept in mind when reading about the technological breakthrough disclosed by the Correa inventions. The phenomenon involved has been turned to account by generating electrical power output far in excess of the input power used and so it is no longer a question of scientists declaring, as they do regularly, that they understand so much about the
25.4.2005
Page 4 of 37
laws of thermodynamics that they can deny this possibility without even considering the evidence. They do not understand their own experimental findings of clear record in this particular technical field and so are in no position to say that excess power generation is impossible by virtue of a 'law' prescribed by past 'authority' in ignorance of the experimental facts just quoted. We have here to confront the reality of this situation, namely that energy from a mystery source can be harnessed technologically, and this Report aims to explain this as well as pointing to the source of that energy and showing where accepted physics stands in need of correction. To appreciate in full measure of what this Report is about it is recommended that the reader should procure copies of the three U.S. Patents granted to Dr. Paulo N. Correa and Mrs. Alexandra N. Correa: U.S. Patent No. 5,416,391 (issued May 16, 1995), U.S. Patent No. 5,449,989 (issued September 12, 1995) and U.S. Patent No. 5,502,354 (issued March 26, 1996). The disclosure in the specifications contains experimental facts presented in a form which amounts to an academic dissertation or degree thesis and, as I see it, the disclosure in these patents cannot now be ignored owing to their clear showing that we already have access to the hidden energy source which one can presume powered the creation of the universe. I can also interject here a note added since the main body of this text was written to advise that a full description of the Correa project together with a copy of the specification of U.S. Patent 5,416,391 has been published in the Vol. 2, No. 7, 1996 issue of Infinitie Energy (ISSN 1081-6372), Editor-inChief and Publisher Eugene F. Mallove Sc.D. and that publication warrants the fullest attention. Still as part of these preliminary remarks I further draw attention to the fact that my paper: 'The Law of Electrodynamics', appeared 27 years ago in the Journal of the Franklin Institute, 287, 171-183 (1969). It explained how one could justify, by simple dynamic analysis based on empirical data, the fact that in an electrical discharge through heavy ions there is an axial electrodynamic force acting on the ions that is (M/m)i2, where M/m is the ratio of ion mass to electron mass and i is the current carried by the heavy ions. I stated that many authors had found anomalous cathode reaction forces in discharge studies and quoted E. Kobel, Physical Review, 36, p.1636 (1930) as measuring that anomalous cathode reaction force and showing that it was proportional to the square of current and far greater than any value one could compute from a pinch pressure in the discharge filament. Later, in 1977, my paper: 'Electrodynamic Anomalies in Arc Discharge Phenomena', appeared in IEEE Transactions of Plasma Science, PS-5, 159-163 (1977). Here I had in mind the subject of my patent application as referenced above. See the quoted text on its p. 161 and the last five lines on p. 163, where the action was deemed to accelerate ions into the cathode as a means for generating heat. I had by then become aware of the possibility that we could tap vacuum field energy and generate heat anomalously by harnessing the electrodynamic forces set up in an axial discharge involving heavy ions. However, my circumstances did not allow me to take the proposition forward experimentally. The invention, the subject of that patent, was aimed at tapping the zero-point field energy to produce 'excess energy' heat by the electrodynamic ion discharge action which sustains a positive space charge adjacent the cathode. In contrast, as we shall see below, the Correa invention is able to produce electrical power directly by discharging that positive charge in pulses drawn through a secondary output circuit. The energy source in both cases is the same, as is the principle for setting up the positively ionized plasma and holding it transiently stable. By 1985 a new kind of discharge anomaly had been reported as a result of passing very high current through water. I showed a simple derivation of my version of the law of electrodynamics and commented on this anomaly in my paper: 'A New Perspective on the Law of Electrodynamics', Physics Letters, 111A, 22-24 (1985). This referred to the incomprehensible enormous explosive effects found from pulsed ion discharges in pure water and pointed again to the reason advocated
25.4.2005
Page 5 of 37
earlier, namely that scaling factor of m/m. Separately in my paper: 'Anomalous Electrodynamic Explosions in Liquids', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS-14, 282-285 (1986), I presented a more detailed analysis of the incredibly high speed at which ions are driven into an electrode, in defiance of known physics. In the Correa invention to be described there is a slowing down of these fast ions by causing them to transfer energy into the build-up of electric charge in the abnormal glow discharge in front of the cathode, which energy can be drawn off as output electrical power, rather than as heat. To complete this preliminary account I refer also to my paper: 'The Thunderball - An Electrostatic Phenomenon', presented at the 'Electrostatics 1983' conference held at Oxford University, and documented in Inst. Phys. Conf. Series No. 66, at pp. 179-184. As can be seen from the data presented in the third Correa patent referenced above, the operation of the Correa discharge tubes at low pulse frequency indicates that energy in excess of 1,000 joules can be stored in the plasma of each discharge pulse. This implies an enormous capacitance and voltage gradients that should be far in excess of those actually prevailing. Indeed, for such energy to be contained as electric charge energy in a plasma confined within the Correa tube one would expect voltage gradients expressed in billions of V/m, unless some compensating reaction suppresses that field. This energy of 1,000 J in a volume of plasma of the cubic cm. order is an energy density of some 109 J/m3, which is of the same order as that known to exist in thunderballs produced by lightning discharges. The Correa invention therefore, in a sense, mimics the action of lightning discharges in compacting energy into plasma balls which we see as the thunderball anomalies of atmospheric electricity. The subject paper, which will be reproduced later in this Report as Appendix II, explained how radial electric displacement, as opposed to the transverse displacement we know from Clerk Maxwell's theory, can induce `vacuum spin' or àether rotation' which permits such energy densities to be stored in an electrically quasi-stable manner at low voltage gradients. The Correa technology, it will be suggested, does therefore rely on `vacuum spin' for its storage function, whilst setting up the positive plasma in the discharge tube by electro-dynamic confinement in an axial sense, as opposed to the electromagnetic `pinch' sense that features in fusion reactor research. However, though it succeeds in sustaining confinement for the pulse period, the Correa device it is not powered by a fusion process. Indeed, since this author presented the subject paper at the conference at Oxford University he has become aware of independent research in three countries on electromagnetic machines which overheat owing to the low voltages and very high current involved, but which nevertheless draw energy anomalously from the àether' by setting up radial electric fields in a conductive disc spinning in a magnetic field. The Correa technology taps this same `vacuum spin' source of energy and the subject paper published by the Institute of Physics in U.K. points to the aether phenomenon involved. It is of interest also to mention that geophysicists and cosmologists have not been able to explain the magnetism of the Earth or the Sun in terms of unipolar charge rotating with that body, even though a connection was recognized which gave basis to the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis. This was not just because they discovered that the magnetic field reverses periodically but because the charge needed would develop those same electric field gradients of billions of V/m that are somehow avoided in the Correa tube. This really is an interesting subject of research, all connected with the evident fact that charge displacement in the aether cancels that electric field but does not cancel the magnetic field! I therefore see the Correa research as having important implications for the interpretation of several phenomena in cosmology. See also Appendix I, where I explain why the alleged self-excited dynamo theory for the geomagnetic field is quite untenable.
25.4.2005
Page 6 of 37
I refer in this connection also to 'Space, Energy and Creation', my privately published paper, for use on the occasion of a lecture delivered at the University of Cardiff in 1977. Copies are available from Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England, the publishing source of this Report. This was a lecture delivered by the author as an invited speaker addressing students in the Physics Department at that university. It dealt with the subject of anomalous electrodynamic acceleration of ions in plasma discharges and explained why this was relevant to the induction of 'vacuum spin' which was intimately linked with the energy and momentum aspects of creation of stars and planets, as well as thunderball and tornado phenomena. The basic physics of 'vacuum spin' are there presented in a concise way for easy assimilation by students. The lecture paper also explains how 'vacuum spin' can stabilize the axial discharge and pointed to some surprising experimental work by Vonnegut on that subject. Later in a note at the end of this report text from the last page of that lecture paper is reproduced for the reader's interest. It is also noted that an important updated section of the theoretical analysis in that paper has recently been incorporated in my new book 'Aether Science Papers', now available from the publishers of this Report. It will be evident from this that the now-emerging technology for generating power from space energy is destined eventually to upset the physics world and particularly cosmologists. Instead of exercising their criticism to block the breakthrough developments on the new energy front, they need instead to look to their own problems, as now exposed, because they have invested so much time in futile theoretical pursuits that now come under attack. The Correa Project Essentially the core element of the Correa apparatus is an electrical discharge tube containing a rarefied gas. It is a tube having a special construction but which can be manufactured in much the same way as a fluorescent lamp. Its objective, when used in a special circuit, is not the emission of light but rather the generation of electrical power in excess of the input power needed for its operation. This seemingly impossible feat is proved by providing a battery of electric d.c. storage cells large enough to deliver a high enough voltage to trigger the discharge which in turn feeds output to a separate battery of d.c. storage cells which store the electrical energy generated. Since the generation of electricity is the objective there can be no better way of proving that, over a period of time, the net energy output exceeds by far the net energy input. Measurements of instantaneous power and the energy transients can reassure an investigator that there is a power gain but sustained performance conditions are essential for a definitive proof. Indeed, this will be better understood when the principle of operation is explained. The pulse of energy input is ahead of the output pulse in timephasing, owing to the intervening opening of the gate, otherwise described as the radial electric field, which allows entry of energy from the quantum activity of the vacuum field. The battery tests, repeated during a succession of charge and discharge cycles, using two banks of cells, one charging on output power as the other discharges input power, provide indisputable evidence of a substantial gain in power. This gives a verifiable accounting of an energy inflow that can be put to good use while enough energy is returned to sustain operation of the system. Though a cumbersome part of the overall apparatus in comparison with the small and light-weight tube, which is the heart of the system, such a battery of conventional electric storage cells satisfies a research need, but ultimately, since power feedback should make the device self sustaining, one can foresee a compact product not requiring these cells and which operates to deliver electric power, as if from nowhere. Now, our world of technology is not really ready to accept such a claim and no amount of technical comment here concerning the specific structure of the Correa apparatus can sway the minds of a professionally qualified engineering and scientific community, well indoctrinated by their teaching and by their experience to require conformity with the well established laws of thermodynamics.
25.4.2005
Page 7 of 37
It goes without saying that one simply cannot get energy from nowhere and so there are only two issues to confront. Firstly, does the Correa apparatus really deliver what is claimed? That is a question of fact which needs the testimony of those witnessing demonstrations and able to judge what they see. Secondly, given that the Correa invention does deliver excess power, how are we to come to terms with the need to understand the true source of that excess energy? To be sure, the answer is not to be found in physics textbooks and such textbooks are not noted for disclosing unsolved mysteries. Yes, they do tell us that there is still a mystery concerning the force of gravity, which we all know should somehow find unification with the theory of electromagnetism. However, gravity is something everyone of us contends with every waking hour of our lives. It weighs upon us physically, if not mentally, but there are forces and actions seated in the energy background that are revealed only in a spurious way or come fleetingly from unusual experimental conditions. These are not recorded in our physics textbooks, because those who write such books write only about topics they understand and can explain by accepted theory. This, therefore, is why this Report is being written. We need to understand that source sufficiently to be able to do onward design work and develop the Correa invention. We need to understand it in order to reassure those who manage and invest in new energy technology, because there has to be scientific certainty underpinning any R & D venture that is not funded as a mere academic speculation. The latter is the province of the funding resource assigned to university and to government research institutions and those responsible for such funding are very careful indeed in ensuring they avoid controversy by not investing in projects which their peers may ridicule. The Correa project is now the trigger for taking forward the theme of some earlier research findings, notably those of Geoffrey Spence, a researcher in U.K. who has demonstrated an operable òverunity-performing' discharge device to sponsoring interests, but whose device was presumably impractical in requiring heavy magnets to guide the discharge in a kind of cyclotron spiral orbit. There is also the research of Professor Chernetskii in Russia and possibly even the work of Tesla to keep in mind, but it is the research of Dr. Paulo Correa and Alexandra Correa that has been disclosed in sufficient detail to warrant attention at this time in view of the immediate prospect it offers for rapid technological development. Later in this Report such background activity will be reviewed because the several earlier findings lend support to the Correa project, but the immediately following sections of this Report will be devoted to presenting a scientific case concerning the true source of the excess energy generated by these plasma discharge devices. To conclude this introduction to the Correa project, it is noted, by way of a summary, that the apparatus involves a cold-cathode electric discharge with current flow between anode and cathode producing an axially-directed electrodynamic compression force which squeezes positive ions into a ball of plasma trapped against the cathode. The electron current from the cathode delivers the negative electrons at a rate which is overwhelmed by the ion discharge pulse and the powerful ball of positively charged plasma can build up enormous radial electric field gradients which induce equally enormous cancelling electric field gradients owing to a spin reaction set up in the vacuum medium. The vacuum reacts by propagating waves when responding to transverse electric fields around a radio antenna. However, whereas the latter promote such wave propagation according to Maxwell's theory, the vacuum spin provides a contained quasi-stable field condition which draws energy from the phase-lock of the quantum spin states of the enveloping aether field. The analogy we see in nature is the creation of the thunderball which research findings show to have electrical energy densities of the order of 109 J/m3 stored in their plasma forms. Some of the pulses in the Correa experiments operated at low pulse frequencies are found to contain energy of one thousand joules or more. With a 2 cm electrode spacing defining a plasma as having a volume of cubic cm. order, this gives 109 J/m3 as an energy density, clearly of the same order as is reported from thunderball investigations. It has, incidentally, been reported that a thunderball was once seen to enter a barrel of water and dissipate itself leaving the water at an elevated temperature. From the data collected its energy density was estimated.
25.4.2005
Page 8 of 37
However, we can now see from the Correa research findings that the trapped energy can be deployed into electrical power output and so measured as it is shed by an output pulse and then more energy can be regenerated repeatedly at the pulse frequency. The Correa data indicate an inverse relationship between the energy output per pulse and the pulse frequency, given a sustained input voltage and input current. Therefore, much of the Correa research has involved examining different electrode configurations, gas fillings and pressures, as well as different electrode materials and operating conditions, all with the object of determining which give the best power gain. Such data is presented in the Correa patents and the technical description which will be given later in this Report is directed not to the specific technology options, but rather to the disclosure of what is relevant to understanding what governs the access to the vacuum energy source. The Root of the Problem It is basic to the teaching of Newtonian mechanics that momentum is conserved when energy transfers between particles in motion. Yet Newton's laws were formulated before the electrodynamic action between charged bodies had been discovered and before it was known that all matter is composed of fundamental particles which are electrically charged. Scientists today declare that a substantial portion of the matter forming material bodies on Earth is really attributable to `neutrons', which supposedly have no electrical charge. However, the neutron exhibits a magnetic moment that betrays the presence of electrical charge in its composition and all we really know about the properties of a neutron apply to something that only exists as an unstable particle having a mean lifetime of the order of 15 minutes. It is mere hypothesis to suggest that neutrons exist alongside protons in atomic nuclei and so exist as a major component of matter. In fact, beta particles (electrons and positrons) have a stronger claim to a presence in atomic nuclei and these can serve with protons to account for all the properties of the atomic nucleus. Essentially, the point made here is that Newton devised his laws without taking proper account of the electrodynamics of interacting charges and the fact that all matter, even matter we see as electrically neutral, comprises nothing other than such charged particles. In the electric discharges of the Correa apparatus we have a scenario where heavy atomic ions, rather than mere electrons, are also the charge carriers. A rarefied gas, such as argon, in the discharge tube is ionised and the heavy positive ions are pulled one way by an electric field, whilst the electrons go the other way. The current flow is that of electrons in one part of a closed circuit but at least partially that of heavy ions in another part of the same closed circuit. To understand the physics involved, we need to know whether Newtonian principles hold valid in such a case and whether even standard electrodynamic principles hold valid having regard to the fact that their empirical basis is not the testing of current circuits where heavy ions flow in one circuit segment and electrons flow in another circuit segment. There are undisputed and unexplained anomalies of record in the science literature concerning the very substantial cathode reaction forces set up in what has come to be termed a cold cathode discharge. These have been mentioned already but the Correa patent specifications reference several other sources and the data provided in the Correa patents include measurements of such forces in the apparatus tested by Dr. Correa. In the cold cathode discharge thermionic emission of electrons from the cathode is avoided and an electric potential set up between anode and cathode is relied upon to trigger the discharge. Ostensibly, it seems that there is a force acting on the cathode with no counterpart force acting on the anode The root of our problem then has two offshoots, one being the Newtonian origin of the principle of conservation of momentum and the other being a feature of accepted electrodynamic law that says that interaction forces act on charge at right angles to their motion.
25.4.2005
Page 9 of 37
There is contradiction of principle here and virtually all physics textbooks contrive to avoid discussion on this enigmatic problem. If an electrodynamic force acts on charge at right angles to its motion it cannot do any work. This means that there can be no exchange of energy with the field background owing to that interaction and other than the energy deployments that arise from electrostatic potential. It means that physics theory obscures the process of electromagnetic induction by relying on an incompatible mixture of empirical formulations which serve us well in engineering design, provided we do not trespass into territory outside the scope of the empirical protocol relevant to our problem. The Correa invention lies in that outside territory because the current circuit through the discharge tube is not one involving a closed all-electron flow such as was used in one or other of the interacting circuits that gave basis for the accepted empirical data. It is well accepted that if there can be any breach of the principle of conservation of momentum then there is scope for gaining, or losing energy, anomalously, in seeming contradiction with the principle of conservation of energy. However, one needs to be careful to be sure that one is looking at a total system. If the field background contains energy, even the energy stored by magnetic induction, it must participate in the energy conservation process and that field background is not something we can isolate as belonging exclusively to a particular charged particle or a particular current circuit. There is enough energy activity in the vacuum (the aether) owing to its intrinsic charge motion that underlies the quantum control of atomic electrons to assure the buffer needed to keep faith with the law of energy conservation, whatever anomalous forces are developed in any apparatus we can build. In the university teaching of dynamics as evidenced by a textbook by an author in Cambridge, the seat of learning attended by Isaac Newton, and published by Cambridge University Press, the principle of conservation of momentum is deduced by the preliminary assumption that internal actions and reactions between particles are equal and opposite in pairs. It is as if each and every paired combination of particles interact with one another without any dependence upon anything else. This is manifestly not the case for the electrodynamic interaction because electrodynamics has a dependence upon motion relative to a frame of electromagnetic reference, something totally absent from Newtonian mechanics. When Einstein tried to bring conformity between inertial and electromagnetic effects his transformations of the space and time dimensions led him to the Lorentz force law, which prescribes that the interaction force between two electric charges in motion is not directed between the two charges as internal actions and reactions between particles that are equal and opposite in pairs. This condition is only met where the two charges travel at the same speed side-by-side along parallel paths and this clearly is not the case for the discharge current through the tubes used in the Correa apparatus. An electrical discharge likes to form a kind of filamentary current with charge travelling in line, each ion or electron following behind its like form but the negatively charged electrons dodging around the heavy ions or even replacing electrons in the atomic ion and neutralizing its state. It follows, therefore, that, whether one relies on the principles of Newton or Einstein, or both, these being the accepted doctrines, the resulting theory will have no certain bearing on the practical situation encountered by the Correa research. This means that, with the vast majority of scientists all conforming with the restrictive disciplines of physics that confine knowledge to conventional technology, those few who venture into the new energy world with an open mind confront some very significant opportunities. So, first and foremost, we must be prepared, when considering certain very special situations in electrodynamics, to go against the teachings of our profession and pay attention to the messages in the experimental findings disclosed by the Dr. Paulo Correa and Mrs. Alexandra Correa. The earlier messages about anomalous electrodynamics which this author found in the many
25.4.2005
Page 10 of 37
scientific papers of record were sufficient reason for investigating where the errors had crept into our theories. The author discovered how energy is stored by electromagnetic inductance within a metal body and how it is later retrieved from within that conductive material. This provided the onward inspiration for questioning how the electrodynamic interaction between two electric charges in motion is affected if they have the same charge magnitude but different mass. There was, in the metal, a magnetic field reaction which was not properly factored into the diamagnetic state as analyzed in conventional theory. It was in fact ignored, because energy was not the focus of attention in the use of the Lorentz field formulation, but if its energy role had been duly noted and incorporated in the theory of the steady field situation, it would have given explanation of the factor-of-2 anomaly that became known as the g-factor. This is a phenomenon of charge in orbital motion, but theoretical physicists sought to solve the problem by inventing what they called 'spin', even though a charge which `spins' is not moving its centre of charge and so its field is not changed by a changing spin condition. There are angular momentum issues involved here in relation to magnetic moments and the g-factor was measured in solid metal rods by the ratio of these two quantities. The essential step needed to explain that factorof-2 in terms of orbital reaction of electron motion required taking the argument from within the metal to the external vacuum field. There has to be in the aether the same basic g-factor reaction as applies within a metal conductor and this clearly points to the g-factor reaction being at the heart of the field energy storage by magnetic induction. The aether and its angular momentum properties as well the thermodynamic properties associated with the activity of its charge composition cannot just be brushed out of sight by a flourish of the mathematician's pen. I interject here the comment that I am not unaware of the anomalous g-factor account afforded by Q.E.D., the theory of quantum electrodynamics. This is regarded as being the only theory of relevance on the subject of electron dynamics, because it can explain the g/2 factor of the electron as being 1.001159652. It involves copious mathematical exercises that are far too extensive to be fully worked through and documented to that precision in any textbook. Indeed, as the successive advances in precision measurement crept to this quoted value, the theoretical physicist was always found to be lagging behind in trying to work through to the next iteration in the calculation. If, on the other hand, the reader would like to see a derivation of the factor 1.001159652200 fully presented in only three printed pages, the reference is the Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 32, 114-116 (1981), this being a well known English language periodical published by the Italian Institute of Physics which was noted for its rapid publication of new scientific contributions. A later very relevant reference on the same theme, but more closely connected with the energy source we are concerned with in the Correa invention, is my paper entitled 'Fundamental constants derived from two-dimensional harmonic oscillations in an electrically structured vacuum', which appeared in Speculations in Science and Technology, 9, 315-323 (1986). This paper, as the title implies, referred to synchronizing constraints as between aether charge in its quantum activity as part of the vacuum medium. The analysis, which is quite brief, is also reproduced in my new book 'Aether Science Papers'. As energy is 'lost', as by thermal radiation into outer space, it is absorbed into the quantum activity of a two-dimensional oscillating system. There is equipartition of energy as between charge displacement and kinetic energy. Now, if this energy system of the field medium is caused to move in one region relative to another region of that same medium, this invokes that constraining action because the aether charge is kept in synchronized motion at a universal rhythm, the photon frequency at which the surplus energy can materialize as electron pairs or heavy electron pairs (the latter being otherwise known as `muons'). If, on the other hand, one interferes with this activity by producing a positively charged cluster of ions, this sets up a radial electric field and forces radial charge displacement in that aether medium. This would upset the timing as each displaced element of aether charge in its quantum orbit moves
25.4.2005
Page 11 of 37
faster about the centre of the orbit in one half cycle and then slower in the next half cycle. However, the synchronizing power coupled to all that energy in the aether resists that and assures a perfect phase-lock with the result that, to hold smoothly in that state, the whole system of aether charge has to rotate about the centre of that radial electric field. The glow discharge in the Correa tube becomes the seat of what this author has called 'vacuum spin'. Such a spin condition derives its power by drawing on energy from the universal field system enveloping the glow discharge. In other words, the action promotes the inflow of aether energy from outer space. The key to all this is that synchronizing influence or phase-lock that is at the very heart of quantum theory, this being a theory that represents the properties of the harmonic oscillator and is governing at the microcosmic level where individual electron motions are coupled to the action quantum. Planck's constant is, in fact, determined by the structural form of the array of aether charge which constitutes the elusive, but real, medium we call the 'vacuum'. This link between the vacuum medium or vacuum energy field and electrons is crucial to our problem of tapping energy from what we see as empty space, but to get things started we need to set up that positive core charge. Here, rather than just using electric field effects to pull electrons out faster than the positive ions can make their way to the cathode of a discharge tube, we find that the action can be augmented electrodynamically as a function of current discharge. The heavier mass of the positive ions helps enormously in making them more sluggish, but it needs real force to compress those ions into a positive ball of plasma and here the anomalous electrodynamic interaction forces along the current axis become effective. It is a curious fact of accepted physics that the interaction forces between two charges in motion are assumed not to have any dependence upon the mass of the particles transporting those charges. We use Newtonian mechanics to argue that momentum has to be conserved, momentum depending upon mass, but somehow eliminate mass from the electrodynamic problem. Why then should we be surprised to hear that when experiments are performed involving charge interactions between heavy particles and light particles, atomic or molecular ions and electrons, we encounter energy and momentum anomalies? The very substantial anomalous cathode reaction forces observed in reported experiments indicate that a powerful force is exerted on the cathode with no counterpart reaction on the anode. They indicate, by theory alone, that energy is being shed by the inductive system in excess of that supplied when the discharges through the device are pulsed. However, the Correa research gives us the experimental proof. As an aside here, it is mentioned that the energy source is much the same as that already discussed in Report No. 1 in this series, where the author has pursued his interest in ferromagnetism to show that the energy set up inductively in a gap between two magnetic poles can exceed the energy input to a magnetizing winding. The energy source in the latter case is the quantum priming of the electron motion in the atoms in the ferromagnet. However, in the Correa situation, access to that energy is more directly associated with the motion of the underlying electromagnetic frame of reference. In a sense, the quantum world involves microscopic orbital motion of a charge system constituting the vacuum medium at a very high frequency, the Compton electron frequency, whereas superimposed on this there is a low frequency rotation of a very extensive electromagnetic system. Both of these motions feed the anomalous energy to the Correa apparatus. The Earth would have to stop rotating and to arrest its translational motion with the local galaxy before the energy resource harnessed by the electrodynamic action in the Correa apparatus can be exhausted. However, the energy of the quantum activity at that Compton frequency will never be exhausted, simply because the rest condition of the vacuum medium is one of negative electric potential and the absolute ground state cannot go sub-zero anywhere. Then, because energy is
25.4.2005
Page 12 of 37
conserved overall, we must have activity, meaning motion of charge, which keeps the charge displaced to positions of positive finite potential in which its motion stores additional energy, the fluctuations of which give life to the universe. Now, physicists, except at least for this author who is also professionally qualified as a physicist, are locked into the belief that momentum as well as angular momentum are conserved, meaning that an isolated system cannot by its internal interactions develop any angular momentum or linear momentum. For this reason, so far as they are at all interested in the problem, they have been very perplexed by the fact that the solar system has angular momentum that is not zero. Indeed, the Sun and the planets all rotate in the same sense and so the Sun must have been created in a rotating state before it shed matter to form the planets. By standard physical theory this is not possible but it is nevertheless an indisputable fact. How then have cosmologists come to terms with this problem? It is all too easy to say that the angular momentum was there, shared by matter in its galactic circulation, before that matter condensed to form the Sun, but that says nothing about how it all started. One hypothesis was that another star grazed past the Sun to set it in rotation and in the process disperse the matter that condensed to form the planets. Yet when the chance of this occurring was estimated it was found so improbable that of all the stellar systems in the universe the solar system would possibly be unique as the one having planets. Another hypothesis was that all the stars were created together in a Big Bang and were so close at the time that they could exchange angular momentum and so move outwards in a spinning state. What is not seen as possible by accepted physics teaching is the acquisition of angular momentum and linear momentum as energy was fed into the nucleating star to create it. Energy transfer from 'somewhere' surely implies that momentum and angular momentum can flow in from that same 'somewhere'. So it seems very logical for some of us to be open to the possibility that somehow Nature has a way of breaking faith with what we have adopted as the laws of physics, because, as surely as the Sun was created, there is a physical process that is non compliant with our modern physics teaching. The author submits that it was the initial onset of gravitation that triggered creation and caused the dispersed electric charges in the universe to condense to form stars, in much the same way as ferromagnetism appears in iron as it cools through its Curie temperature. This brings into account the anomalous transfer of energy and momentum to matter. The heavy protons would converge to form the stellar nucleus before the lighter-mass electrons could come together to neutralize the star so formed. The electrodynamic interactions between electrons and heavy ions during this primordial period would set up the linear momentum of the star and the transient radial electric field in the conductive plasma would develop the vacuum spin which imparts the angular momentum. The technological discovery evident from the Correa research is therefore giving direct evidence of the anomalous electrodynamic force interactions between heavy ions and electrons, which go hand in hand with anomalous momentum and anomalous energy. The physics involved in such research is much closer to the subject of energy powering the Sun than is the physics of nuclear fusion. Readers who decide to look up their book references on Newton's laws should consider the right way and the wrong way of presenting those laws in the light of our knowledge of electrodynamics. Newton himself, if he were alive today, would surely be prepared to restyle his argument if, by doing so, he could adapt the laws to extend their cover beyond macroscopic mechanics and embrace the microscopic dynamics of electric particle interactions. Firstly, note that it is Newton's third law of motion that is in issue, the balance of action and reaction. Newton combined this law with the principle of conservation of energy and was able to deduce that two particles, not necessarily having the same mass, would emerge from a collision with their relative velocity reversed. In sharing their energy the velocities of the two particles have to adjust so as to assure that they separate from the collision with a relative velocity that is -1 times their relative
25.4.2005
Page 13 of 37
velocity just before impact. This is known in mechanics as 'Newton's rule'. Secondly, note that it is logical that if two conditions determine a third condition then that third condition taken with one of the two conditions can determine the other of the two conditions. If, therefore, Newton had taken his 'rule' to be his third law, especially as it is more easily demonstrated, as by propelling a metal ball into another at rest and observing that it transfers its motion to that other ball, then he would have got things the right way around. The new law would be a 'law of relative motion' and, taken together with the principle of energy conservation, one can then deduce that action and reaction follows 'as a rule'. Thirdly, given this latter entry to the physics of electrodynamics, one can give support to the 'law of relative motion' because electric charge interactions are dependent upon relative position and so upon relative motion, but not dependent upon mechanical inertia. Fourthly, however, we have a new scenario once electrodynamics get into the act, because whereas a pure mechanical system involves the summation of discrete collisions between pairs of constituent particles, which only see their own energies as involved at the instant of collision, the case is entirely different for the electrodynamic interaction. The reason is that there will invariably be numerous other electric particles in motion in the immediate locality of the colliding charges. The conserved energy is not exclusively that of a collision between a discrete pair of charges. In the latter situation the derivation of the 'rule' that action and reaction are always equal will fail. Energy will always be conserved but one cannot in this case formulate the relevant energy exclusively in terms of the square of a relative velocity. In mathematics every square power of a quantity has two roots, one positive and one negative, which is why we see the relative velocity of two colliding balls reverse after their impact. It is all a question of mixing vector and scalar quantities. Energy is a scalar quantity but velocity is a vector. We can take numerous particles conforming with linear vector equations and add their individual contributions to determine the overall state of a combined system, but once we start changing those vectors by working out the square roots of component scalar energy quantities, without being able to exclude the external cross interactions between charges acting on the two in collision, we really are headed for trouble. The well proven laws we have accepted for mechanics cannot be applied to practical situations where there is a dominant electrodynamic effect involving the interaction of electrons and heavy ions. This rider has been added because Nature contrives to deceive us in a rather curious way when we apply the Newtonian philosophy to the electrodynamics of the closed circuital all-electron current flow. We find we can use the Lorentz force law which does not conform with Newton's law of action balancing and reaction and apply this to all the discrete elemental current circuit interactions to find in the end that they sum to give the balance needed to satisfy Newton's law for the circuit as a whole. This is a quirk of the mathematics of this situation combined with the fact that the Lorentz formulation prescribes force on charge in motion acting at right angles to that motion. A force so directed can do no work and so the summation of all the individual interactions will result in no work being done, meaning that the circuit carrying current is not giving or drawing power from its field environment. It can therefore not assert force on that environment and so internally its action overall must balance its reaction. Yet, as soon as we change that current, there is inductive energy exchange with that field environment, which means that somehow the forces on the electrons moving through that circuit are no longer at right angles to charge motion. Electric fields have been set up by induction effects and the moment these are introduced one is bringing into play empirical rules, all of which have been discovered by experiments where at least one of the interacting current sources is all-electron closed circuit flow or its equivalent.
25.4.2005
Page 14 of 37
Once one departs from the latter constraint one enters a realm needing new physics tailored to the problem of electrodynamic interaction between heavy ions and electrons, because the mass of the charge carrier has to play a role in the dynamics of force-producing situations. In fact, analysis shows that it is the mass ratio between two interacting charge carriers that is the dominant consideration and it so happens that in the all-electron current flow circuit this ratio is unity, thereby disguising its true relevance in an electrodynamic formulation. Once that ratio is measured in thousands as is the case the heavy ion to electron mass ratio, then we enter a whole new scenario, the one into which the Correa research has ventured. In summary, therefore, the root of the problem of understanding why the Correa apparatus actually works is intermeshed with the basic principles of Newtonian mechanics and their inadequacy in coping with the conditions peculiar to the electrodynamic interaction. To adjust our theories to the facts of the Correa experiments and at the same time bring conformity and unification into the connection between Newtonian mechanics, gravitation and electromagnetism, we need to correct the empirical law of electro-dynamics so that it embraces the interaction between heavy ions and electrons. There has to be a mass term in the law of electrodynamics. This author derived the inter-electron interaction law nearly 40 years ago and the version with the mass ratio term some 30 years ago but it was not until 1969 that its derivation featured in a scientific paper as published by the Journal of the Franklin Institute. This was referenced in the earlier introduction. The law thus formulated in no way conflicts with the accepted Lorentz law when applied to the same problems, those involving closed circuital electron current. It indicates powerful anomalous forces on heavy ions flowing between electrodes in a gas discharge tube where the current circuit is completed by a partially closed electron circuit. These anomalous forces generate the build up of electric charge at the cathode which establishes the condition needed to trigger excess power output from the Correa discharge tube. The Dilemma Confronted Hopefully the reader will now join the author in confronting the dilemma which has been introduced in the foregoing pages. We have on the one hand certain anomalous facts of experiment which have been building up over many years and are now crowned, not so much by the Correa discovery, but by the fact that the Correa patents disclose so much experimental data that technologists have the way charted to begin to invade the new energy world. We have on the other hand a well established scientific belief system enshrined in notions of the socalled Big Bang creation of the universe and the notions of a relativistic four-dimensional space-time metric which aims to destroys belief in an aether brimming with energy. We have intermediate these extremes the knowledge that physicists and cosmologists openly admit that they are still searching for their Holy Grail, the Unified Field Theory, by which they mean a theory conforming with the Einstein doctrine but yet bridging the gap between electrodynamics and gravitation. Supplementary to this we have the very extensive theoretical contributions of this author, all built on the revision of physics resulting from acceptance of a vacuum energy medium and that law of electrodynamics as adjusted to permit anomalous force imbalance in the interaction of moving electric charges of different mass. The author's theory is an all-embracing unified field theory. In the appendices which follow this text many of the relevant references will be listed. The author has come to realise that the scientific community is so entrenched in its dedication to the Einstein doctrine, which is linked with the Lorentz force law, that no amount of contrary reasoning based on
25.4.2005
Page 15 of 37
new theory will be heeded. This is why the experimental discovery demonstrable by Dr. Paulo Correa and Mrs Alexandra Correa is of vital importance, not just as a way forward which offers us direct access to a new source of energy, but for its scientific significance. The anomalous cathode reaction forces discovered and duly recorded by past experimenters have been swept aside by physicists with the presumption that there must be sufficient electrode vaporization to explain the cathode reaction force. That process would, of course, impart a back pressure on the vapour that would assert a balancing force on the anode. However, I am not aware of any tests that confirm the balancing reaction on the anode and I find it difficult to understand how vaporization of a metal can impart much more energy to the freed atoms than is implicit in the latent heat of vaporization. See the later comment on this point. The generation of excess energy in seeming breach of the law of action and reaction is the decisive factor in determining the scientific truths involved in this situation and the Correas have taken us forward decisively on that front. What lies ahead, therefore, is not only the entry into a new energy regime, but the prospect of a developing thrust in aerospace applications and a scientific revolution as the extremes of modern philosophy in physics collapse into a more rational picture. The dilemma the reader now faces is whether to do nothing and simply watch events, leaving the task to others, or whether to explore and probe the Correa claims to try to trace a flaw in their experiments, (if there is one to be found!) or whether to stand by the principle that what amounts to 'perpetual motion' is impossible and so pass judgment solely on the strength of that conviction. It may or may not help the argument to say that each atom in the reader's body exemplifies the reality of 'perpetual motion', because if the reader were to die and be cooled down to the absolute zero of temperature, minus 273oC, the electrons in every atom in the reader's body would keep moving perpetually. All that is suggested by the new theory underlying the new energy science is that, by understanding the quantum activity of the aether and showing how it determines the Planck constant and regulates electron motion in atoms, we can see a way forward to tapping into that energy system. The obvious challenge comes in the statement: "Prove it by demonstrating something that works." Well, the Correas have done that! Yet even that will not be enough to turn the scientific world upside down, because the cry then is: "Where does the energy come from?" Well, the author has outlined the explanation above! Yet that will not be enough, because the scientists who are able to judge the theoretical arguments would rather not waste time in that effort, being so confident that there must be flaws. So, assuming the worst case scenario, the final arbiter is likely to be the public at large, those who care little about where the energy comes from, so long as it is cheap, plentiful and non-polluting. That means that we will need to see several technologies develop all generating energy in a way which confounds the physicists but all aimed at the domestic market or the small user, such as by providing back up power to keep electric batteries on a boat charged when the boat is not being used. In saying this, the author is aware of initiatives around the world and particularly in Japan which do seem to be backed by adequate funding and which suggest a lower level of prejudice against the new energy theme. So it is really now a question of waiting to see how the situation develops, trusting that what is explained in this Report will contribute to forward developments. Even though we will hear much about new technology in the form of anomalous heat generation at
25.4.2005
Page 16 of 37
water temperatures and new motor technology in which magnets play a dominant role, all pointing to excess energy generation, whichever technology is the first to command enough attention to convert Establishment opinion from disbelief to belief will pave the way for acceptance of the other technologies. In this race, the Correa technology has a distinct advantage in that it is already the subject of three granted patents in USA, in that the claims of these patents cover, quite broadly, the three key aspects of what the Correas have discovered and in that the scientific basis is seated in anomalies long recognized in scientific literature by authoritative institutional researchers. This is why much of the remainder of this Report simply gives references and abstracts as there seems little that needs further explanation other than the provision of a brief description of the way in which the Correa tube taps aether energy. As with any technological development introducing a new electronic device it will be necessary to involve experts in the design for mass production, with particular attention to the problem of enhancing electrode lifetime. There will be scope for more invention in improved design structure of the electrode configurations and choice and composition of electrode materials, but there are some new and interesting principles embodied in the patented Correa apparatus and these should survive and have value as the technology comes into commercial use. I am writing this section of text on February 13, 1996 and have just received my copy of the February 1996 issue of New Energy News, a monthly publication edited by Dr. Hal Fox and issued from a postal address P.O. Box 58639, Salt Lake City, UT 84158-8639. At pp. 10-12 I summarized the 1 hr documentary shown on British television on 17th December 1995 concerning 'free energy'. That programme included reference to research on energy from plasma discharges, notably by reference to the research of Professor Chernetskii in Moscow, but the programme was compiled before news concerning the Correa discovery came to light. Accordingly, in my submission to New Energy News I did refer to the Correa research in Canada. I find, incidentally, that the editor, Hal Fox, interjected the additional note that "The work by Kucherov, Karabit & Savitimova has also shown excess heat generation from a `glow discharge'", but I have at this time no data on that subject. The remaining body of this Report will concentrate on a simple illustrated exposition as to why the abnormal glow discharge in a Correa tube generates excess energy and how that energy is taken off as electric power rather than as heat. So far as possible what is presented will be extracts from what has already been published on the subject, since it is not appropriate to elaborate new theories to explain the operation of the technology discovered by Dr. Paulo N. Correa and Mrs Alexandra Correa. The object here is to show that the scientific basis of the discovery is something in common with natural phenomena that have hitherto defied accepted explanation when the physics was there on record but was ignored. Operational Characteristics of Correa Discharge Device The excess energy mode of operation of a typical Correa discharge device involves cyclic current oscillations in the EF region of the operational characteristic depicted in Fig. 1 of U.S. Patent No. 5,416,391.
25.4.2005
Page 17 of 37
Note that AGD denotes the abnormal glow discharge region. The plotted data show how current varies as the voltage between the electrodes increases. There are two regions of negative resistance. The one at higher current is used to develop pulsating current oscillations which allow excess energy to be drawn from the device. To get current to flow between the two electrodes in a cold-cathode discharge tube containing a rarefied inert gas such as argon a sufficient voltage, of the order of 1,000 V, is needed to initiate ionization. Much then depends upon the circuit connected to the tube and the load conditions that can limit the current to certain levels, which in the case of the Correa invention hold the current in a stable pulsating oscillation mode. Normally the current will climb to the VAD region where the high current vacuum arc discharge condition applies. That state does not deliver excess energy output. Once the ions are formed (Fig. 2) a flow of current through the tube arises by the attraction of electrons to the anode and the migration of the positive ions owing to their attraction to the cathode.
25.4.2005
Page 18 of 37
Fig. 2 Because the heavy positive ions do not move as rapidly in the field between the electrodes as do the electrons, there will be a residual positive space charge established, particularly adjacent to the cathode. This means that there will be a radially directed electric field gradient from the centre of the glow discharge. Now, how does the medium to which we attribute electromagnetic wave propagation in terms of Maxwell's displacement current respond to a radial electric field? It responds by trying to cancel the plasma charge field, just as it does in a parallel plate capacitor. Nevertheless there is a difference. There the electric field is applied from outside, namely from the electrodes, and the Maxwell displacement, which comprises two separated layers of charge of opposite polarity, simply confronts the charge on the plate electrodes and screens it by placing one polarity charge adjacent one plate electrode and the other polarity charge adjacent the other electrode. In the absence of an electric field vector, the scalar reaction of the aether is to store energy by equipartition between kinetic and electric displacement energy by expanding the radii of the orbital quantized motion of the elements of its aether charge. This is the basis of this author's theory for the photon and the derivation of the theoretical value of the fine-structure constant [Reference 2 in the bibliography]. The aether responds to the field vector mode of a linear electric field displacement by storing energy as electrical field energy. This amounts to an internal strain in the aether and, if a gas is present, it may become ionized. Here there is translational motion of the charge system in the aether but no kinetic energy is added to its overall quantum state because the displacement of the charge orbits in local aether regions is affected by synchronizing constraints exerted from external aether regions which assure phase lock. These constraints, rather than the applied electrical field, provide the energy needed to sustain that translational motion. This is why the aether cannot be sensed in terms of the mechanics of linear motion. This aspect is a subject mentioned in reference [57]. The aether responds similarly in response to the radial electric field vector, because it is able to set up a state of spin or rotation which involves inflow of kinetic energy in the aether itself, energy which is supplied from the external aether owing to the phase-lock just mentioned. In this case, if the external influence which sets up the radial electric field subsides in strength, the phase-lock persists but the kinetic energy which has been fed into the field system from the external aether cannot return to its source by virtue of that same phase-lock. This is akin to the situation where a dog with its feet firmly locked to the ground can wag its tail, but the tail cannot wag the dog and, with it, body Earth. Therefore, the energy in the aether spin has to be shed in a different way, but by virtue of the synchronizing constraint which now forces a radial charge displacement powered by the captured
25.4.2005
Page 19 of 37
aether spin energy. In other words, what is stored in the spin state as aether input energy becomes available as electric field energy which can be tapped by drawing power from the electrodes of the Correa tube, just as if the glow discharge were a capacitor. To do this it is necessary to have pulsations and here there is an aspect which warrants further theoretical research, but which seems to have already found a practical solution in the Correa device. The point of interest is that, in theory, we need to add as many joules of energy to build the electric field condition as we can expect to draw in as excess energy from the enveloping aether. This is because the aether has certain harmonious features consistent with equipartition of energy between electric and dynamic (kinetic or magnetic) states. The puzzle then is that of understanding how energy efficiencies in excess of 200% are possible. The answer is easily found if there is a Q factor applicable to the circuit, meaning that the electrical energy oscillates as between the discharge and an external capacitor. However, it may well be that in the Correa tube the extended form of the cathode in relation to the electrode spacing allows multiple discharge zones which can cooperate in exchanging some portion of the electric energy whilst the aether energy inflow is pumped into all such zones in each external pulse cycle. In summary, therefore, there are undoubtedly some very special advantages in the way in which the Correa discharge tubes are designed. The design of the electrode configuration as covered by the Correa patent position seems therefore to be crucial to securing high conversion efficiencies with excess power generation well in excess of 200%. What is clear is that the radial separation of positive and negative charge in the plasma in the Correa discharge tube will capture large amounts of aether energy. Fig. 3 depicts that radial separation and shows two capacitors denoted C which make a circuit connection with a load resistance.
Fig. 3 The object here is to set up an oscillation in the a.c. output circuit connected in parallel across the discharge tube electrodes. Suppose that there is an oscillation which allows us to draw a.c. current through the load. There will
25.4.2005
Page 20 of 37
be times when the current through the tube collapses rapidly and this means that the current in the discharge drops. The rate at which positive ions are being created will drop as well and so the radial electric field can fall below the value corresponding to the state of aether spin. This then uses the kinetic energy of the aether spin to set up radial electric field displacement in the aether itself and that, in turn, releases the plasma charge at a higher potential, corresponding to that negative resistance characteristic. The result is that the tube delivers power drawing on aether spin and sheds it in those output current pulsations that are channelled around the a.c. shunt loop through the load resistor shown in Fig. 3. Now, to accentuate this effect, one of the features of the Correa patents involves a discharge tube having an extended cathode structure with a relatively small anode in fairly close proximity. As indicated in Fig. 4, this has the effect of spreading the cathode current and so the distribution of positive ions over the area of the extended cathode, whilst the anode current is more confined to the central part of the tube.
Fig. 4 ..........................Fig. 5 Thus, in Fig 5, the way in which current flows through the tube is illustrated by the separation of positive ions and electrons. These can recombine, as by the electrons entering the anode migrating around the d.c. supply circuit path to find their way to the cathode. However, the significant point of interest is that the AGD discharge has a charge storage feature which is depicted by the notional capacitors illustrated inside the tube. One has then to visualise a region of aether spinning about the centre of that plasma forming the glow discharge and contriving to contain the build-up of an enormous amount of charge separation. Under the cyclic relaxation control of the suitably-adjusted parameters of the external load circuit, the oscillation which develops can literally pump energy from the aether as the positive ion state of the plasma is increased and allowed to decrease, increasing under control of the power input, but decreasing spontaneously to draw on the aether energy stored once the input loses control. It is not the purpose of this Report to describe precisely how the circuits of the Correa experiments are designed to exploit this phenomenon, but before mentioning other related research and before giving further explanation of the physics underlying the spin phenomena, one example of the reported performance data will be quoted from U.S. Patent No. 5,449,989. That patent together with the other two already mentioned show several circuit diagrams to which the reader can refer. Performance Data Exemplifying the Correa Discharge Device In experiment No. 8 as listed in Table 5 in column 36 of the patent specification, it is shown that a battery pack in which 46 batteries, each of 12 V rating, provide an input voltage of nearly 600 V. As
25.4.2005
Page 21 of 37
energy is drained from this battery pack a separate pack of 28 such batteries is charged by the rectification of a.c. output drawn from the pulsating oscillations of the discharge tube. The experiment begins with the driver pack at a voltage of 582 V, corresponding to 12.65 V per cell, which was an 87.5% state of charge. The charge pack had an initial voltage of 328 V, corresponding to 11.71 V per cell, which is a 20% state of charge. The cathode in the discharge tube was of hardened aluminium and had an area of 64 sq. cm. There was a 4 cm. gap between electrodes and the gas pressure in the tube was 0.8 Torr. The experiment ran for 28.5 minutes. Thereafter, the driver pack was found to have lost very little of its charge, its voltage having reduced to 579.5 V, corresponding to an 84% state of charge. It had shed 0.134 kWh of energy. In contrast the charge pack had climbed to a voltage of 350 V and become 76.5% charged, an energy increase of 1.213 Kwh, which is a ninefold increase. The energy conversion efficiency was greater than 900%. The Vapour Reaction Hypothesis The conventional assumption concerning cathode reaction force in the cold-cathode discharge is that the discharge involves vaporization of the cathode material. The reaction force on the cathode is then attributed to the rate at which momentum is imparted to the ejected vapour. The speed of ejection times the rate of loss of cathode mass should then equal the measured anomalous force. It is therefore interesting to compare that speed, and the kinetic energy it implies for an atom shed by the cathode, with the thermal state of such an atom just prior to its release, as determined from the latent heat of evaporation of the cathode metal. For an aluminium cathode, given that the latent heat of evaporation is 10,800 J/gm, the speed of the vaporized atoms can be little more than 5,000 m/s. This is estimated by equating the kinetic energy of unit mass to the energy 10,800 J. It follows that, the force of 245.2 dynes as measured and reported in Table 15 of the third of the Correa U.S. patents for a current of 1.6 A, will require the cathode to vaporize at the rate of 490.4 10-6 gm/s to impart the necessary rate of reaction momentum to account for that cathode reaction force. This assumes that the force is not set up by electrodynamic action. Now, in column 20 of U.S. Patent 5,449,989 the rate of erosion of cathode material is discussed on the basis of the Correa data on actual measurements of craters formed by vaporization activity. That data allows the conclusion to be drawn that electrodes having a mass of less than 100 gm would have a useful life equivalent to the generation of power of 40 Mwh. Assigning 250 V to the 1.6 A current implies output power of 400 W and, if that were to consume the cathode at the rate estimated above, a 100 gm electrode would be consumed in 56 hours, corresponding to a lifetime energy production of 0.0224 Mwh. This is discrepant by a factor of the order of 1,000 when compared with the erosion observed. It follows, therefore, that the cathode reaction force has to be almost wholly attributable to some cause other that reaction produced by vaporization. Hence the anomaly already discussed in connection with this new source of energy!
The Author's 1977 Plasma Discharge Device This was the subject of U.K. patent Application No. 2,002,953. It proposed the concentration of
25.4.2005
Page 22 of 37
heavy positive ions in a central chamber by the anomalous electrodynamic forces of the cold-cathode discharge, with the object of producing heat in excess of that generated by electrical input power. The invention was based on the recognition that the aether can shed its ìntrinsic' energy. The last paragraph of the specification was: "The ion acceleration technique provided by this invention becomes, in such situations, a catalyst by which high energy concentration in suitable ionizable media may trigger transformations and possibly release of intrinsic energy." The circuit shown in the following reproduction of Fig. 11 of the patent had the merit of avoiding cathode overheating by injecting ions into the heat generation chamber and subjecting them to accelerating effects produced electrodynamically by auxiliary cold-cathode discharges.
Spence's 1986 Energy Conversion System This was the subject of U.S. patent 4,772,816. See the figure below of the patent. Geoffrey M. Spence of Crowborough in England assembled operative plasma discharge devices which generated more electrical power output than was supplied as input. The abstract of the patent reads: "The apparatus uses a magnetic field (80) to accelerate a charged particle radially towards a target electrode (10). The increased kinetic energy of the particles enables the particle to give up more electrical energy to the target electrode (10) than was initially given to it. This charges the target electrode (10), and the increased energy is extracted from the apparatus by connecting an electrical load between the target electrode and a point of lower or higher potential."
25.4.2005
Page 23 of 37
Chernetskii Vacuum Energy Breakthrough: News Release dated 1989 The Novosti Press Agency, Moscow, USSR issued their Press Release No. 03NTO-890717CM04 in 1989. A few sentences from that document are quoted below: "Abstract: A design model of a plasma generator which can convert physical-vacuum energy into electricity has been developed under Professor Alexandr V. Chernetskii at the Moscow Georgi Plekanov institute of the National Economy. Such generators could lay the groundwork for a future environmentally-benign power industry." "Classical physics cannot explain what happens when a plasma discharger placed in a Chernetskii circuit is started. For no apparent reason the ammeter pointer suddenly shows triple strength of current increase and energy output is several times more than input. The plant's efficiency is suddenly much more than ONE! No magic is involved. Additional energy outputs at specific plasma discharges have been established in several independent 'Expert reports' by staff from the V. I. Lenin All-Union Institute of Electrical Engineering (Moscow) of the Ministry of the Electrical Equipment Industry. This effect has been checked by different methods. Where does this mysterious energy come from?" "The self-generating discharge emerges when the discharge currents reach a definite critical density, when the magnetic fields they create ensure magnetisation of the plasma electrons and they begin to perform mainly cycloidal movement. The interaction of currents with their magnetic field forces the electrons to deviate to the cylinder-shaped discharge axis and the electrical field emerges. ..... Clearly, only part of the tremendous vacuum energy is extracted." "We've developed several circuit versions which can find application. In the latest experiment which had an input power of 700 watts, the generator produced three kilowatt for load resistance, or nearly five times as much. This is only the start and not the limit. The calculations for more powerful plants show that many megawatts of free energy can be produced from a minimal power source."
25.4.2005
Page 24 of 37
A Concluding Note In this concluding note there are two points which it is believe warrant attention. One is quite topical in that it has attracted media interest in the vacuum as a new energy source. The paper generating that interest is that of C. Eberlein in Physical Review Letters 76, 3842-3845 (1996) entitled 'Sonoluminescence as quantum vacuum radiation'. It is the phenomenon by which sonic pulsations applied to water result in the water emitting optical radiation which betrays the release of energy in bursts which signify high temperatures. See also the report by Peter Knight 'Sound, Light and the Vacuum' in News and Views in the journal Nature (381, pp. 736-737, 27 June 1996). This phenomenon is of little practical consequence when measured against the discovery underlying the Correa invention, but it shows that scientists need to face up to the reality of the new energy world. The sonoluminescence phenomenon is, in my opinion, another manifestation of the vacuum spin scenario. By compressing tiny air bubbles at frequencies of 25 kHz the positive H3O hydronium ions and the negative OH hydroxyl ions in water converge radially towards each bubble of air during the pressure impulse period. The heavier ions respond more slowly and each such pulse sets up a small radial electric field displacement. This induces aether spin or vacuum spin, with inflow of energy from the quantum underworld, owing to the phase lock action of the quantum environment. As the pressure relaxes the ions do not recover their original positions owing to the neutralizing field effects inherent in the aether spin. Each successive sonic pressure pulse then augments the effect by forcing further radial charge displacement. This is an escalating situation broken only when the build-up of vacuum spin energy centred on those air bubbles grow in physical size until instability sets in as by surface collision with other such spin states. These collisions in their random distribution will be triggered in time with the sonic pulsations and local flashes of light will be emitted. In effect what one sees is a kind of very tiny thunderball phenomenon, where the stimulus exciting the formation of the glowing balls is not an electrical discharge but a pressure wave. While physicists ponder on that sonoluminescence phenomenon, those interested in the practical pursuit of the new energy opportunity can follow the Correa lead, confident that scientists who decry the `free energy' prospect have their own problems in understanding sonoluminescence. As indicated earlier in this work, the theme of charge induction by vacuum spin featured in my 1977 lecture paper 'Space, Energy and Creation' and I stated that I would from quote something from the end of that text. This now follows:
Finally, an interesting experiment has been performed by Ryan and Vonnegut (1971)*. They arranged for a cage to rotate around an electric arc discharge at quite low speed and found that this stabilised the arc. The task of stabilising an electric arc is one of the major problems of thermonuclear fusion research. It seems therefore very difficult to believe that the wild antics of the arc discharge are tamed merely by the slow rotation of a column of air. Here then is more scope for research. Can an arc be stabilised by a in a vacuum by cage rotation? It is research which the modern physicist will not readily undertake because there is widespread belief that the vacuum is a non-entity devoid of any special properties. It is a belief encouraged by the development of relativity and in my experience those who believe in relativity deny the existence of the aether. On the other hand I was once reassured by a comment Professor Cullwick** made about something I published. He quoted Einstein as saying: 'The special theory of relativity does not compel us to deny the existence of the ether .... there is weighty evidence in favour of the ether hypothesis.' (H. Aspden, 15 September 1977) * Nature Physical Science 233 142 (1971). ** Electronics & Power 22 40 (1976).
25.4.2005
Page 25 of 37
APPENDIX I WHY THE EARTH IS NOT A SELF-EXCITED DYNAMO

Introduction Readers of 'The Homopolar Handbook' by Tom Valone will see that it has the sub-title 'A Definitive Guide to Faraday Disk and N-Machine Technologies'. They will also see on its page 78 a reference to a Scientific American article which gives weight to such technology by declaring that the Earth is a self-excited dynamo analogous to a Faraday disk generator which powers the self-induced magnetic field. The article appears in the February 1979 issue of Scientific American at pp. 92-101. Its authors are Charles R. Carrigan and David Gubbins and it is entitled 'The Source of the Earth's Magnetic Field'. In the December 1979 issue of Scientific American at pp. 120-130 there is an article by Lewis P. Fulcher, Johann Rafelski and Abraham Klein entitled 'The Decay of the Vacuum'. This latter article predicts that matter can be created from empty space in the close vicinity of the atomic nuclei of high atomic mass. One at least of those two articles just quoted is based on a false foundation, but both bear upon the subject of this Energy Science Report. I make this statement well recognizing the authority of authors who write for Scientific American, but knowing that where magnetism and the aether's energy properties are concerned one really needs to be discerning as to what one is willing to believe. In this Appendix I it will be shown why the Earth's magnetic field cannot be self-induced by homopolar induction. Appendix II reproduces my paper as read at an Institute of Physics conference at Oxford University, England in 1983. It provides the authentic explanation of the induction of the Earth's magnetic field as an aether phenomenon, consistent with the foregoing analysis of operation of the Correa PAGD technology.
The Logic of My Case 1. For there to be self-induction of electric or magnetic effects attributable to the rotation of any system that system must comprise a composition of electric charges. 2. The electrostatic force acting between any two charges is directed along the line joining them and there is balance of action and reaction, meaning that the system will not develop an out-of-balance reaction force that can enhance or retard a state of spin. 3. If the system is already spinning then there will be mutually-induced electromagnetic forces acting on the charges as each moves under the influence of the field set up by the motion of other charge. 4. By the Lorentz force law these forces act at right-angles to the charge motion. The effective motion of each charge is in a circular orbit about the axis of spin and so any electromagnetic force must be radial with respect to that spin axis. This means that no force component will enhance or retard the spin. 5. It must be concluded that the mutual-interaction of charges within a spinning body cannot set up
25.4.2005
Page 26 of 37
any electromagnetic forces affecting that spin, this being, of course, consistent with the principle that angular momentum is conserved in the absence of an external influence. 6. A consequence of this is that there can be no circulating electric current induced inside that system owing to its rotation as that would draw on the inertial spin energy and mean that the spin speed must reduce. 7. This account does not preclude the setting up of EMFs in the body of the spinning system of charge because those EMFs would be balanced, meaning that the perimeter is at a different potential from that at the axis. 8. In an operable homopolar generator based on the Faraday disk principle there is a non-rotating return current circuit path external to the rotating disk and that accounts for the unbalanced EMF around a circuit whilst providing the external structure which can absorb the forces affecting the spin speed of the disk. 9. Body Earth has no external structure against which to apply the requisite force action if it is to slow down owing to self-exciting dynamo properties. The Alternative Solution There is, of course, a solution to the mystery of the Earth's magnetic field, but it depends upon something totally unfamiliar to those expert in the physics of field theory. It concerns 'vacuum spin' and a 'phase-lock' effect and that connects the phenomenon of the Earth's magnetic field with the energy activity intrinsic to the aether. It involves a process which taps that aether energy, which is why the subject is important in our quest to discover a new and commercially viable source of energy. Appendix II should now be read, keeping in mind that the self-generating magnetic dynamo theory as an explanation for the Earth's magnetic field is flawed and must be rejected. _______
APPENDIX II
THE THUNDERBALL - AN ELECTROSTATIC PHENOMENON
This is the text of the author's paper as presented at Electrostatics 1983, Oxford and as published in Institute of Physics Conference Series No. 66 at pp. 179-184.
Abstract A quasi-static electric displacement according to Maxwell's theory is considered in a novel context, that of a forced radial electric strain centred on a source of energy. The resulting balancing charge displacement in enveloping matter may have transient stability and should exhibit ionization if gaseous. Potentially hazardous pockets of migrant electrostatic energy may well be created in the vicinity of electric discharges. Analysis shows the energy content to be within the range applicable to the thunderball, that is between 2x109 J/m3 and 5x109 J/m3.
25.4.2005
Page 27 of 37
1. Introduction Maxwell's equations are very much a part of the accepted physics in use today. They are used without much regard for the physical model on which Maxwell developed his theories. Jeans (1966) has referred to Maxwell's displacement theory as 'part of the scaffolding by which electromagnetic theory was constructed' but said that it was an open question whether this scaffolding ought now to be discarded. Some impetus in examining this question stems from the recent experimental discovery by Graham and Lahoz (1980) that the field medium can provide a reaction force to quasi-static fields. The evidence from this experiment, which is electromagnetic in character and depends upon current displacement between capacitor plates, is so strong that the authors ended their paper with the comment that 'the quasi-static Maxwell's field is not merely an invisible medium of interaction between matter and matter; it has in fact the mechanical properties postulated by Maxwell, in contradistinction to any "action at a distance" theory'. This encourages the author to present a proposition directly based upon Maxwell's displacement theory. The question at issue is whether the vacuum, as a physical medium in its own right, can be set in a state of electrical strain and might, under certain circumstances, retain this strain transiently so as to store energy in a quasi-stable manner. In particular, it seems worthwhile to ask whether radial electric displacement centred on a source of energy has a role to play in physical phenomena. Note that this contrasts with the lateral oscillatory displacement we associate with wave propagation. We are considering a static displacement such as is associated with the storage of energy by a charged capacitor.
Fig. 1 We believe that when the parallel plates of the capacitor shown in Fig. 1 are electrified, as by the potential V, the linear displacement in Maxwell's field medium (depicted by the arrows) effectively neutralizes the capacitor charge and stores energy in the state of strain in the dielectric and the field medium itself. The hypothesis we now address is that Nature may operate in the reverse mode, particularly in response to a radial displacement, and somehow sustain a state of radial electric strain in the vacuum medium so that it asserts a primary role and causes the electric charge in enveloping substance to take up neutralizing positions. Instead of the electricity applied to the capacitor causing energy to be stored, we have an event accompanied by the injection of energy into the strain storage system of the field medium and a consequent electrical adjustment in matter.
25.4.2005
Page 28 of 37
Fig. 2 A lightning flash is a likely candidate for such an event. Its action must be to pinch the discharge into a thin filament in which the more mobile electrons concentrate along a core as shown in Fig. 2 and set up radial electric strains bounded by the inert positive ions. If the field medium reacts in some way to preserve this strain and store energy in a quasi-stable form for a transient period before the electrons and ions recombine, then the condition according to the hypothesis outlined above is achieved. The resulting pocket of energy optimizes its form to that of a sphere and asserts a primary role in keeping the positive and negative matter charge displaced, pending eventual decay.
Fig. 3 A useful concept giving strength to this hypothesis involves an imaginary state of spin, which we will term `vacuum spin'. The idea here is that if the vacuous field medium were to contain charges capable of displacement then it would be feasible to imagine a sphere of such a medium rotating as shown in Fig. 3 about an axis through the centre of the sphere. The charges would be subject to a
25.4.2005
Page 29 of 37
centrifugal action and so would be displaced radially. Energy would be stored by the spin state and by the radial electric fields induced. In the presence of matter such as the atmosphere these fields might well be cancelled by ionization and separation of charge in the matter itself, leaving only the spin energy. Nevertheless, the spin would sustain the electric displacement in the field medium and a transient state of ionization pending the eventual dissipation of the spin energy. Hence the vacuum spin concept does convey some understanding of the quasi-stable character of the phenomenon under discussion. 2. Theoretical Analysis We can proceed to analyze a spherical field system subject to symmetrical radial strain, without further recourse to this spin concept and solely by reference to the charge separation in matter. Consider a spherical shell of negative charge Q enveloping a uniform sphere of distributed charge +Q developed to balance the radial electric displacement. The electric energy is simply the sum of three terms. These are (i) the self-energy of the distributed charge 3Q2/5R, (ii) the self energy of the charge Q which is Q2/2R and (iii) the mutual energy of the interaction between -Q and Q, which is Q2/R. The total electric energy becomes Q2/10R, where R is the radius of the sphere subject to the electric strain. Given this amount of energy applied to form the spherical object under discussion, we know that it will be characterized by a charge Q and a radius R connected by the above formula. To proceed further it is helpful now to digress a little and consider the possible creation of such a spherical object wholly within a larger spherical object of similar character. This is possible because we are talking about fields and the field medium and can envisage pockets of this medium permeating matter. As depicted in Fig. 4(a), a sub-sphere of electric strain is contained wholly within a much larger sphere of electric strain. The strains are radial in each sphere and combine to determine the strain energy density at points within the sub-sphere. Because the main sphere is very large in relation to the sub-sphere we can regard the strain of the larger sphere as uniform over the volume of the smaller sphere. This means that when the electric strain vectors of the spheres are combined at points within the sub-sphere the cross products will balance and so cancel to leave the energy needed to form the sub-sphere independent of the strain within the larger sphere.
Fig. 4(a) ................................ Fig. 4(b) Fig. 4(a) shows a sub-sphere of radial strain within a larger sphere of radial strain and Fig. (b) shows an ion and its associated electron influenced by a non-linear electric strain. Note that we have in mind the possible ionization of matter and the separation of electrons and positive ions. The electrons present will, by their thermal equilibrium with the ions, have a range of
25.4.2005
Page 30 of 37
travel well in excess of that of ions with which they are associated. Thus, collectively each ion and its paired electron will form a system which is electrically neutral overall and which can be represented, as shown in Fig. 4(b) by a positive central charge surrounded by a spherically symmetrical negative charge distribution attributable to the statistical random motion of the electron. This is because the electrons have a much smaller mass and a much greater speed and, though confined to the spherical boundary of the sub-sphere in order to balance the effects of the strain discussed above, they are less confined than any ions present at that boundary. Owing to this greater range of motion of the electrons it is the polarity of the electrons that determines the direction in which ionized matter tends to move in a non-linear electric field. For stable confinement to a sphere the electric strain everywhere within the bounds of that sphere must correspond to the action of a positive charge. Thus the radial electric strain of the sub-sphere at its surface is limited by the prevailing electric strain in the larger sphere and the latter must correspond to the action of a positive rather than negative charge.
Fig. 5 Imagine now that what we have described occurs in our own environment, with the Earth and its ionosphere constituting the larger sphere and the subspheres being the thunderballs induced in the Earth's atmosphere. The Earth rotates, as depicted in Fig. 5, and so the charge just mentioned would rotate to produce a magnetic field attributable to a distributed positive charge and a balancing negative charge at the upper bounds of the atmosphere. Overall this would give the Earth a geomagnetic moment attributable to a negative charge, which is found to be the case. Furthermore, no electric field would be detected directly because the strain caused by vacuum spin would be balanced. It is well known (Rosser, 1968) that this strain causes no magnetic field itself as, otherwise, charged capacitors when rotating would induce no magnetic field, yet such a field is observed. The magnetic moment attributable to the collective action of a surface charge Q is readily shown to be: M = QR2/5c (1) where R is the body radius and is its angular speed. c is the speed of light. Note that this expression is in electrostatic units and both the dielectric constant and the magnetic permeability are taken to be unity. For the Earth the geomagnetic moment M is 8.1x1025 gauss-cm, R is 6.4x108 and is 7.26 105 rad/s. c is 3x1010 cm/s. Thus Q is readily found and so the surface electric strain Q/R2 as applicable in atmospheric regions.
25.4.2005
Page 31 of 37
This sets the surface strain of the sub-spheres and determines the energy density associated with their overall energy. The mean energy density of any such sub-sphere is found by dividing Q2/10R by the volume 4R3/3, R now being the radius of a sub-sphere and Q its charge. This energy density is simply 3/40 times (Q/R2)2 and as this latter quantity is the same throughout the Earth's atmospheric layer we may expect all sub-spheres to have the same energy density. It is known that thunderballs all exhibit the same energy density, regardless of their size, as was reported by Altschuler et al (1970) and that this energy density lies in the range 2x109 J/m3 to 5x109 J/m3. We have, therefore, an encouraging link with the hypothetical model under consideration. However, more than this, we find that the energy density calculated from the above expression and using the value of the parameter Q/R2 derived for the Earth itself is 2.37x109 J/m3. The theory is therefore supported also by a quantitative connection with the geomagnetic field. 3. Discussion The greatest puzzle of all concerning thunderballs is their ability to pass through solid matter and still preserve their form. This is explained by the above theory. As a phenomenon of electric strain in the vacuum itself, a strain which is primary and sustained by some inner mechanism of the vacuum state, the thunderball can pass through solid matter just as easily as solid matter can pass through the vacuum. What is seen of the thunderball is merely the ionization in the atmosphere resulting from the decay of the energy locked up in this state of strain. As the pocket of strain passes through solid matter any ionization on the entry side merely subsides to be replaced by ionization on the exit side once the sub-sphere surface of the thunderball emerges. Another property of these objects is that they would exhibit a magnetic field of the same order as the Earth's magnetic field. This is quite small but, bearing in mind that the mass of the thunderball is that of the field itself and therefore negligible, it needs very little force to displace them. Accordingly, it becomes possible to explain why thunderballs can hover over the surface of an aircraft wing in flight without being swept away in the slipstream (Aspden, 1980). In separating from the conductive surface of the wing, eddy currents would be induced by weakening the flux linkage sourced in the ball. These would develop a magnetic attraction for the ball and resist its separation, so holding the ball for a period in the proximity of the aircraft. Connected as they are with dramatic and dynamic events such as lightning discharges, it may appear to be bold speculation to suggest that these glowing spheres really are manifestations of a quasielectrostatic effect. Yet, as we have seen, their unusual properties can be explained on such a theory. Given data concerning the amount of energy released, the theory suggests that the size of these objects is then determined by the standard energy density already estimated. This means that even a small amount of energy released by a discharge that is quite weak could produce a tiny thunderball. Since the electric field gradient is the same at the surface of all such objects and this is sufficient to ionize large and easily visible objects, we can expect even the smallest to exhibit ionization as well. They become, therefore, a potential hazard where explosive and inflammable substances are present. They constitute an unexpected hazard because they have a durability and a mobility not shared by other electrical phenomena. They are so elusive in character that they may exist without having been noticed except as an apparent illusion. Yet the thunderball is unquestionably a real phenomenon and a dangerous one. In order to devise experiments by which thunderballs may be created and examined under controlled laboratory conditions, one needs at least to begin with a viable hypothesis as to their character. This
25.4.2005
Page 32 of 37
has been offered in this paper. The theory presented should be judged in the light of the very great spectrum of theories proposed hitherto and discounted for many reasons. See, for example, the excellent review articles by Golde (1977) and Charman (1979). Of more practical concern on a grand scale are the efforts of Nobel laureate Kapitza (1979) who, recognizing that the energy densities of the thunderball are of the right order for application in fusion reactors, seeks to create them artificially by R.F. techniques, this mechanism being his assumption of how these objects may derive their energy. Finally, it is noted that the author has explored in considerable depth the possible physical basis of the underlying `vacuum spin' on which the argument was developed (Aspden, 1980). It remains to devise and conduct experiments aimed at inducing this spin condition by using radial electric fields, so as to verify and perhaps apply the phenomenon to useful ends. References Altschuler M D et al 1970 Nature 228 545 Aspden H 1980 Physics Unified (Sabberton: PO Box 35, Southampton) Ch. 3 & p 188 Aspden H 1981 The Journal of Meteorology UK 6 258 Charman W N 1979 Physics Reports 54 261 Golde R H 1977 Lightning (London: Academic Press) v. 1 pp 409 Graham G M and Lahoz D G 1980 Nature 285 154 Jeans Sir James 1966 The Mathematical Theory of Electricity and Magnetism (Cambridge University Press) p 155 Kapitza P L 1979 Rev. Mod. Phys. 51 417 Rosser W G V 1968 Classical Electromagnetism via Relativity (Butterworths: London) Appendix 6 p. 285
LISTING OF PUBLISHED WORK OF DR HAROLD ASPDEN
In writing this Report I had occasion to refer to just a few of the various published papers I have written over the years and am mindful that I have been writing in a confident style, taking strength from my other related efforts on the creative properties of the aether. The Correa research findings have been my inspiration by opening the door giving access to that aether. It may be that the following list of my papers may serve as a partial index giving guidance as to what also lies a little further behind that door.
25.4.2005
Page 33 of 37
[1] 'The Law of Electrodynamics', Journal of the Franklin Institute, 287, 179-183 (1969). [2] [Jointly with D. M. Eagles] 'Aether Theory and the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 41A, 423-424 (1972). [3] [Jointly with D. M. Eagles] 'Calculation of the Proton Mass in a Lattice Model for the Aether', Il Nuovo Cimento, 30A, 235-238 (1975). [4] 'The Fresnel Formula applied to Empty Space', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 15, 263-264 (1976). [5] 'Inertia of a Non-radiating Particle', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 15 631-633 (1976). [6] 'A New Approach to the Problem of the Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Electron', International Journal of theoretical Physics, 16, 401-404 (1977). [7] 'Electrodynamic Anomalies in Arc Discharge Phenomena', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS-5, 159-163 (1977). [8] 'Energy Correlation Formula Applied to Psi Particles', Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 59-63 (1978). [9] 'Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism', Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 281-288 (1978). [10] 'G Fluctuations and Planetary Orbits', Catastrophist Geology, 3-2, 1-2 (December 1978). [11] 'Ion Accelerators and Energy Transfer Processes', U.K. Patent Specification No. 2,002,953A (Published 28 February 1979). [12] 'The Spatial Energy Distribution for Coulomb Interaction', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 25, 456458 (1979). [13] 'Energy Correlation of Radiative Decays of psi(3684)', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 26, 257-260 (1979). [14] [Jointly with D. M. Eagles] 'The Spatial Distribution of the Interaction Contribution to the Magnetic-Field Energy Associated with Two Moving Charges', Acta Physica Polonica, A57, 473482 (1980). [15] 'The Inverse-Square Law of Force and its Spatial Energy Distribution', J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 13, 3649-3655 (1980). [16] 'UFOs and the Cosmic Connection', Energy Unlimited, 8, 37-40 (1980). [17] 'A Theory of Neutron Lifetime', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 31, 383-384 (1981). [18] 'Atmospheric Electric Field Induction', Speculations in Science and Technology, 4, 314-316 (1981). [19] 'The Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Electron', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 32, 114-116 (1981).
25.4.2005
Page 34 of 37
[20] 'Electron Form and Anomalous Energy Radiation', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 213-216 (1982). [21] 'A Theory of Pion Lifetime', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 237-239 (1982). [22] 'The Correlation of the Anomalous g-Factors of the Electron and Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 481-484 (1982) [23] 'Mirror Reflection Effects in Light Speed Anisotropy Tests', Speculations in Science and Technology, 5, 421-431 (1982). [24] 'Charge Induction by Thermal Radiation', Journal of Electrostatics, 13, 71-80 (1982). [25] 'The Aether - an Assessment', Wireless World, 88, 37-39 (October 1982). [26] 'Relativity and Rotation', Speculations in Science and Technology, 6, 199-202 (1983). [27] 'The Lamb Shift for a Cavity-Resonant Electron', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 36, 364-368 (1983). [28] 'The Thunderball - an Electrostatic Phenomenon', Institute of Physics Conference Series No. 66: Electrostatics 1983, pp. 179-184. [29] 'The Determination of Absolute Gravitational Potential', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 169-172 (1983). [30] 'The Nature of the Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 210-214 (1983). [31] 'Theoretical Resonances for Particle-Antiparticle Collisions based on the Thomson Electron Model', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 307-311 (1983). [32] 'Meson Lifetime Dilation as a Test for Special Relativity', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38 206210 (1983). [33] 'The Mass of the Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 342-345 (1983). [34] 'The Assessment of a Theory for the Proton-Electron Mass Ratio', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 423-426 (1983). [35] 'The Finite Lifetime of the Electron', Speculations in Science and Technology, 7, 3-6 (1984). [36] 'Electromagnetic Reaction Paradox', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 247-251 (1984). [37] 'The Muon g-Factor by Cavity Resonance Theory', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 271-275 (1984). [38] 'Boson Creation in a Sub-Quantum Lattice', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 40, 53-57 (1984). [39] 'The Steady-State Free-Electron Population of Free Space', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252256 (1984). [40] 'Don't Forget Thomson', Physics Today, 15 (November 1984).
25.4.2005
Page 35 of 37
[41] 'The Nature of the Pion', Speculations in Science and Technology, 8, 235-239 (1985). [42] 'The Maxwell-Fechner Hypothesis as an Alternative to Einstein's Theory', 8, 283-289 (1985). [43] 'Unification of Gravitational and Electrodynamic Potential based on Classical Action-at-aDistance Theory', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 44, 689-693 (1985) [44] 'The Paradox of Constant Planetary Mass as Evidence of a Leptonic Lattice-Structured Vacuum State', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 44, 705-709 (1985). [45] 'The Exploding Wire Phenomenon', Physics Letters, 107A, 238-240 (1985). [46] 'A New Perspective on the Law of Electrodynamics', Physics Letters, 111A, 22-24 (1985). [47] 'Theoretical Evaluation of the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 110A, 113-115 (1985). [48] 'The Proton Enigma', American Journal of Physics, 53, 938 (1985). [49] 'More on Thomson's Particles', American Journal of Physics, 53, 616 (1985). [50] 'Weak Violation - a New Concept in Relativity?', Nature, 318, 317-318 (1985). [51] 'Anomalous Electrodynamic Explosions in Liquids', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS14, 282-285 (1986). [52] 'How to Test Special Relativity', Nature, 321, 734 (1986). [53] 'Classical Relativity', Nature, 320, 10 (1986). [54] 'Electron Self-Field Interaction and Internal Resonance', Physics Letters, 119A, 109-111 (1986). [55] 'The Mystery of Mercury's Perihelion', The Toth-Maatian Review, 5, 2475-2481 (1986). [56] 'Flat Space Gravitation', Physics Education, 21, 261-262 (1986). [57] 'Fundamental Constants derived from Two-Dimensional Harmonic Oscillations in an Electrically Structured Vacuum', Speculations in Science and Technology, 9 315-323 (1986). [58] 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, 9, 129-136 (1986). [59] 'Meson Production based on Thomson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 137-140 (1986). [60] 'An Empirical Approach to Meson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 153-157 (1986). [61] 'The Exploding Wire Phenomenon as an Inductive Effect', Physics Letters, 120A, 80-82 (1987). [62] 'Earthquake-related EM Disturbances', Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 28, 535-536 (1987). [63] 'The Physics of the Missing Atoms: Technetium and Promethium', Hadronic Journal, 10, 167172 (1987).
25.4.2005
Page 36 of 37
[64] 'Synchronous Lattice Electrodynamics as an Alternative to Time Dilation', Hadronic Journal, 10, 185-192 (1987). [65] 'Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer', Hadronic Journal, 11, 307-313 (1988). [66] 'The Theory of the Proton Constants', Hadronic Journal, 11, 169-176 (1988). [67] 'A Theory of Proton Creation', Physics Essays, 1, 72-76 (1988). [68] 'Do We Really Understand Magnetism?', Magnets, 1, 19-24 (1988). [69] 'The Vacuum as our Future Source of Energy', Magnets, 3(8), 15-18 (1988). [70] 'Conservative Hadron Interactions Exemplified by the Creation of the Kaon', Hadronic Journal, 12, 101-108 (1989). [71] 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant', Physics Essays, 2, 173-179 (1989). [72] 'A Theory of Pion Creation', Physics Essays, 2, 360-367 (1989). [73] 'The Supergraviton and its Technological Connection', Speculations in Science and Technology, 12, 179-186 (1989). [74] 'Standing Wave Interferometry', Physics Essays, 3, 39-45 (1990). [75] 'The Harwen Energy Radiation Regenerator', Speculations in Science and Technology, 13 295299 (1990). [76] 'Maxwell's Demon and the Second Law of Thermodynamics', Nature, 347, 25 (1990). [77] 'The Theory of Antigravity', Physics Essays, 4, 13-19 (1991). [78] 'Magnets and Gravity', Magnets, 6(6), 16-22 (1992). [79] 'Electricity without Magnetism', Electronics World, 540-542 (1992). [80] 'Switched Reluctance Motor with Full A.C. Commutation', U.S. Patent 4,975,608 (4th December 1990). [81] 'Thermal Power Device', U.K. Patent Specification 2 239 490A (Published 3rd July 1991). [82] 'The Law of Perpetual Motion', Physics Education, 28, 202-203 (1993). [83] 'The First Law of Thermodynamics', Physics Education, 28, 340-342 (1993). [84] 'Retardation in the Coulomb Potential', Physics Essays, 8, 19-28 (1995). [85] 'Space, Energy and Creation', Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England.
25.4.2005
Page 37 of 37
The latter item [85] was a privately published paper as distributed on the occasion of an invited lecture delivered by the author to the Physics Department, University of Cardiff in Wales in 1977. __________
This report was first issued on 26th February 1996 by a private arrangement with Dr. Paulo Correa. It was updated and reissued for publication in its present form on 31st July 1996, the date of publication of the author's 'Aether Science Papers'.
25.4.2005
Page 1 of 31

This Report was first published by the author in 1994 and was reissued later and made more generally available from Sabberton Publications as ISBN 0 085056 0217 in October 1996. It is now made available freely via this Internet facility. It concerns theory pertaining to the creation and properties of deuterons which, as present in atoms in heavy water, deuterium oxide, are involved in the experiments which gave birth to the notion of 'cold fusion'. The technology of that field is slow to develop and, though the author did plan to write a Part II Report as a sequel to this report, which is entitled POWER FROM WATER: COLD FUSION: PART I, this has not materialized. This Report nevertheless is an important contribution to the theory of the subject, also because it explains how the triton, the third isotope of hydrogen is created. It is worthy of study as an adjunct to the author's latest work, the book: The Physics of Creation, because the latter explains in updated detail how the proton itself, the primary isotope of hydrogen is created. For this reason it is given priority in updating this website by now adding progressively each of these ten Energy Science Reports as they are withdrawn from normal printed publication. It should be noted that the book just referenced is a substantial work and should not be confused with Appendix A of this Report, which has the same title. The latter featured as a 12 page Chapter 4 in the author's book GRAVITATION, published in 1975, which gives an early insight into what has now become a 28 year-old account of the origin of proton creation. .......... Harold Aspden, 1 June 2003
25.4.2005
Page 2 of 31
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994
Contents
Introduction The Black Hole Syndrome The Triton Factor Conclusion APPENDIX A: 'The Physics of Creation' APPENDIX B: Deuteron-Proton Transmutation APPENDIX C: Triton Lifetime Theory APPENDIX D: 'The Theory of the Proton Constants' APPENDIX E: 'The Neutron and the Deuteron'*
* These papers are reproduced here by kind permission of the Editors of the Hadronic Journal
Introduction This Energy Science Report draws attention to the revelance of theoretical work pursued by the author over many years before the advent of the now well-known 'cold fusion' discoveries reported
25.4.2005
Page 3 of 31
from Utah in 1989. It will be followed by a Cold Fusion: Part II Report, which will be more specifically directed to the author's patented technology which is emerging from this theoretical base. The object of this Report is to show how the 'cold fusion' scenario is destined to impact the whole field of fundamental physics, ranging from cosmology generally to the pursuit of energy generation techniques that are so fundamental that they can harness the still-latent and ever-present forces which brought about the creation of the universe. These Energy Science Reports are all connected with that underlying groundwork in energy physics that the author has surveyed, driven by his interest in magnetism. Thus Energy Science Report No. 1 concerned 'Power from Magnetism' and described three of the author's experiments which point the way forward to what many term 'free energy'. We are assuredly destined to see rapid strides in this technological field in the months and years ahead and we will enter the 21st century with a whole new vision of our energy future. Only today, 15th April, 1994, as the author writes the first words of this report, a communication was received which draws attention to what is termed 'UDT' - Unidirectional Transformer - which Paul Raymond Jensen of Santa Barbara, California claims to have invented. When readers of my Energy Science Report No. 1 become aware of Jensen's 'UDT' and compare the transformer with that shown in Fig. 4 of that Report they will see how the solid-state 'free energy' ferromagnetic device can now emerge on the 'free energy' scene. With the same prospect evolving on the magnetic reluctance motor using permanent magnets, as championed, for example, by New Zealander Robert G. Adams, this author has planned an Energy Science Report concerned with motor technology. However, here also, whilst currently in the throes of experimentation, it has come to light that a researcher named Frank F. Potter has, for many years, been urging university professors in U.K. to work on the prospect of tapping the energy field that powers a magnet. He has challenged them to do the calculations on specific field coupling involving magnets to prove the case one way or the other. In spite of the interest engendered, the usual establishment reserve about the so-called 'perpetual motion' machine has kept the Potter issue private and not brought it into open forum. However, this author, having now heard of this, has responded to the challenge and has brought ahead of schedule 'Energy Science Report No. 4: The Potter Debate' which was completed on 10th April, 1994. That Report provides a mathematical basis which will help critics of the 'free energy' field to come to terms with what is now bound to disturb the world of those experts who know how to design electrical transformers and chokes but appear not to know how close they are to a new technology that can provide an energy bonanza. The intervening Energy Science Reports Nos. 2 and 3 are captioned 'Power from Ice', and relate to experimental work on a thermoelectric energy converter in which the author is involved as inventor. These Reports exist only in confidential draft form at this time but that technology does spill over into something that will be said about the 'cold fusion' research, particularly in the Part II Report. This introduction, therefore, explains how this text fits into the series of Energy Science Reports by which the author has chosen to update his published research findings prior to incorporation and consolidation in a more formal book form. The 'free energy' scene is now evolving so rapidly that it is better if such a book is written once the author has possession of his own working 'free energy' generator and can provide full test data on a practical system. The Black Hole Syndrome
25.4.2005
Page 4 of 31
This may seem an unusual heading for a text about 'cold fusion', but the physicists who believe in 'black holes' think as do physicists who do not believe in 'cold fusion'. This is a very relevant comparison as one can see from the following remarks. 1. All physics is built on observation of how electrical particles behave, whether individually or in aggregation as matter. The interaction forces between such particles control their coming together, whether to form atomic nuclei, molecules, composites, crystals or stars and planets. 2. Physicists tend to extrapolate their knowledge of experimental behaviour to realms far beyond the bounds governing the conditions of their experiments. They seek to probe territory they cannot reach, but always build with confidence on the certain founding knowledge derived from experiments on what they can see or what they can explore in a laboratory. 3. The neutron as a real particle has only been detected upon creation in the free state and it has a half-lifetime measured in minutes but physicists extrapolate and create 'neutron stars' in their imagination, stars which survive far longer than a few minutes! They cannot 'see' a neutron in an atom, such as in the deuteron, but they assume it is there because the deuteron has two atomic units of mass and one of charge. But, surely, one could better surmise that two anti-protons plus three positive beta-particles represent two atomic units of mass having one positive unit of charge. We know that atoms decay by shedding beta-particles and what we could suspect is that, if they shed an anti-proton and a positive beta-particle, so that would manifest itself as a short-lived 'neutron'! If, on this basis, there are no neutrons in an atomic nucleus such as the deuteron, then is it really surprising to find no neutron emission when we contrive to capture those positive beta-particles by free conduction electrons in the host metal cathode of a cold fusion cell? On the contrary, physicists go the other way and make their unwarranted quantum leap by recognizing that neutrons are able to form stars that have no electrical resistance to the crushing force of gravitation - even though those free neutrons in the laboratory show a substantial negative magnetic moment! 4. They cannot see a 'black hole', but they can imagine matter becoming so compact, as gravitational interaction forces become so strong as to out-weigh and preclude the intervention of electric forces between those charge constituents of the neutron. They are thereby assuming that gravitation is a force so fundamental that it transcends and displaces electric force from a primary role that is so evident in laboratory findings from atomic physics. 5. Those physicists can see in certain remote galaxies certain effects which suggest the coming together of electrical matter, which, by all the basic rules of physics, should not occur because electric forces resist nucleation. Their evidence is a strong gravity force, abnormally related to the mass of the visible body acted upon or a substantial redshift in the optical spectrum of atoms radiating from the nearby field zone. Their assumption is that the universe was born in a Big Bang where everything was overheated and had such energy content that all physical barriers could be overcome. Anything is possible in such a vision! 6. So, if excess heat is seen to emerge from a deuterated palladium cathode in a 'cold fusion' cell, that could suggest that 'nucleation' or fusion has occurred between deuterons, overcoming their mutual electric repulsion in that metal palladium. However, those who believe in 'black holes' are not inclined to believe in 'cold fusion' because they know that the 'black-art' assumptions needed to create the 'Big Bang' and the 'black hole' are not as easy to apply inside a lump of palladium on a laboratory test bench. 7. This 'disbelieving' body of physicists has other 'disbeliefs' as well. They rely on their 'practical' knowledge of gravity and measurement of G to calculate 'black hole' properties, but do not believe that there is a real 'aether' medium, the distortion of which generates that gravitational action. They believe in mathematical extrapolation and that means reliance on equations do not 'rupture' when under excessive stress, as does real matter or real 'aether'. What, indeed, is the tensile strength or the
25.4.2005
Page 5 of 31
compressive strength or the shear strength of what physicists call 4-space? What, one wonders, are its internal dimensions, the distances between its component parts? Without common ground on which to stand in talking about 'aether' or 'space-time', one cannot discuss with such physicists how it is that the 'crystal' structure of the aether itself determines the 'fine-structure constant' they use in their atomic physics. One cannot discuss with such physicists how it is that the sub-quantum motion underlying the Planck action quantum interacts with matter present to force a need for a dynamic balance, which in turn demands the presence of a discrete and unseen graviton population. One cannot therefore get such physicists to listen to the formal account by which G, the constant of gravitation, is derived in terms of that dynamic balance. And so it follows that one cannot put the case to such physicists that, where matter is very concentrated, as within an atomic nucleus in the mid-range of the periodic table, the aether is not too far from the stress limits that govern graviton creation conforming with G as measured in our laboratory. 8. It seems that there is no way in which one can lead a 'disbelieving' physics community out of their wilderness, even if one uses their own language and words with which they are familiar. All one can do is to destroy their beliefs with the mighty blow forthcoming from the reality of a technological breakthrough. Whether this comes from 'cold fusion' or from 'free energy' sourced in ferromagnetism matters not, so long as there is that technological breakthrough. What is needed is something that points to evidence of how protons and deuterons are created preliminary to their fusion to form heavier forms of matter and how Planck's action in the underlying aether spills out energy to feed that creation. 9. The 'black-hole' supergravity that can occur in very dense matter cannot be explained until one can explain gravity in normal matter and until one can further explain the factors which determine the value of the fine-structure constant. If, for example, Planck's constant were to change in a step function as a function of the mass density thresholds in very dense matter, related to the concentration of aether energy, so that would affect the interpretation of the so-called 'black hole' evidence. 10. If, in striving to sustain a dynamic balance, the aether responds in a dual dynamic action to the passage of electromagnetic waves, so this could affect energy deployment implicit in Maxwell's wave equations and it could explain why the aether medium appears non-dispersive. These possibilities are not even considered by physicists who insist on building only on their 'past experience' without looking at the foundations to see what might have been missed. So, we advance by the accident of discovery, and, it seems, 'cold fusion' is one such accident. It remains now to convince physicists generally that there is excess heat generated in a cold fusion cell and then they can begin to think of revising their theories. This they will do in their own way, mindless of the work of record that can help them in that task. 11. Inasmuch as this author began in this field by first making the magnetic case for a real aether, then by determining the structure of that aether and deducing the fine-structure constant and going on from there to explain the connection with gravitation and proton creation, so it seems appropriate to lead from that into the subject of this Report. 'Black holes' and an 'expanding universe' conceived by physicists who were unaware of how Nature's ongoing attempts at proton creation in space can progressively reduce the frequency of electromagnetic waves in transit, plus the illusions of Einstein, have made them deaf to what this author has been saying over the years. In spite of this the author will here try once again to introduce his theory of proton creation and with it the creation of neutrons and deuterons, all to give basis to the new physics essential to our understanding of what underlies 'cold fusion' and of that deeper source of 'free energy' from which protons and deuterons are created. The author will further show how gravity features in this act. 12. One could not advance a theory on the scale provided by this author without encountering numerous obstructions where one has to pause to explain why others who claim something different have gone wrong in their own endeavours. The 'cold fusion' issue has run into such problems.
25.4.2005
Page 6 of 31
However, here it has not been a question of theory. There is now too much theory and not enough fact and so it is that the author feels he can let his own theory pertaining to cold fusion stand the scrutiny of others in this contest before needing to consider its defence. No, the rival claims in the 'cold fusion' field are those of experimenters. Whilst there are the pioneers who persist experimentally in their onward research, there are the others who rely on their personal 'experience' of confirmatory tests which have failed. Thus, whilst the author makes no special claim for superior wisdom in this experimental field, he has a comment to offer on the latter topic. It is merely an observation that to get two like-polarity charges to come together in a metal conductor one needs a standing charge of opposite polarity set up in that metal. One way of creating this condition is by setting up a non-linear orthogonal configuration of the temperature gradient and the magnetic field in the metal. In attempting to use uniform temperature calorimeter test apparatus enclosing the cold fusion cell, researchers are choking off the possible catalyst temperature gradient that could well be needed to trigger deuteron fusion. That topic will be discussed in the Part II Report and, pending that, readers may see some mention of this in New Energy News: April 1994: 'Patents for Cold Fusion' pp. 3-5. ****** It is hoped that the above discourse will explain why 'cold fusion' is seen by this author as offering more than a technological route to a non-polluting new source of energy. Nor is it merely something that can affect attitudes by nuclear physicists in their particular discipline. It is, in fact, a route to something of far greater consequence in that it gives us an insight into the true forces of Creation. It is appropriate here to remind the reader that 'cold fusion' is very much concerned with whether, and if so, how, hydrogen nuclei, adsorbed into a host metal and having their atomic electrons exposed to the interplay with free conduction electrons in that metal, can fuse together to release energy. The mutual transmutations and transient behaviour of the nuclei of the hydrogen isotopes, the proton, the deuteron and the triton, is what concerns us in finding the answer to these questions. The Triton Factor One is not far from claiming the ultimate scientific achievement when one declares an ability to calculate the proton mass theoretically in terms of electron mass, based on showing how Nature creates that proton. One should not then be surprised if the same theory explains other phenomena and leads to the precise derivation of other fundamental dimensionless physical constants, such as Planck's constant and the gravitation constant G. Whilst the author has waited patiently for his work in this field to be appreciated and recognized by the world at large, to no avail so far, it has been personally satisfying to see how the same theory yields the solutions to lesser problems, such as those posed by the muon, the pion and the kaon or the neutron and the deuteron. The key interest on which this research was founded was that of understanding the electrodynamic properties of these particles and relating the quantum of action of a real aether with the electrodynamics of the gravitons which determine the force of gravitation. In the Appendices to this Report some of the relevant published papers are reproduced, so there is no point in discussing that work in the body of this text on 'cold fusion'. However, not reproduced elsewhere is an account presented in a book entitled 'GRAVITATION' which the author published in 1975. The subject was that of showing how heavy electrons (the mu-mesons or muons) which account for
25.4.2005
Page 7 of 31
the primary energy action in the aethereal vacuum medium come together to create particles from which evolve protons and gravitons. Their action in creating protons is fully disclosed in the paper reproduced in APPENDIX D. The paper in APPENDIX E deals with the neutron and the deuteron and particular reference is made to Table II in that paper which shows how a deuteron alternates between three states, one of which is electrically neutral with a transiently-free -particle, a state which makes it particularly vulnerable to fusion with another deuteron. Concerning gravitation, the author could further include 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant', as published in Physics Essays, 2, pp. 173-179 (1989), but as that will be appended to ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 6, the reader is invited to refer to that. However, a summary introduction is presented below as APPENDIX A, reproduced from pp. 44 to 52 of the author's 1975 book entitled 'GRAVITATION'. It provides a pictorial scenario showing how particle building can occur to develop the proton into the graviton needed to explain the derivation of G, the constant of gravitation. From the viewpoint of 'cold fusion' this is relevant because one needs to be assured that a theory developed for the proton, the neutron and the deuteron is consistent with the physics needed to explain other phenomena and, as 'black holes' and gravitation have been mentioned, the link between protons and gravitation should be of interest. Knowledge of the graviton mass is essential if one is to calculate the value of G. The underlying theory was extremely simple in that the energy formula for two electric charges in contact is a quadratic equation having two solutions for the same energy value if one of the charge energies is a variable. This is because the energy of a charge e is inversely proportional to its bounding radius. Therefore, given two particle energy quanta, each nucleated by the standard unit of charge, one finds that a third particle form is created with no energy requirement. In an energy-active world, the separation and recombination of such particles and the ongoing regeneration of new particle forms amounts to a creation process. The question then arises as to which particle forms win in the contest for survival and it is found that only those having special secondary resonance properties can enjoy a long life span. In this contest for survival of particles, newly created by drawing on the pool of surplus energy, there are those which are created at very nearly the same mass by two different combination sequences. This gives them a dominant advantage but the only long term survivor in real matter is the proton. This means that the heavier particles of matter are formed by taking protons and/or antiprotons as basic building blocks and combining the -particle constituents, the electrons and positrons of the quantum-electrodynamic field background. The deuteron has to be an electron-positron-proton-antiproton composition of some kind, whereas the triton, the third isotope of hydrogen, can be of similar composition, but of more complex form. The reason for this is the fact that the basic graviton has a mass greater than twice the proton mass but not as great as three times the proton mass. Therefore, a closely-bound structure will constitute the deuteron, whereas the triton will need to have its mass seated in two end regions standing apart and not closely-bound by a -particle linkage. It was on these lines, that the theory of the deuteron and triton evolved, but the key to determining their actual structure was the evidence afforded by their precise mass and by their electrodynamic response properties as known from their magnetic moments. The same applied to the neutron, which, like the triton, had a third parameter to bring in as evidence, namely a measured lifetime. Such data, when deciphered, showed that the deuteron, for example, was exchanging states by particle and anti-particle annihilation and recreation and that in some states it had a satellite system
25.4.2005
Page 8 of 31
or 'entourage' of 'free' -particles, meaning that they could migrate a very limited distance into a host metal containing such a deuteron. For the neutron the lifetime became calculable but, as the theory evolved to build into a model of nuclear chain linkage as atoms of greater atomic number formed, so the neutron could not be seen as part of the atomic nucleus. It only exists in a free condition where it has that limited lifetime. It is only very recently that the triton data has been deciphered and the theory has been proved very successful in interpreting the lifetime. Note that lifetimes are calculated on the basis of destructive bombardment by combinations of mu-mesons featuring in their quantum-electrodynamic dance in that aethereal field background. The work on the triton has followed closely on the discovery that the proton and deuteron have an abundance relationship that is set by their interaction in this aethereal background field, as deuterons are primed to undergo fission to recreate protons, whilst protons merge by fusion to create deuterons. The showing that the deuteron and the proton have a relative natural abundance that is determined by an ongoing physical process forms the subject of APPENDIX B, whereas the derivation of the lifetime of the triton is presented in APPENDIX C. It is noted that the author has written many other papers that connect with the above theory and five, in particular, warrant mention and are commended for library reference to interested readers as they will not be included in this initial series of the author's ENERGY SCIENCE REPORTS. They are: (a) 'Meson Production based on Thomson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 137-140 (1986). (b) 'An Empricial Approach to Meson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 153-157 (1986). (c) 'The Physics of the Missing Atoms: Technetium and Promethium', Hadronic Journal, 10, 185-192 (1987). (d) 'Conservative Hadron Interactions exemplified by the Creation of the Kaon', Hadronic Journal, 12, 101-108 (1989). (e) 'A Theory of Pion Creation', Physics Essays, 2, 360-367 (1989). All these papers passed the test of referee scrutiny as did many papers giving groundwork for the above developments that were published in English by the Italian Institute of Physics in their Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento series in the five or so years before that periodical terminated publication at yearend 1985. There will be those who read this text who stand ready to criticize because there is so much in physics that can affect one's views on particle behaviour. For example, the wave nature of the neutron is not something that may seem to fit easily into the picture presented above. However, in fact, it does, because that -particle 'entourage' already mentioned (see Table I in Appendix E) is what exhibits the wave property. The reader who is ready to discard the substance of this text on that account should first read the author's paper 'The Theoretical Nature of the Photon in a Lattice Vacuum' to be found at pp. 345-359
25.4.2005
Page 9 of 31
in 'Quantum Uncertainties' Series B: Physics Vol. 162 (1986) in the NATO ASI Series published by Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York. Then the reader may refer to the author's paper: 'A Causal Theory for Neutron Diffraction', Physics Letters A, 119, pp. 105-108 (1986), before looking up those many other background papers in Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento. Indeed, for the reader who has a cosmological inclination, half an eye on the 'missing mass' problem, and believes that steady-state equilibrium by proton creation and decay is not compatible with the redshift indication of an expanding universe, the author's paper that warrants special scrutiny is: 'The Steady-State Free-Electron Population of Free Space' Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento, 41, pp. 252-256 (1984). Conclusion This Energy Science Report on Cold Fusion, in its Part I contribution to the 'Power from Water' theme, is intended to present some of the author's relevant background theory in the scientific paper form in which it has already been published elsewhere, though the paper on the proton-deuteron abundance ratio is new to this work. As already stated, Part II will address other aspects bearing more directly on the technology of cold fusion, but this Part I material is an essential introduction to show why it is that the deuteron by its particle entourage can be partially embroiled in the electron-positron activity of free electrons in a metal host conductor. As already mentioned, one can see from the reference in APPENDIX E the situation where the core of the deuteron sits electrically neutral and bare of charge for moments in a fluctuating environment of charge, meaning that it is vulnerable to Coulomb barrier penetration by charged deuterons, so giving chance of fusion. Also, it is hoped that what has been said will cause some physicists to realise that existing knowledge of fundamental physics has its limitations but that 'cold fusion' research could well give us the added stimulus leading to the needed insight into the forces at work in creating the hydrogen nucleus and so understanding Creation on its universal scale. The reprinted papers forming APPENDIX D and APPENDIX E, are copied with the kind permission from the Editors of the Hadronic Journal. 26th April 1994 DR. HAROLD ASPDEN ENERGY SCIENCE LIMITED c/o SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB, ENGLAND
APPENDIX A [The text here in the printed version of this Energy Science Report No. 5 was copied from pages 44-51 of the author's 1975 book 'GRAVITATION'] These pages can be seen in pdf format by using the following link: GRAVITATION pp. 44 to 51
25.4.2005
Page 10 of 31
*******************
APPENDIX B
THE DEUTERON-PROTON RELATIVE ABUNDANCE Introduction We begin by asking a question: 'Bearing in mind that the chemistry, meaning the chemical-bonding affinity, of heavy water is identical to that of ordinary water, would a human being be: (a) more healthy, (b) less healthy or (c) as healthy if the water intake to the body were to be heavy water rather than ordinary water?' As we approach the 21st century our scientific knowledge should have an answer to this question, especially as we know physicists are trying to solve our energy problems by nuclear fusion processes which utilize heavy water. Putting the above question rather differently: 'If a wealthy man were to create an environment in which he spent most of his time with no exposure to heavy water, meaning that all deuterium oxide or hydrogen deuteroxide is removed from the ordinary water supplied to that environment, could he expect to benefit healthwise and live longer?' Perhaps, unknown to this author, the answer to these questions is to be found somewhere on university library shelves. The author, in giving limited consideration to this question, referred to a textbook in his own possession, the third edition (1957) of 'Physical Chemistry' by Walter J. Moore, Professor of Chemistry at Indiana, published in the original American edition by Prentice-Hall Inc. of New York. An end-of-chapter question on page 249 reads: 'A normal male subject weighing 70.8 kg was injected with 5.09 ml of water containing tritium (9x109 cpm). Equilibrium with body water was reached after 3 hr when a 1-ml sample of plasma water from the subject had an activity of 1.8x105 cpm. Estimate the weight per cent of water in the human body.' The triton is the atomic nucleus of tritium, the third isotope of the element hydrogen, so, in a sense, one can infer from the latter exercise question that the body intake of very heavy water involving tritium will make the body radioactive and that cannot be good for one's health. Yet the very fact that this exercise question appears in a university textbook does suggest that water containing a concentration of tritium can be used in clinical testing. Our interest in the health implications of deuterium is therefore warranted. Deuterium is not radioactive but we still have a valid and unanswered question in wondering if heavy water is in any way damaging to health.
25.4.2005
Page 11 of 31
Deuteron Fission and Fusion as a Natural Phenomenon In that same 'Physical Chemistry' textbook and chapter 9, with its appended questions, we read on p. 244 about the 'energy production of stars'. Two nuclear processes are described as being alternative possibilities. One involves a process in which C12 and H1 fuse to produce N13 which in turn decays to C13 with the emission of a positron before experiencing further regenerative fusion and decay iterations with hydrogen and oxygen to yield ultimately He4. The other involves the fusion of two protons to produce a deuteron and a positron, also followed by the synthesis of He4. It is said that the first of these, the carbon cycle, is the source of energy in very hot stars, whilst the second involving deuterons applies to somewhat cooler stars like our sun. Amongst the steps in the stellar carbon cycle there is one in which C13 combines with H1 to yield N14 before the latter combines with H1 to produce O15. Now, moving back to Earth and those end-of-chapter questions we read: 'According to W. F. Libby [Science, 109, 227 (1949)] it is probable that radioactive carbon-14 (mean lifetime 5720 years) is produced in the upper atmosphere by the action of cosmic-ray neutrons on N14, being thereby maintained at approximately constant concentration of 12.5 cpm per g of carbon. A sample of wood from an ancient Egyptian tomb gave an activity of 7.04 cpm per g of carbon. Estimate the age of the wood.' The significance of this is that the physics of carbon-14 dating depends upon the transmutation of atomic nuclei and the probability of events involving exposure the atomic nuclei to bombardment by energetic stimuli. Now, in simply assigning a mean lifetime to a particular nuclear decay process the physicist can be hiding ignorance of something behind his presentation of empirical fact. He knows that there is decay and can measure the mean lifetime involved, but we are not in every case told why that decay occurs. Yes, we are told that the cosmic-ray neutrons create C14 from N14, presumably by emission of a positron, but we are not told what it is that sporadically bombards the C14 once it is protected from exposure to the elements and which somehow triggers its eventual decay. There is, quite clearly, something in our non-cosmic Earth environment that can activate nuclear fission and possibly nuclear fusion reactions. This may be that mysterious something we call the 'neutrino' but one really must wonder whether that term 'neutrino' is scientific 'mumbo jumbo' for what could be described as 'a sporadic intruding influence of an energetic interaction with an allpervading field background'. The advancement of energy science may depend upon the development of a better understanding of that intruding influence, because it surely must account for nuclear energy transactions which can occur at normal temperatures as in that ancient piece of wood of the carbon-dating example. It is not very satisfying to be told that, inasmuch as energy and momentum equations would not otherwise balance, there is need to recognize the existence of particles we call 'neutrinos' or the even enigmatic 'neutrons'. There was in pre-20th century science the firm belief in the existence of an aether medium which common sense suggested as that ever-present hidden underworld which could sustain electric field oscillations travelling through a vacuum. In a sense, the modern physicist has replaced that aether with a collection of imaginary particles, whether termed 'neutrinos' or described as being 'virtual' which are the unseen denizens of the vacuum state which we can refer to to 'take up the slack' created by gaps in our scientific knowledge. Yet, is the conventional picture of that virtual 'neutrino-inhabited' quantum sea correct? Let us return to our problem and focus attention upon the transmutation of the hydrogen and
25.4.2005
Page 12 of 31
deuterium nuclei, meaning the process deemed to occur in the sun by which two protons fuse with release of energy and a positron (or so-called beta-plus particle) to become a deuteron. Also meant is the reverse process by which, given the right stimulus, a deuteron can convert into two protons by emitting an electron or so-called beta-minus particle. The latter possibility as a natural process is suggested by the observation that the abundance ratio of deuterons to protons is the same for matter found in comets as it is for matter on Earth. What universal process determines this ratio and keeps it constant? Are we, instead, to believe that the ratio is one which evolves and so changes, in which case we should try to explain why the comet presents the same ratio as the Earth. Are we to believe that there was a Big Bang in which the ratio of protons to deuterons was fixed in an atomic soup which was stirred to a uniform and final mixture before the cometary matter and the Earth condensed from that common nebulous mixture? In the absence of verifying laboratory tests we shall never know for certain the answer to these questions, but one can say that there is more than the glimmer of a solution if the abundance ratio actually measured can be deduced in the manner and style of the solution of those end-of-chapter questions in that textbook entitled 'Physical Chemistry'. So, we now set our sights on explaining the proton/deuteron abundance ratio ducumented at page 965 of the 1967 second edition of the McGraw-Hill 'Handbook of Physics' edited by Condon and Odishaw. According to this reference work, in every ten million atoms containing hydrogen and deuterium there are 9,998,508 nucleated by protons and 1,492 nucleated by deuterons. The conditions governing the fusion and fission of these atomic particles must involve the element of chance, in that a combination of events conducive to decay must occur as a probability function, bringing about actions involving energy in a form which can materialize or dematerialize in integer quanta we associate with decay particle products (those beta particles). Note that we speak of 'decay' both for the fission and the fusion process as if decay can be a two-way or reversible operation. This has meaning only if the real form of the proton and the deuteron is that of a system which overall exhibits the stability of single-form existence but yet which, inherently, undergoes cyclic alternations of state, as between a ground state and one of greater energy. Much more will be said about this subject in this and later work and by reference to the author's published papers, but the reader may here consider two basic facts known to the particle physicist. These are (a) that the deuteron exhibits a nuclear magnetic moment that is about 6/7ths of that expected in relation to its spin property and (b) that the proton exhibits properties suggesting it is composed of three charges, rather than a single charge. (See APPENDIX E and the Feynman reference in APPENDIX A). The deuteron property implies that it has a state for one seventh of the time in which its positive charge becomes that of a satellite beta-plus particle that has been transiently displaced from the mass of its core, which thereby reacts as a neutral charge in its spin response during that limited transient period. The proton property suggests a 'quark' composition which this author prefers to see as being that of a proton charge +e aggregated with a (+e, -e) charge pair in the form of a beta-plus and a beta-minus particle or, in the alternative, an antiproton charge (-e) aggregated with two beta-plus (+e) particles. For the actual proton this implies alternation between two states in one of which the mass-energy is slightly greater than the norm of that of a bare proton charge standing in isolation and in the other of which the mass-energy is slightly lower than that norm. For the deuteron, there are three alternative states, (a) one of lowest energy, the ground state, in
25.4.2005
Page 13 of 31
which two antiproton charges are aggregated with three beta-plus particles, (b) the neutral state, of greatest 'core' energy, where a (+e, -e) beta-particle charge pair sits between an antiproton charge and a proton charge in the near presence of a satellite (+e) beta-particle, and (c) the third energy state for which two proton charges are aggregated with an intermediate beta-minus particle with the (+e, -e) beta-particle charge pair in a satellite position. These particle 'models' are justified on other grounds in APPENDIX E, but they serve here to give basis for our understanding that a system of protons in a suitable combination of states can serve collectively to permit a balanced energy transition involving the creation of the deuteron in its least energy state. Similarly, it is the transiently neutral state of the deuterons which permits their reaction in an energy balanced transition which regenerates the proton. To formulate the resulting abundance ratio of H1: H2 we write: H1/H2 = (S1N/(S2n)(P1/P2) ................... (1) In the above equation: S1 is the factor signifying the incidence of state when a transition can occur involving the proton (this having the value 2 because there are two equally probable states). S2 is the factor signifying the incidence of state when a transition can occur involving the deuteron (this having the value 7 because the deuteron is in its vulnerable neutral core state for one seventh of the time). N is the number of protons that need to be subjected simultaneously to the transition stimulus of the energy fluctuations in the environmental field background in order to secure the energy balance conditions needed to assure a transmutation. n is the number of deuterons that need to be subjected simultaneously to the transition stimulus of the energy fluctuations in the environmental field background in order to secure the energy balance conditions needed to assure a transmutation. P1 is the net number of protons created by collective action in a transition event. P2 is the net number of deuterons created by collective action in a transition event. The evaluation of the four parameters N, n, P1 and P2 will be our task below, but, to show the power of the argument being pursued, it is of interest to recite the calculated values first. They are: N = 35 n = 8 P1 = 18 and P2 = 16 Putting these in equation (1) gives the result: H1: H2 = 6705 : 1 which corresponds to a deuteron abundance factor of 1491 parts per ten million compared with the observed factor of 1492. This result is, at least in this author's opinion, a very significant scientific contribution.
25.4.2005
Page 14 of 31
It means that the physical processes that can occur in the oceans of the Earth can establish this equilibrium ratio as between the abundance of protons and deuterons to cause the heavy water content of the sea to be a natural physical quantity maintained at a constant value. One needs, of course, to apply the underlying theory to estimate the time constant of the exchanges leading to equilibrium. This is measured in thousands of years so that one can feel confident that a laboratory store of deuterium hydroxide or heavy water will not convert into normal water too readily. More important, however, there are implications for the Big Bang theory of cosmic evolution and for energy generation by so-called 'cold-fusion' methods, if deuterons and protons can undergo mutual transmutation at the temperature of our environment. The abundance ratio could not be computed by theory in the way suggested unless such transmutations do occur and, it may be noted, none of those high energy neutrons which are deemed so important in high energy physics are involved in the processes discussed. The Significance of the Deuteron Algorithm The reason for terming the formulation in equation (1) as an 'algorithm' is the author's way of saying that what has been discovered is the short-cut route for solving a problem which, by orthodox methods, would otherwise involve vast amounts of computer time. That is assuming that the route to a solution by computer methods has been devised and, as concerns the proton/deuteron abundance ratio, scientists seem not, as yet, to have appreciated that the problem is amenable to solution. It is traditional in particle physics which involve hadronic mass calculations for problems to be approached by iterative techniques which take account of a vast number of interacting factors. This will be better understood when we come to discuss what it is that determines the proton/electron mass ratio. The algorithm we will use for solving that problem is the 'jewel in the crown' amongst the arsenal already mentioned. It has devastating implications for orthodox scientific doctrine founded on so-called 'quantum chromodynamics'. However, as the scientific world knows from the hostility and resentment aroused against the claims of Professors Fleischmann and Pons for daring to imply that deuteron cold fusion had been discovered, there is readiness to scorn progress in science that challenges cherished beliefs. Where the only product is an intellectual accomplishment expressed as an equation which presents the numerical value of what is a very fundamental dimensionless physical constant, then the wrath of the establishment scientist can reach its zenith. The modern computer allows one, by trial an error, to probe all combinations of numbers, if one is willing to indulge in exercises that are arithmetic in character rather than physically founded. It follows, by the doctrine that if something is possible it will eventually happen, that scientists assume the trial and error arithmetic exercise is at the root of any claim to have deduced a physical constant. They lack credulity and show no tolerance when one makes a claim to explain the numerical value of a physical constant. What, they ask, is the merit of deducing the value of a quantity having a particular meaning in physics when the value of that quantity is already known to high precision from our experimental measurements? They argue, therefore, that to find acceptance one must, before it is measured, predict a numerical value of a constant having real physical meaning, so that eventual measurement of that quantity will deservedly command attention. This is not a logical posture, given that there are a limited number of truly dimensionless fundamental constants in physics, all of which have been already measured to very high precision. It is not a logical posture because it means that we are denied the hope of ever allowing a simple algorithmic approach to confirm to us the discovery of insight into the factors which govern the constant of gravitation, Planck's constant and that proton/electron mass ratio already mentioned. It is, however, deemed acceptable to allow the supercomputer to try to decipher the mysteries of Nature
25.4.2005
Page 15 of 31
whilst feeding it with mathematically elegant instructions designed to test artistic notions of symmetry. That said, the author challenges the reader to examine equation (1) and consider the skill needed to contrive its discovery and the choice of parameters had the author really probed the problem by exercising a computer. Firstly, consider the simplicity of the equation and its symmetry as between the proton-deuteron transition of the numerator and the deuteron-proton transition of the denominator. Then consider the chances, with an arbitrary choice of integer numbers for S1, S2, N, n, P1 and P2 of finding the correct solution and, after choosing an appropriate combination of integers, consider the scope for devising a plausible physical model giving meaning to the integers selected. Note that the author could have put the integer 9 for P1 and the integer 8 for P2, if the basis of the formulation had not developed from direct physical analysis. One may wonder what solution the trial and error computer search would have found had the objective been set for this general equation to give the right answer to within the one in thousand precision assuming any integer combination other than that presented above is to be regarded as valid. There are in fact many possibilities but then one confronts that formidable task of justifying in physical terms which combination applies and how each of the numbers chosen has a valid role in determining the proton-deuteron abundance ratio. In the absence of a tentative model to guide one's endeavours that is not a worthwhile pursuit. Physicists are not loath to wasting time on such a project, judging by the attack on the theoretical value of the dimensionless quantity incorporating Planck's constant. This is a reference to -1, the constant we know as having the value 137.035 9895(61). In 1970 a physicist named Wyler claimed a derivation for this constant as 137.036 082 by presenting a formula including the quantity and the integer numbers 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 and 9. As is explained by Petley in his 1985 book 'The Fundamental Physical Constants and the Frontiers of Measurement', it was in 1971 that Robertson, Roskies and Prosen brought disrepute to such work by arbitrarily sythesizing values of -1 with the aid of a computer. Using a similar format to Wyler's equation, given some ground rules and arbitrary combination and choice of 11 integer numbers and further including , the computer found 6 values of -1 all closer to the measured value than was Wyler's value. The integers ranged up to 19 in value and one can but deplore this 'numbers game' exercise, as a means for suppressing genuine physically based endeavour by those who seek to solve the great mysteries of physical science. The fine structure constant concerns the action we associate with Planck's constant. It is at the very heart of the Energy Science to be discussed in these Reports. It is with that background in mind that the author invites the reader to examine the algorithm presented in equation (1) and consider the problem of devising a physically meaningful result in such good accord with the measured value, if that accord were fortuitous. However, for the benefit of the reader who seeks the truths of this situation, we will first summarize the process involved and then begin the analysis of the energy transactions which govern equation (1). How is it that protons can transmute into deuterons and vice versa as an ongoing natural process, when the mass-energy of two protons exceeds that of the deuteron? The reason is that, owing to vacuum energy fluctuations, both the proton and the deuteron are constantly experiencing changes of state in which they have slightly changed mass-energy. It so happens that the highest energy state of the deuteron which applies for one seventh of the time
25.4.2005
Page 16 of 31
is one for which the energy is higher than twice the lowest energy state of the proton. The proton ground state applies for what is virtually half of any period of time. The other half is spent in its higher energy state and it flips cyclically between the two states halting very momentarily between these two states whilst in its 'bare proton' form. The presence of beta particles when in either of the two principal energy states account for the mass differences. Accordingly, the deuteron to proton transformation occurs when the deuteron is in its highest energy condition. Conversely, the protons cooperate in creating a deuteron by action focused on the deuteron ground state. The analysis by which these actions can be fully understood does, therefore, require the background study of the state composition of the proton and the deuteron. For the purpose of this Report, it suffices here to refer to APPENDIX A in which the author discusses the three-part proton and APPENDIX E, which concerns the deuteron. As to the proton, the 'bare proton' has a definite mass that is 1836.152 times the electron mass, as calculated in APPENDIX D, but, by reference to Feynman in APPENDIX A, we saw that the proton in its normal state behaves as if its charge is spread between three centres. In fact it is alternating between states, being at times a bare proton charge and at other times having close association with an electron-positron pair and even in another state becoming an antiproton coupled to two positrons or rather beta-particles, because physicists prefer not to think of electrons and positrons as being nuclear constituents. In its beta-particle association it has a mass increased in one state by a value very close to 0.25 electron mass units and decreased in the other least-energy ground state by very nearly 0.25 electron mass units. For the purpose of the calculations of the deuteron-proton transmutations the time spent in the intermediate 'bare proton' state, in order to keep the overall mass-energy balance at a mean value equal to that of the 'bare proton', is quite negligible. The reader is here reminded that particle physicists picture the proton as comprising quarks as if it has three separate fractionally charged components. This author urges the reader to think in terms of a proton which changes form between three states in each of which its component charges are unitary at all times. This author is urging the reader to keep in mind that charges can be created and annihilated in pairs and that this is a property of the beta-particles known from quantum electrodynamics. It needs little imagination to recognize that such charge transmutations occur inside protons and deuterons and that there could even be some polarity inversion or exchanges involved between beta-particles and protons when they are so closely bound together in atomic nuclei. Physicists who believe in fractionally charged quarks are leaping into the unknown and making unwarranted assumptions. All the evidence points instead to transmuting forms of unitary charge particles which only appear on a statistical average to be fractionally charged. They are, in fact, exchanging energy with nearby charges and participating in vacuum field effects of pair creation and annihilation activity. Therefore, they exhibit behaviour reflecting their average condition. Of course, when they emerge from their bondage in the composite particle form they must appear as unitary charges, which explains why the so-called quark has never been isolated in any experiments. Just as the physicist assumes that there is a neutron in the deuteron, so he has assumed that there are quarks in the proton. That is ill-founded assumption which can be remedied by understanding what is offered in this text as an explanation for proton-deuteron quantities which can be measured against the theory. We now delve into the detailed analysis leading to the prime formula specifying the natural proton:deuteron abundance ratio.
25.4.2005
Page 17 of 31
Energy-Balance Criteria It will be argued that, for the simple particle structures involved in the deuteron and proton states, we can assume for close approximation purposes, that energy transactions between these two particle forms involve quantities corresponding to quarter units of the rest mass-energy of the electron. Should the reader question this it may help to refer to another older textbook, this being 'Modern Physics' by Professor H. A. Wilson of the Rice Institute at Houston, Texas, reprinted in 1946 from the 1937 second edition (publishers Blackie & Son Limited, London). It is at p. 261 in the chapter on Atomic Nuclei that Wilson begins to discuss the fact that the energy released in nuclear reactions, particularly those involving the lighter atoms, is nearly always in approximate multiples of 0.387 MeV. This is 0.757 units of electron rest-mass energy, but, for reasons that will later become apparent, we will assume that this corresponds to three of the quarter units just mentioned. It seems quite logical, therefore, to look to the electron or the positron (that is, the beta particles associated with nuclear decay) as providing the 'glue' or binding energy holding the heavy charges (the hadrons) together in an atomic nucleus. The deuteron when bombarded by very high energy from a radioactive gamma ray source breaks up by emitting two heavy particles, one being the proton. The other heavy particle is a neutral entity which we call the 'neutron'. The neutron is unstable and has a mean lifetime of about 15 minutes, breaking up into a proton and an electron. It follows from this that one could say that a deuteron comprises two protons and an electron. Remembering then that the proton is deemed to comprise three charged components it is not unreasonable to believe that, when it stands in isolation, it comprises a heavy positive charge in close association with an electron-positron pair or a heavy negative particle closely bound between two positrons. In this scenario the 'neutron' can be a neutral aggregation of an electron and one of these proton forms. We come therefore back to the rather simple proposition that electrons and positrons exist in atomic nuclei and account for the binding energy which holds the protons and antiprotons together. There are no neutrons, as such, in atomic nuclei. Now, based on Table II in APPENDIX E, it can be seen that we can state the highest and lowest energy states of the deuteron in terms of their 'proton' P unit composition and 'electron mass units' E. The latter are units of 2e2/3a, so that state A has energy 2P+3E-35E/8 because the deuteron, as such, incorporates three -particles. State C has energy 2P+E-18E/8, there being only one -particle in the deuteron core. The intermediate state B deuteron has an energy 2P+2E-25E/8, which is the highest. In contrast the proton has a least energy P+2E-9E/4 and a highest energy of P+2E-7E/4. Consider now the action needed to produce ground-state deuterons from protons which have net energies of -E/4 or +E/4. The action we contemplate will involve no net energy exchange in the transmutation process, but may involve fluctuations of energy. Also, we will presume the decay of protons is conditioned at an energy level matching that at which protons are created, this is in their bare charge form with no satellite electrons or positrons. The proton input to the deuteron creation process must then involve an even number of protons involving equal participation of those with net +E/4 energies and -E/4 energies (meaning -7E/4 and -9E/4 interaction energies, respectively). Our deuteron creation reaction will involve N three-charge protons creating x ground-state A deuterons plus y bare electrons or positrons and z residual protons in their bare charge state. The rules governing a decay process of this kind are that the space occupancy by electron and positron charge and so their intrinsic energy content must be conserved, as must interaction energy
25.4.2005
Page 18 of 31
separately and the numbers of bare proton or antiprotons. Noting that the deuteron ground-state interaction energy is given by -35E/8 and that its electron/positron content is 3, so one can then write: space conservation: 2N = 3(x) + y ................................... (2) energy conservation: (35E/8)x = (7E/4 + 9E/4)(N/2) ........ (3) proton conservation: N = 2(x) + z ..................................... (4) It requires simple algebra to find the solution for minimal residue, meaning z is minimum with N finite. It may be verified that the following combination of numerical values satisfies the three equations: (x) . (y) . (z) . (N) 16 .. 22 .. 3 .. 35 32 .. 44 .. 6 .. 70 From this one finds the unique solution, which is that a trigger event involving 35 protons produces 16 ground-state deuterons. The protons can be in either of two states and at their transition through the bare state some will be tending to increase energy and others will be tending to decrease energy. This trigger event occurs when all 35 are in the same transient increasing energy state, meaning an event probability factor, the inverse of which is proportional to the numbers of protons in the equilibrium system. The latter factor is (2)35. The reverse process involves a vacuum field fluctuation supplying 0.511 MeV of energy as part of the trigger event by which deuterons in their transient highest energy B state are raised to the energy level at which they can transform into proton pairs. There is a governing requirement for other transient energy input in paired units of the electron rest-mass energy quantum E = 0.511 MeV and a need for charge parity by a transformation of the C state deuteron form into the ground-state A form. Note that a neutral B-state deuteron core without its satellite beta-plus particle has a net energy of 2E-25E/8 or -9E/8. Therefore the addition to a group of 8 such deuterons of the mass energy carried by 9 beta-plus particles will correspond to an event which brings the energy into balance with that of 16 protons, suggesting that this could be the process by which deuterons transmute into protons. The ongoing energy fluctuations in the electron-positron field will allow the energy of those 8 satellite beta-plus particles to redeploy into electron-positron pairs in the quantum-electrodynamic background which sources the 9 beta particles, as the positive charge transfers to the proton product. On balance only one 0.511MeV unit E of field energy is needed to simulate the deuteron-proton conversion. The action described can, therefore, on energy balance criteria, create 16 protons from those 8 deuterons, but only if there is a net unit electron rest-mass energy input and a complementary reaction which can take up the surplus unit of positive charge. Since the net core deficit energy of the C state deuteron is E less 9E/4 or -10E/8 and that of the A state deuteron is 3E less 35E/8, which is -11E/8, the transition of 11 C state deuterons to 10 A state deuterons with the shedding of two protons will occur with no energy residue. However, in this case the reaction product requires an input of one unit of positive charge. It follows that, at least in theory, the state transitions of the deuteron could, in the normal ongoing QED field activity, give reason for expecting protons to emerge from natural fission of deuterons but the statistics of such an event are set by the chance combination of 8 of the B-deuteron states. Then 16 protons will emerge directly from those B-state deuterons and 2 protons will emerge from the very frequent C-state to A-state transitions. The event will mean that protons are created in batches
25.4.2005
Page 19 of 31
of 18 from these events. Each deuteron is in the B-state for 1/7th of any period of time. This yields an event factor giving measure of deuteron population as (7)8 since 8 deuterons collectively are the target for the primary reaction. Combining these results one finds that S1 and N in equation (1) are 2 and 35, respectively. Furthermore, P1 in equation (1) is 18. Similarly, S2 is 7 and n is 8 in equation (1) with P2 as 16. The overall ratio of proton to deuteron in the equilibrium state can then be expressed by the contracted quantity 9(16/7)8, which is 6705 as a proton to deuteron ratio or 1491 deuterons per ten million protons. As already stated above, this compares with an experimental abundance ratio assessment of 1492 per ten million. The General Parity Criteria It is important to appreciate, when dealing with problems involving the background zero-point energy field, that the energy balance is the primary regulating factor. There can be energy fluctuations but, so far as the energy locked into the matter form is concerned, this is conserved in the overall picture of things. Charge parity and the parity of space occupancy associated with electron-positron charge forms are less important to individual energy processes of the kind just described, though these too must be balanced on a collective less-local basis. For example, an electron and positron can, together, be seen as a neutral charge entity and yet two space quanta are involved. Conversely, two space quanta can be occupied by charge of the same polarity, meaning that a given even number of space quanta can all be occupied, and then there can be a net charge out-of-balance. If one says that 35 normal three-charge protons can transform into 16 deuterons plus 3 bare singlecharge protons, there is a net charge deficit of 16 units of charge e. However, we are also saying that the reverse event can occur in which batches of 8 plus 1 deuterons convert into 18 protons. Both batch processes are occurring together in the deuteron/proton environment and so, allowing for transient leptonic (electron-positron) activity in the QED field background (see section III of APPENDIX E) the charge condition balances overall. Similarly the space occupancy condition is a self-balancing process in our stable local field environment. Should one ask whether a litre of heavy water will be transmogrified into normal water by the processes suggested above one must answer affirmatively. The real question is that of knowing the time scale involved. Here one can estimate the time rate of these events by noting that an event time factor of the order of 10-13 seconds characterizes the single electron transition in the quantum field background. It can decay at A and be recreated at B as if it jumps from A to B in that period. The three-charge proton and state B deuteron decays discussed above centre on a pairing of two electron-sized charges in each of these particle forms. The governing frequency of the background field is that corresponding to a photon of energy equal to the rest mass energy of the electron. The chance factor for a single electron as target for an energy fluctuation is about 1 in 107, meaning that
25.4.2005
Page 20 of 31
there are that many cycles of that electron Compton frequency in the 10-13 second period of the electron lifetime. Therefore, we can estimate that every 10-6 seconds every proton and B state deuteron will be a candidate for transmutation. For there to be transmutation, however, the target particles have all to be in the same state and this is governed, for the proton, by that factor above of (2)35. This means that, on average, a proton will withstand participation in the deuteron creation process for a period of (2) 35 microseconds, which is about 10 hours. This period reduces to a few seconds for the converse process by which deuterons should transmute into protons in water that is nearly 100% deuterium oxide. It is only in the composition of the equilibrium mixture that the proton transmutation time rate applies for the reciprocal transmutations. Clearly, therefore, the question arises as to why heavy water does not convert into normal water on a time scale measured in minutes. The answer to this is connected with the problem confronting the 'cold fusion' issue. When deuterons transmute into protons in the recognized way, energy has to be added by gamma radiation and the products are one proton plus one neutron. 'Cold fusion' has posed the question "Where are the neutrons?". It would seem that what happens in the world of very high energy collisions is not the same as events in the cool conditions of a medium at water temperature. In the sea the process described above can occur to keep the equilibrium between the deuterium oxide D2O, hydrogen deuteroxide HDO and hydrogen oxide H2O. The charge imbalance is there avoided by the recriprocal transmutation but one must assume charge fluctuations involving the atomic nuclei in exchanges with the background field. Possibly this activity has connection with the many reported energy anomalies found in experiments with water, particularly those involving electrolytic action. In high energy physics of deuteron transmutation the charge issue is avoided by the action we term the 'neutron', which this author must assume is really a proton or antiproton neutralised by an accompaniment of electron(s) and/or positron(s). However, we still ask the question "How long will it take before a kilogram of heavy water converts to a 50% mixture of heavy water and normal water?" Note that this question is put in terms of weight because the overall volume of the water would increase as deuterons change into protons. Furthermore, unless there is neutron emission, there would be release of hydrogen gas unless oxygen were to be absorbed. The answer must lie in the understanding of the source of the added positive charge taken up by the newly created protons. If this source is sluggish in providing that charge then the transmutation rate will be retarded. It may be measured in hundreds or thousands of years under normal environmental conditions or where water is sealed in a container. Equally, it may be a matter of days only where the heavy water is absorbed into a palladium host metal carrying electric current. Accordingly, one must wonder if the charge adjustments applicable where protons convert into deuterons and vice versa affect adjustments to the natural equilibrium ratio of protons to deuterons and see how this affects the 'cold fusion' deuteron transmutation process. This Part I Report will not enter into speculations on the technological implications of the latter issue. The main point made in this contribution is that the ratio of protons to deuterons which occurs naturally is not an arbitrary consequence of disorder in the evolution of historical events. It is a fundamental physical constant determined by the same regulating factors which fix constants such as the proton/electron mass ratio. Footnote
25.4.2005
Page 21 of 31
In the paper which follows as APPENDIX C the deuteron features as a component of the triton and the decay of the triton is related to events by which the deuteron is itself affected by the mu-meson bombardment. There is a fundamental difference in that action compared with the situation above. Whereas the beta-particles are really the target affected by those mu-mesons in the isolated proton and deuteron forms, when one considers these as part of larger atomic nuclei the decay action is dominated by mumeson attack on a different and larger target which latches onto nucleons belonging to atomic nuclei having atomic mass number of 3 or more. Though this may sound complicated, in the limited space available in this Report, the author has deemed it best to present this Appendix B and Appendix C as separate self-contained texts and it is hoped that the reader will be able to follow the logic of the separate presentations even though study of the author's other published work will be needed to fully comprehend the distinction. The threshold between 2 and 3 nucleons has a dynamic 'gravity' balance connection with the 'graviton' mass developed in Fig. 7 as shown in APPENDIX A. The 'larger target' involved in proton creation, one larger than the electron or beta-particle, by 1843 in volume, is explained on page 40 of APPENDIX C and more fully on the second page of APPENDIX E. The relevance of the latter to the deuteron as a component of the triton is that it brings about the actual creation of a proton within the triton as a deuteron-proton composition. It is shown on pp. 42-43 that the mu-meson bombardment of that space lattice charge 'target' triggers the transient creation of a proton, on average, every 12.2 years. If this event occurs in the 3-or-more-nucleon core, so that may well involve a proton transfer and a nuclear transmutation. This is an action quite distinct from that described above where it was assumed that the two beta-particles in the proton or the B-state core deuteron were the 'target' for mu-meson attack.
APPENDIX C
[The following paper was presented at a conference held by ANPA, the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association, in Cambridge, England during 9-12 September 1993. Though the title refers to the 'model proton' the main thrust of this paper concerns the triton and theoretical derivation of its lifetime.]
THE MODEL PROTON IN A NON-COMBINATORIAL HIERARCHY Harold Aspden The proton, as the primary form of matter, is at the creative equilibrium interface between matter and vacuum energy. Just as there is electron-positron pair creation and annihilation activity in the vacuum field, so there may be an underlying 'heavy' lepton (muon) activity in the universal field environment. This paper explores the relationship between the muon and the proton on the simple assumption that Nature is constantly trying to create protons but is normally restrained by energy equilibrium criteria. The author's theoretical model is of long standing record, as outlined in Physics Today, November 1984, p. 15, and as acknowledged for its remarkable 'classically-derived' prediction of the proton-
25.4.2005
Page 22 of 31
electron mass ratio in the paper reporting its measurement by Van Dyck et al, International Journal of Mass Spectrometry and Ion Processes, 66 (1985) 327-337. The advance reported in this ANPA-15 paper concerns recent developments of this model which focus upon aspects of the deuteron and the triton. In particular, the model will be tested by deriving theoretically the 12 year lifetime of tritium on the assumption that it decays owing to interaction with that same heavy lepton field environment that creates the proton. This approach then affords insight into the exposure of the deuteron to that heavy lepton field activity. The quantitative aspects of the energy transactions involved are too remarkable to be attributed to coincidence. The advantage to humanity which such research affords is linked to the prospect of success now emerging from research on cold fusion, inasmuch as the theoretical processes envisaged explain why no neutrons result from what is deemed to be deuteron fusion. The consequences concern an alternative natural philosophy having bearing upon the forces of creation in the universe and are important in that by theorizing about the derivation of the proton mass in relation to the electron there is spin-off which can cause physicists to revise their views on nuclear theory. 1. The Triton in Focus Tritium is the third isotope of hydrogen. It is radioactive but decays by releasing a minute amount of energy - about one thirtieth of what is needed to create an electron. Its nucleus, triton, is an enigma in physics. A portion of the energy it releases somehow vanishes without trace and this phenomenon has been the basis of the neutrino hypothesis. The fusion of hydrogen in the sun is believed to be the source of energy which powers our existence on Earth, but the supposed related neutrino emission from the sun is itself a problem. There is just not enough solar neutrino energy intercepted by our Earth to balance the energy books representing the solar hydrogen fusion hypothesis. It is submitted that the triton is the guardian of the secrets which govern our understanding of the cold fusion process encountered when deuterium is loaded into a cathode in a Fleischmann-Pons experimental cell. The triton has a lifetime of 12 years. That is a very important clue and it has caused this author to focus on the assumption that the triton incorporates a ground-state deuteron, which is the seat of the decay action. This means that the deuteron itself is subject to radioactive decay processes but, as will be shown, this decay action involves a proton creation followed by proton decay. What may then emerge as a cold fusion product is a tritium nucleus or the reestablishment of the deuteron in its orginal form. In other words, the deuteron appears stable, but it can develop into a triton by a natural lifetime process, albeit with very much higher probability if another deuteron in close proximity is available to sacrifice a proton. This proposal is not hypothetical. It is based on a theme developed in the author's earlier work, published long before the Fleischmann-Pons cold fusion discovery was announced. See, for example, the American Institute of Physics journal 'Physics Today', 37, p. 15 (1984). There the author drew attention to the P and Q scenario where a proton of energy P was attracted to an oppositely charged partner of energy Q. If each has a charge e bounded by a sphere of radius a determined by the J. J. Thomson formula (E = 2e2/3a), the total energy of the P and Q charge in surface contact is: P + Q - 3PQ/2(P+Q) For the binding energy term to be a maximum, P and Q must have a certain relationship. This is when 1+Q/P is the square root of 3/2. The reader may then verify that with P as 1836 the value of Q is 413, which is the combined energy of a pair of mu-mesons in electron units. Resulting from this
25.4.2005
Page 23 of 31
discovery the author has advanced elsewhere a theory of proton creation which explains how protons are built from the virtual muonic energy activity in the vacuum field. Note here that electron-positron creation and annihilation are ongoing activities in the vacuum field, the basis of quantum electrodynamics, and the mu-mesons are the 'heavy electrons' which hitherto have been seen in physics as having no role or function that could justify their existence in Nature. Their role is, of course, the most important of all, that of matter creation in the form of protons! Now, we are, in the description which follows, to see how this same process of proton creation is at work within a deuteron or a triton. The algorithm which the reader may keep in mind in the analysis which follows is the curious mathematical fact that 4Q, meaning four mu-meson pairs, if combined with the energy released by creating two (P:Q) systems from two bare P components, will be exactly that needed to create a new proton or antiproton P. To prove this write: P = 4Q + 3PQ/(P+Q) - 2Q Then rearrange algebraically as: P(P+Q) = 2Q(P+Q) + 3PQ or: 3P2 = 2P2 + 4PQ + 2Q2 = 2(P+Q)2 which is the above relationship between P and Q as calculated from minimization of energy potential. It follows, therefore, that if a particle containing two P nucleons is bombarded by the mu-meson vacuum energy background there is a condition where 8 mu-mesons will create a third P. This is tantamount to a fusion process occurring at room temperature which adds a nucleon to a deuteron. Note that the energy is 'borrowed' partially from the vacuum as a vacuum energy fluctuation and partly provided by the degeneration of two nucleons in creating the two Q dimuon components. The system will 'restore' by causing a proton elsewhere, as in a nearby deuteron, to decay, but for a transient period there will be a very active energy situation which can give basis for much that is observed in cold fusion phenomena. The remainder of this paper will develop the above theme by reference to the triton, and the verifying key which confirms what is said above is the resulting calculation of the 12 year mean lifetime for the transmutation just mentioned. This gives insight into the energy generation rate that can be expected in the cold fusion deuteron reaction. A deuteron will experience the mu-meson transmutation described on an average that is set by the triton 12 year lifetime. Since the deuteron is in the required ground state condition 2 parts in 7 of any period of time probable deuteron transmutation lifetime by this process is 42 years. However, one cannot exclude secondary nuclear reactions triggered by the excess energy transients of the above process. [Note: the 2 part in 7 factor is derived in the author's paper The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron, Hadronic Journal, 9 129-136 (1986). APPENDIX E of this Energy Science Report.] Note that the deuteron ground state is one in which the deuteron structure has two antiprotons sitting amongst three beta-plus particles, represented by (e+:P-:e+:P-:e+), and the process we are to consider is one where attack by 8 mu-mesons causes the outer beta-plus particles to become dimuon Q
25.4.2005
Page 24 of 31
charges as a newly created P charge is nucleated from a nearby vacuum lattice charge. The latter will be understood from the following detailed description. The Constant Vacuum In the Winter 1992 issue of 21st Century one reads of an interview with Martin Fleischmann and his Italian theoretician colleague Giuliano Perparata on the eve of the Third Annual Cold Fusion Conference. This was an interview which revealed that we could expect a backlash from the criticism levied at the pioneer work on cold fusion. It has aroused retaliation which will take the form of an attack on the weaknesses of much that has become accepted in theoretical physics. The following two quotations from that interview will serve to set the scene for the subject developed in this paper: 'There is something seriously adrift with modern theory. There is a lot of work to be done, lots more to be discovered.' 'Preparata pointed to the hyperfine structure constant, alpha, which relates the electrostatic and electro-magnetic fields and is crucial in physics. "I often ask myself," he said, not really joking, "What if the fine structure constant were like the Dow-Jones index and constantly shifted up and down? Then there could be no science and no rationality .... If it were not for constants such as the fine structure constant and the speed of light, then our universe would not exist.' Here then is a statement that should cause physicists to wonder and reason as to why the textbooks of science do not discuss the way in which Nature determines that fine structure constant and thereby is able to build our universe. The derivation of the value 137.0359 which is -1, where is 2e2/hc, e being the electron electrostatic charge, h Planck's constant and c the speed of light, is crucial to everything that is fundamental in physics. Next, in order of fundamental importance, there is the understanding which can come from the theoretical derivation of , the proton-electron mass ratio, as 1836.152. In a 1985 book entitled 'The Fundamental Physical Constants and the Frontier of Measurement' published under the auspices of the Institute of Physics in U.K. B. W. Petley of the National Physical Laboratory describes the theoretical attempts to derive these dimensionless constants and states at page 161: 'No doubt the theoretical attempts to calculate and will continue - possibly with a Nobel prize winning success.' Now, the reader may wonder how this concerns the triton and cold fusion. Well, perhaps Martin Fleischmann and Giuliano Preparata are unaware of the connection via this author's work, but its very essence is a vacuum medium that bombards us with action and is a seat of events that trigger photon creation, thereby determining , and proton creation which determines . The Physics Letters, 41A, pp. 423-424 derivation of was published in 1972 and the theoretical derivation of was published by the Italian Institute of Physics under the title: 'Calculation of the Proton Mass in a Lattice Model for the Aether', in Il Nuovo Cimento, 30A, pp. 235-238 (1975). The first paper derived in terms of a resonance in a fluid crystal structure of the vacuum and the analysis involved knowledge of the lattice cell dimensions. The underlying research had already at that time solved the problem of gravitation and revealed that a virtual pair of mu-mesons had association with each cell and were the building blocks for hadronic matter including protons. Of particular relevance to the calculation of the proton-electron mass ratio in free space is the way in which, as a rare occasion governed by statistical chance, nine mu-mesons come together at the seat
25.4.2005
Page 25 of 31
of a vacuum lattice charge to create a proton. Here then is Nature's arsenal by which it can act, even from within our bodies, to bombard matter with mu-mesons. These are energy quanta which act in concert to strike the body blow which converts a tritium atom into helium 3 and a deuterium atom into tritium, in the process creating a new nucleon in an act seen as fusion but by promoting the decay of one elsewhere. Indeed, we confront a scenario where Nature is constantly trying to create protons throughout space but it only succeeds where the energy equilibrium as between the sub-quantum vacuum underworld and matter has become unbalanced. Generally speaking, if a new proton is created an old one somewhere nearby must decay. Therefore, if the nuclear chemistry suggests that an intruder proton moves to fuse with the deuteron so creating a tritium nucleus, the real event is probably one where the mumeson attack on the deuteron has caused a proton to appear as a nucleon whereupon the energy equilibrium bookkeeper has 'ordered' the demise of that intruder proton. This may seem fantasy speculation, but the reader should be mindful of the power of the author's published research by which those and constants were derived. The calculations matched the partper-million precision of the measured values and were in exact accord. We can, therefore, proceed to study the triton with confidence and our objective, as with corresponding published work on the neutron, for example, is no less than the aim to confirm the theory by simultaneously deriving values for the magnetic moment, the mass and the lifetime of the triton. The reader can share in the author's pleasure of discovery by working through this exercise, because the triton, rather curiously, lends itself to straightforward analysis. It is necessary to engage in some preamble to explain the factors involved but to keep the focus on the objective the argument will advance directly to the calculation of these three values and the reader is asked to keep in mind that the ultimate objective is the calculation of the triton lifetime. The deuteron component of the triton stands as the target and so much of what is discussed is addressed at the deuteron transmutation as if it has the same lifetime in its ground state. The Triton's Vital Statistics The triton has a structure supporting three units of nucleon mass presenting an overall unit of positive charge e. Its mass is slightly less than that of three protons. Indeed, we should begin by working out precisely how much the measured mass differs from that of three protons as that provides the value we need to compare with the one derived theoretically. We will work in terms of mass expressed in terms of electron rest mass as a number ratio. The author's data reference is the 2nd Edition of the McGraw-Hill, Condon and Odishaw Handbook of Physics (page 9.65). Atomic mass of proton plus electron: ......... 1.00782519 Atomic mass of triton plus electron: ........... 3.01604971 Unit atomic mass in electron units: ............. 1822.888 This latter value was found by dividing the first atomic mass into 1837.152..., which is the proton mass incremented by one electron unit. If we now multiply the first-listed atomic mass by 3 and subtract the second-listed atomic mass, the result is 0.007426 and multiplication by the unit atomic mass in electron units gives 13.54. This, therefore, is the measured mass difference as between 3 protons plus two electrons and the triton.
25.4.2005
Page 26 of 31
It follows that the triton has a mass that is 11.54 electron mass units below the combined mass of three protons. Our task is to find the model form of the triton which allows us to calculate this mass discrepancy. The other items of data we need to extract from the same data source (page 9.93) is (a) the triton lifetime of 12 years, (b) the half-spin unit of angular momentum (presumed to be same as the proton) and (c) the magnetic moment stated in nuclear magnetons to be 2.9789. It is, however, better for us to avoid reliance on data that is based on indirect measurement and take note of the direct measure of the triton nuclear magnetic moment presented as a ratio in terms of the proton magnetic moment effective in the same reacting environment. This ratio, as quoted from the Dover 1966 text of 'Atomic Physics' by Harnwell & Stevens, is: 1.06666 The task ahead is then to guide the reader through the analysis by which the three measured numerical dimensionless values just presented as the triton's credentials are duly derived by pure theory. The Magnetic Moment of the Triton It is appropriate here to refer to the author's paper entitled 'The Theory of the Proton Constants', Hadronic Journal, 11, pp. 169-176, 1988. On page 174 of this paper the gyromagnetic ratio of the proton is deduced theoretically as being 2.792847367, which compares with the measured value of 2.792847386(63) and so is quite precise, it being computed from a proton modelled on a structured resonant state. This, in effect, is the proton's own magnetic moment expressed in terms of nuclear magnetons and so one can see that the 2.9789 triton magnetic moment above is derived from the measure 1.06666 and the independent measure of the proton's gyromagnetic properties. Now, when we have regard to the fact that the triton's magnetic moment is measured as a frequency ratio as between the reaction of a triton and a proton in the same magnetic field, there is the curious feature that the two frequencies have what appears to be a perfect integer ratio, namely 16:15, which is the near-unity ratio factor 1.06666. This causes one to wonder whether the interfering wave modulation which would develop harmonic interactions somehow locks the response of the triton onto a condition that is exactly set by this 16/15 ratio, even though the true triton magnetic moment with no proton reaction present is virtually that of three nuclear magnetons. With this doubt, there is little purpose in trying to derive the precise quantity 2.9789 and it suffices for our purposes to justify, if only as an approximation, the triton magnetic moment as being 3 nuclear magnetons. The interesting point to then take into account is that amongst all atomic nuclei the triton is unique as having by far the largest magnetic moment in relation to its nuclear angular momentum. The ratio is 6:1, whereas Ag108, which sits between the two stable isotopes of silver, has a half-life of 2.4 minutes and comes closest with an exceptionally high ratio factor of magnetic moment to angular momentum of 4.2. What is it, therefore, that gives the triton the magnetic moment of 3 nuclear magnetons based on a single half-spin unit of angular momentum?
25.4.2005
Page 27 of 31
The simple answer which is now suggested is that the triton comprises three nucleons two of which are protons and one of which is an antiproton. They all react magnetically in opposition to a magnetic field and so the two protons 'spin' one way and the antiproton spins the opposite way. The magnetic moments add to 3 units and the 'spins' add to a single half-spin unit of angular momentum. This then explains the magnetic moment property and, further, we have now an insight into the structure of the triton. The Structure of the Triton Once the structure of the triton has been pictured in our minds then we can proceed with the confirming analysis by calculating the triton's mass discrepancy and its lifetime. The interesting feature seen already is that we have not pictured the triton as comprising one proton plus two neutrons. Keep in mind the no-neutron syndrome of cold fusion! Three protons will not hold together even in a quasi-stable aggregation. This is why physicists have taken the easy course and assumed that it consists on two neutrons plus one proton with some kind of glue that introduces a negative mass binding energy. Such assumption has led them down a blind alley. We need to add something such as beta-minus or beta-plus particles or be bold enough to imagine a stable entity including antiprotons. The truth can only be found by discovering the structure which gives the right answers for the three measured parameters presented above. Discovery in this pursuit needs inspiration and intuitive analysis and it is here that the author must lead the reader directly to the solution and then show how the calculated properties prove that it has to be the correct structure of the triton. The triton does, in fact, comprise two protons plus one antiproton, and our only concern now is to understand the 'binding' that holds the three nucleons together but keep the proton and antiproton far enough apart so that they do not fuse and mutually annihilate one another. Now, here we are guided by the fact that independent analysis of the nature of the deuteron has shown that in its prevalent state it comprises two protons bound together by an intermediate betaminus particle, otherwise termed a positron. This is fully explained in the previous reference, the author's paper 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, 9, pp. 129-136 (1986). The less prevalent ground state comprises an in-line configuration of three positive beta particles separated by two antiprotons. We may be further guided by earlier work reported by the author in his book 'Physics without Einstein', published in 1969 by the author under the trade name Sabberton Publications. On pages 147-152 of that work there is a description of nuclear bonds, which the author termed chains, which took the form of an alternating sequence of beta-plus and beta-minus particles and which linked adjacent hole-cum-charge sites in the vacuum lattice which locked onto the atomic nucleus and caused it to form a shell structure. Indeed, this theme was further elaborated in the author's paper entitled 'The Chain Structure of the Nucleus', published in 1974, also by same publisher. The data there presented show that a charged meson can attach itself to a charged nucleon to release sufficient energy to account for its own mass-energy and further the total energy of a chain spanning between two vacuum lattice hole-cum-charge sites. Furthermore, there is a balance of mass-energy or mass deficit which one calculates as being some 12 electron mass units. In these circumstances, and having regard to the fact that we are trying to account for a triton mass deficit of 11.54 electron units, the author sees no point in going further than the assertion that the
25.4.2005
Page 28 of 31
triton has a single beta particle chain linking the antiproton and the proton pair, the latter regarded as being seated at an adjacent lattice site in the vacuum lattice system. The beta particle chains are deemed to be very much a part of the structure of large atomic nuclei. Each chain has up to 170 such particles corresponding to the fact that the vacuum lattice spacing is 108 times the beta particle radius. There are two of the author's papers of easy reference as background to this subject. They are: 'Aether Theory and the Fine Structure Constant, Physics Letters, 41A, pp. 423-424, (1972) and 'Theoretical Evaluation of the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 110A, pp. 113-115 (1985). As will be seen from those papers there is a factor 1843 derived from a resonance closest to a zero potential condition and representing the volume of a vacuum lattice charge in relation to a beta particle. Indeed, the derived value of the fine structure constant was given in the form: -1 = 108(8/1843)1/6 = 137.0359 The fact that the space occupied by the vacuum lattice charge can, given enough energy input, develop into 1843 beta particles from which a proton form can condense is crucial to the creation of the nuclear chains, but the action of creation of a proton depends primarily upon the mu-mesons that do the work. The concept of space conservation in charge particle transmutations is consistent with energy conservation, bearing mind that the pressure or energy density within the charge of the vacuum lattice particle is in equilibrium with the 'gas-type' pressure set up by the mu-meson pairs that, on average, populate each cubic lattice cell of side dimension 108 beta-particle radii. Thus the number of beta particle charge volumes that equals this cube volume is a measure of a factor N which is relevant to the inverse chance of a 'hit' as the annihilation and random position recreation of a mumeson recycles at the standard (Compton electron) frequency associated with vacuum energy charge pair creation activity. To evaluate some numbers, note that the lattice charge has a Thomson radius that is larger than the beta particle charge radius by a factor 12.26, which is the cube root of 1843. The energy of the lattice charge is therefore 1/(12.26) or 0.08156 electron units. The number of electron charge volumes in the unit cubic cell of the vacuum is (108)3 divided by 4/3 and so is 9,324,644. Dividing this by 1843 we find that there are 5059.49 lattice charge volumes of energy 0.08156 electron units in each cubic cell of the vacuum, which is 412.666 electron mass units of energy. This is double a mass energy a little below 207, thereby representing the combined mass energy of a virtual mu-meson pair that is the energy in each cell. The fundamental derivation of the 108 cell dimension parameter and the 1843 factor, the subject of the author's primary analysis of vacuum energy discussed in the above-referenced 1972 Physics Letters paper, therefore leads to the theoretical derivation of the mu-meson energy quantum. It tells us the energy content of the vacuum state. The triton, when created, lives amongst this activity and its rather special structure makes it vulnerable to decay owing to the bombardment by those mu-mesons. The core target for that bombardment is not the antiproton or the two proton nucleons in its composition. The target is the vacuum lattice charge to which the triton is attached. The deuteron, however, is also subject to such attack and here, too, the real target is a lattice particle in its near vicinity. An isolated proton or a deuteron does not need to develop a fixed association with a lattice charge because its mass has not exceeded a critical level above which the dynamic quantum 'Zitterbewegung' behaviour needs a collective balance by a graviton system. The phenomenon of gravitation is dependent upon the inertial reaction of vacuum particles in the form of gravitons which
25.4.2005
Page 29 of 31
have a mass-energy of 2.587 GeV, an energy value having an effective mass between two and three proton masses. This is fully explained in the author's works. See, for example, 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant', Physics Essays, 2, pp. 360-367 (1989). However, when the proton or deuteron is part of a water molecule the nuclear chain structure of the oxygen atoms will provide the lattice location in the vacuum field system. This is why the cold fusion events we see with free deuterons in a palladium host metal are not, so far as we can judge, occurring in water. When atomic nuclei exceed the mass of two protons they do, of necessity, share in a collective action requiring dynamic balance by a multiple graviton system and that action requires that their combination as a structured nuclear entity spreads itself over a multiplicity of vacuum lattice sites. The triton, therefore, has to have a nuclear beta particle chain able to bridge two lattice sites and it probably has two protons in close proximity that straddle the lattice charge of one site whereas the antiproton nucleon constituent is seated at the other lattice charge site. Tritium is, of course, radioactive whether in the molecular stucture of water or not and so it warrants respect and caution from a health viewpoint. The Triton Lifetime This structure already discussed now leads us to the calculation of the decay property of the triton. To proceed we restate part of the commentary in the introduction. In order to set up the nuclear bond in the form of a chain of beta particles a meson charge has to develop as a charge attracted to the proton. This meson charge is termed a Q charge and its energy is that of the unit cell energy, approximately 413 electrons as already explained. Two opposite polarity charges e, having energy E in electron units represented by P and Q and conforming with the J. J. Thomson formula: E = 2e2/3a, where a is charge radius, will, when attracted so as to be in surface contact at their charge radii, have a combined energy E' which is given by: E' = P + Q - 3PQ/2(P+Q) This formula is basic to proton creation and was mentioned by the author in Physics Today, 37, p. 15 (1984), so we are not introducing something new at this stage in developing the theory of the triton. In fact P and Q are in equilibrium as an optimum energy condition for which the negative term is a maximum when P is 1836 and Q is 413. The point of interest is that E' can be calculated to be 92.7 electron mass units below the value of P. In other words, given that there are two protons well separated by the diameter of the vacuum lattice charge (or a beta particle in the case of a deuteron), we can see how such a system, which features in the triton composition, can deploy twice the energy of 92.7 electron mass units to assist in a nuclear transmutation. This sums to 185.4 electron mass units. We then note that the stimulus of 4 pairs of virtual mu-mesons, each of 412.7 electron mass units will suffice with the 185.4 electron mass units to create a proton of 1836 electron mass units. In fact, the energy equation is rigorous in providing exactly the amount of energy needed, which is why the decay of a triton yields so little energy that the result has remained a puzzle to scientists.
25.4.2005
Page 30 of 31
The scenario of interest is then the action by which the triton can be the seat of a process by which a proton is created within the triton itself so as to force a transmutation. The condition we are considering is a coincidence event when 8 mu-mesons hit the lattice charge in the same vacuum cycle. If the result is the creation of a proton then the recovery of the equilibrium of the vacuum/matter interaction will involve the demise of a proton in matter nearby. The task in determining triton lifetime is simply that of determining proton creation probability in a vacuum lattice site charge within matter. Proton Creation Probability As already shown, it takes 8 virtual muons to trigger the action leading to the creation of a proton. The question is how to bring 8 muons together for this purpose. There is an active virtual muon pair in each cell of the vacuum medium, that is for each lattice charge (-e), the latter being neutralized, so far as we can sense in our matter frame, by a positive continuum background. If the positive virtual muon + enters the lattice charge it will momentarily, in the relevant action cycle, render that charge neutral by converting it to some neutral paired charge form. Therefore, to get 8 muon energy quanta to combine in some way, we need to have 8 lattice charges in close proximity in a state in which either all are transiently neutral or, alternatively, 7 are neutral and one is charged to a double unit level, as by being transiently primed by the addition of -. Now, the chances of one lattice charge being primed by either muon in its cell are 2 in 5059. There are 256 combinations of chance simultaneous priming of 8 such lattice charges in each action cycle. The follwing tabulation shows the virtual muon polarity combinations as distributed amongst the various mixed states. Only the first two entries under S in this table represent states that can satisfy the merger requirements by creating neutral energy quanta with a single nucleating charge. Thus there are 9 chances in the 256 for the conditions to meet the proton creation trigger requirement. In other words, in every action cycle at the Compton electron frequency we have 9 chances in (5059)8 of proton creation referenced on a particular lattice charge. S .. + . 1 ... 8 ... 0 8 ... 7 ... 1 28 .. 6 ... 2 56 .. 5 ... 3 70 .. 4 ... 4 56 .. 3 ... 5 28 .. 2 ... 6 8 ... 1 ... 7 1 ... 0 ... 8 This gives us a 'lifetime' in the sense that the attempt to create a proton can influence a decay process which sheds a proton, as already explained. That lifetime is: (5059)8/9(1.235x1020) seconds or 12.2 years The mean lifetime reported for the triton is 12 years and so this result is a quite remarkable
25.4.2005
Page 31 of 31
application of the author's theory. Discussion Given the above solution to the mysteries of triton decay, it needs little imagination to probe the possibility that a deuteron, in its prevalent state, as two protons sitting on diametrically opposed sides of a central beta-minus particle, could become subject to the stability of a nearby vacuum lattice charge and experience similar proton infusion. In this case, the deuteron would become a triton, whereas in the triton the proton infusion into the two-proton component destroys the beta particle nuclear chain and severs the link with the antiproton component, which thereby becomes involved in a decay which replenishes the virtual mu-meson population of the vacuum. The deuteron proton infusion process would be accompanied by the demise of a proton elsewhere, but what we would see with two deuterons in close proximity would appear to be one deuteron shedding a proton and a beta minus particle and the other deuteron acquiring a proton and shedding a beta plus particle, which overall amounts to an act of fusion. Two deuterons merge to create a proton and a triton by shedding energy as the two beta particles annihilate one another. To account for the nucleation of the Q charge forms the less prevalent deuteron ground state composition having five component charges is the best basis for the transmutation under discussion. The central beta particle binds the two proton forms whilst the outer beta particles transform into Q charges to release the extra energy needed to convert the 8 mu-mesons entering the lattice charge target into a proton. One can develop this theme by investigating the expected excess heat generation rate that could come from the 12 year decay rate for the deuteron ground state and one may further wonder how that process might be accelerated. However, the main conclusion reached in this work is that there is basis for understanding the cold fusion reaction and the focal issue here is the interpretation of the process by which the triton is naturally radioactive at room temperatures. It is believed that the account presented here will help with that understanding.
APPENDIX D [This is the author's paper The Theory of the Proton Constants which can be seen as reference 1988b on this website.
APPENDIX E [This is the author's paper The Neutron and the Deuteron which can be seen as reference 1986d on this website.]
25.4.2005
ES10PAGE0
by
HAROLD ASPDEN
Sabberton Publications P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England Fax: Int+44-2380-769-361 ISBN 0 85056 011 X
ES10PAGE00
HAROLD ASPDEN, 1997 Section Title ...................................................................................... page Part I: 1997 Update Introduction ......................................................................................... 3 Part II: 1990 Review The Hazard Risk - A U.S. Perspective .............................................. 19 Molecular Mechanisms in Magnetic Medicine ................................. 20 Cyclotron Resonance of Hadronic Ions in Liquids ................... ........ 21 Killing Fields - Solving the Problem of Overhead Power Lines ....... 29 Explanatory Note ............................................................................... 34 The Harwen Blanket Switch - Electric Blanket Solution .................. 35 ELF Radiation and Biological Effects ............................................... 37 Note on the Schumann Resonance ..................................................... 41 Debatable Aspects of Cyclotron Resonance in Ionized Liquids ........ 42 Part III: Appendices I: Brainwaves and Alpha Rhythm ...................................................... 45 II: Power Lines and Health ................................................................ 49 III: Ionospheric Radiation ................................................................. 51 IV: The Proton Factor and Its Unknown Effects ............................... 54 V: U.S. Patent No. 5,151,577 ............................................................ 67 VI: Living Cells and Superconductivity ........................................ 68-70
*****
PART I: INTRODUCTION
There are times when it is necessary to wander slightly from one's field of expertise to trespass briefly and as a stranger in a discipline that is sending signals into one's own territory. It has been suggested from evidence in the medical field that overhead electric power lines and electric blankets can be harmful to one's health and there are those expert in the science of electrical engineering who argue that low frequency electromagnetic radiation cannot possibly have any harmful effects. Self-appointed in the quest to reconcile differences of opinion in this debate, I once dared to express my opinion as an academically-trained electrical engineer as to why overhead electric power lines and electric blankets can pose a health hazard. My case was based on a combination of two circumstances. Firstly, I have contended for many years that the whole of our empirical knowledge concerning electrodynamic interactions is founded on evidence collected from experiments in which the main field reactions are set up by the motion of electrons. My thesis has been that, where reactions to electromagnetic fields are seated in heavy mobile ions, rather than electrons, then anomalies do arise. Indeed, there are anomalous forces set up in some instances, as reported in scientific periodicals of high repute, which exceed by a thousand fold the theoretical expectation based on electron theory. Secondly, given that the medical community now suspects that fields set up by overhead electric power lines can stimulate unwanted activity in human body cells, I ask myself whether the ions in our body fluids that must react to those fields are electrons as such or are of heavier molecular form. In the latter case, taking the ions found in water, namely the hydronium ion H3O+ and the hydroxyl ion OH, I can see that we are dealing here with the same electrical territory as that in which one experiences those high force anomalies mentioned above. Clearly, therefore, since the electrical engineer has failed to give account of the anomalous energy activity witnessed in plasma discharges where heavy ions are the reacting charge carriers, that engineer has no right to declare that the electromagnetic fields he is producing cannot be harmful. He simply does not know.
All he can be sure about is that people working in the electrical power generation and distribution industry have no reason to worry about electricity affecting their health, so long as they keep well out of reach of live wires and their high voltages. He is, incidentally, all too aware of the characteristic smell of ozone owing to the ionization of air produced by an electrical discharge. It is a warning that something may be wrong and that he is getting too close to an electrical hazard. However, without such a warning the question is whether there is a less obvious influence which puts us at risk if we get close to electrical cables which are spaced apart, one carrying current in one direction and the other carrying current the opposite direction. That, by the way, is the feature which overhead power lines and electrical blankets have in common. In the electrical wiring used in the domestic power supply to electric cookers, electric fires, lighting etc. the current is not something that flows one way. It has to enter an appliance, do its work and then go back to its source. In the wiring system wires carrying current to the appliance are twisted closely around the wires carrying the return current flow. This means that their field effects cancel and the normal domestic power cable poses no hazard problem so long as the insulation in the cable is sufficient to withstand the voltages used and the current, which generates heat, is obliged to restrict its damage to blowing an occasional fuse in the protection system. Our health hazard concern, however, is with those overhead power lines and electric blankets. Remember here that the professional electrical engineer who maintains overhead power lines has expert knowledge of how electricity carried through metal wire by one set of electrons can interact with electricity carried through metal wire by another set of electrons. That is his trade and he knows it well. What he does not know anything about is how electricity flowing in the human body and carried, not by electrons, but by ionic particles, may interact with other such ionic particles in the human body and how their interaction can be aggravated by the electrical and magnetic fields which that engineer creates by his power distribution apparatus. Of course, he will say that he too is human and that his body is exposed to such effects, but then I urge him to consider whether he really does spend his working days close to overhead power lines which are energized. If he does, then I wonder how he contrives to do anything useful. Again I stress that here I am not referring to an energized cable which carries current along conductive strands in close proximity but in opposite directions. I am referring instead to a situation where he may sit close to, and virtually between, two widely-spaced electrical power lines each conveying uncompensated currents, as otherwise there is little field exposure. Dare I then point out that a baby's bottom, which is commensurate in size with the spacing between metal wire strands in an electric blanket, is the kind of exposure to unbalanced field effects of the kind which that engineer rarely, if ever, encounters in his power line work. He is wise enough to switch the power off before climbing up between those overhead lines. On the broader subject of electromagnetic fields, we all have exposure to the electromagnetic wave spectrum, which ranges through its radio and television frequencies, the infra red frequencies and on through optical frequencies and beyond. We know that if such radiation is concentrated to high intensities
then we can suffer. Physicists know that at the high frequency end of the spectrum, as one progresses through the ultra-violet range, there are X-rays and -rays which can be very harmful. However, for the very low frequencies used in power cables and the very weak electromagnetic fields they produce, electrical engineers and physicists see no reason for concern about a radiation hazard. Yet, as I say, since the basis of electrical science is founded on electrical activity seated in electrons and our body fluids involve activity seated in ions that are very much heavier than electrons, there is reason for doubt. Now, the stimulus for writing the text of this introductory essay of this Report No. 10 comes from a Letter to the Editor in the July/August 1996 issue of Electronics World (page 590). It was authored by Dr. David Fisher of Cardiff in Wales and was a declaration framed in an accusative context directed at anyone who believes in 'anti-gravity and perpetual motion (free energy)' with the finger pointed in my direction. Quoting from it: "I was, in fact, thinking of Dr. Aspden who, readers will recall, believes in this nonsense and has also proposed a 'cyclotron' theory in order to 'explain' the so-called link between electromagnetic fields and disease." This was probably a result of an article of mine published by Electronics and Wireless World, pp. 29-31 (1989). It was entitled 'Anti-Gravity Electronics'. The latter article had also attracted similar criticism, expressing doubts as to my wisdom as a professionally qualified physicist, for my views on the gravity theme. My attacker was C. Hellingman writing in Physics Education, 27, 112-115 (1992). In rallying to defend my case I wrote another article which was published by the Institute of Physics in U.K. in that same periodical, Physics Education, 28, 202-203 (1993). It was entitled 'The Law of Perpetual Motion'. As to my `cyclotron' subject that had featured in an earlier article of mine in EWWW, pp. 774-775 (September 1991). The title of that article was 'Power Lines, Cancer and Cyclotron Resonance'. Note that EWWW, or Electronics World + Wireless World, represents a staged period of gradual transition as the publishers of Wireless World decided to rename their periodical Electronics World. I am tempted to note here that the word `wireless' has gone out of fashion, along with the word 'aether', but remind you that Nature still needs the aether to sustain those wireless waves and no amount of electronics can eradicate its existence! This being Report No. 10, the final Report in this Energy Science Series, and the other reports all being concerned with energy matters in the context of electrical power and the fundamental physics involved, I am now going to digress somewhat in this introduction. Indeed, I have decided to present this Report in three parts, this Introduction being the first part. If the reader's interest is restricted to the health hazard issue posed, as by power lines, then the next few pages of this section up to page 9 should be skipped. I planned to publish and, indeed, did compile, a 28 page document bearing the title of this Report No. 10, some 7 years ago, in 1990. I was, however, distracted at the time by other pressing interests, such as the
research matters discussed in Energy Science Reports 2 and 3 in this series. The text of that 1990 document does, I now believe, warrant publication as it does add something of significance to the energy theme of the early Energy Science Reports. Also, I find I am obliged to react to the criticism, such as that of Dr. Fisher quoted above. Accordingly, I have decided to publish that 1990 document unamended as Part II of this Report and add a Part III which is really an Appendix comprising other items that have appeared in print and some that I have now published on Internet. These include a new commentary on Schumann Resonance, owing to recent input from A. G. Callegari of Much Hadham, Hertfordshire in England. Also there is a paper I wrote in 1988, as published in October of that year, which dates from a little before I became wedded to the relevance of the cyclotron theme. It is entitled 'The Proton Factor and its Unknown Effects'. I believe it will interest some readers, but I include it especially because my research on the energy theme tells me that energy in our universe is being recycled. Energy which finds its way into space as part of what cosmologists see as the running down of the universe as it expands into oblivion is really being repackaged and put into order in the quantum underworld that pervades all space. From that quantum sea of energy, protons and electrons, the components of the hydrogen atom, are being created to restore that lost energy in matter form, meaning that we are part of a universe that is a steady-state system. My interest in energy from a power generation viewpoint arises because I can see a way of intercepting the energy in a phase of the regeneration cycle, after it has become quantized but before it is released in proton form. As a side issue I then wonder whether the ongoing creation of protons (accompanied by the demise of protons) within atoms forming our body cells can imply a health hazard. If you, the reader, share Dr. Fisher's view and suspect that this is all nonsense, then do defer your judgement, at least until you know enough about my research to see the strength of my case. The physics involved has allowed me to deduce by pure theory the proton/electron mass ratio to the part in tens of million level of precision measurement. The 'proton factor' must not be overlooked in the study of potential health implications. If such ideas, which are rooted deeply within the discipline of physics, go beyond the scope of your interest, then it is time to jump on now to page 12. Otherwise, and particularly if you, the reader, are well versed in theoretical physics and so are ever ready to challenge an intruder who questions the state of that art as a sound foundation on which to go forward, then let me try to shatter your confidence. Do ask yourself why it is that all the fundamental particles known in physics decay and have a short lifetime, with the exception of the proton and the electron. The electron, however, can, within the period of one ten millionth of a millionth of a second jump from one side to the other of a theoreticallyimpenetrable potential barrier. It is called 'electron tunnelling', but who is to say that that the electron does not decay on one side of that barrier only to find that its energy and its charge are given to a newly created electron on the other side of that barrier? We can all live forever if physics can contrive to rejuvenate us by a recycling process! What I am really saying here is that the proton and the electron are
the basic forms in which matter is newly created from spent energy shed into the quantum underworld of the aether. Therefore, the proton and the electron can have finite lifetimes and suffer decay, but such events pass unnoticed because they are recreated in close proximity to their demise. They have a life after death! However, if protons shed from atoms in a molecule in DNA reappear in different atoms, not necessarily within that same DNA structure, might not that have some effect upon our health? I want simply to point out that physics, being an exact science, even in its interpretation of quantum mechanics, tends to see things as all 'black' or all 'white'. (Physics can 'see' Black Holes even though, if they exist at all, they are invisible and they can 'see' space in a contrasting light because they 'know' there is no aether even though something governs those wireless waves which ripple through it.) The proton has an immeasurably-long lifetime. The assumed age of the universe is not even as long as one trillionth of the mean lifetime of the proton. Yet, for all we know, the proton occupying a certain region of space may have a characteristic age measured in minutes or days, but not years. I believe the proton and its decay have a significant bearing upon our human condition but I am not here urging you to believe what I say, but rather just to suspect that physicists err by ignoring this possibility. The truths will emerge if we study the effects that proton demise and recreation may have and the appropriate arena for such study could well be the biophysical world where isotopic transmutations and molecular changes can have `knock-on' effects. It may not be easy to prove but the task will be all the more difficult if physicists cling too tightly to their textbook training and do not seek out the questions that they have never before asked and so have never answered!
Quantum Field Theory It is generally supposed that physicists know all that there is to know about electromagnetism and the related field theory, at least concerning the phenomena which intrude upon our immediate environment. Field theorists claim great achievements which can bewilder and, indeed, outclass the concerns of the scientist or engineer who has to deal with real problems faced in our daily routine. Field unification, the quest to understand the nature of the force of gravity and its link, if any, with quantum field theory and exotic high energy particles, as well as the creation of neutron stars and probing the physics of the Big Bang and Black Holes, are the territories that they see as warranting exploration. So, let us take a look at the overview presented by Victor F. Weisskopf in the November 1981 issue of Physics Today (pp. 69-85) under the title: 'The Development of Field Theory in the last 50 Years'. I refer to that because it describes the history of quantum field theory and, unlike most articles written on that subject, it actually exposes the weaknesses and uncertainties as they stood in 1981 and, indeed, as they
remain today. I have a personal reason for referring to this Weisskopf article, because, as a young electrical engineer interested in electromagnetism as a research pursuit, I was 'put in my place' repeatedly as I tried to publish my findings on topics which trespassed onto the territory of quantum electrodynamics. I was told that Einstein and Dirac had covered that ground and there was no chance that my research, which obliged me to think more and more about an energy form pervading the aether, could warrant the slightest attention. Eventually, in frustration, and having solved the mystery of unifying the electromagnetic and the gravitational force, I published my own books on the subject, including 'Physics without Einstein' in 1969 and 'Modern Aether Science' in 1972 and, later, 'Physics Unified' in 1980. Thereafter, and mainly because I took early retirement in order to return to academic research in the university in my home town, I was able to get a stream of scientific papers published but many of the more important papers are not to be found in the mainstream periodicals. The editors of those periodicals avoid anything controversial that might ripple the oceans of 'relativity' and 'quantum field theory' by introducing a sea of aether energy. However, in July 1996 I decided to publish 'Aether Science Papers', collecting together a selection of some of my more important published papers. It being impossible to argue theory to get the theoretical physics community to see the need for a `modern' quantum electrodynamic insight into the àetherial' world of the vacuum state, I am taking my efforts forward by seeking ways of tapping energy from that 'aether'. This, in the main, is the reason I have written this series of Energy Science Reports. This final Report No. 10, however, is more concerned with energy transfer processes that are anomalous in electronbased physics, but which can affect the fluids in human body cells. So, what does Weisskopf have to say about the weaknesses of quantum field theory? Well, it seems that it all began in 1927 when Paul Dirac gave birth to the theory of quantum electrodynamics. Already by then "Albert Einstein had put an end to the concept of aether" and already by then "the field-free and matterfree vacuum was considered as truly empty space." The quotations are of text taken from the Weisskopf article. Electromagnetic radiation posed problems but Max Planck had delivered the quantum theory as, without it, "total energy density becomes infinity; empty space would be an infinite sink of radiation energy". With the introduction of quantum mechanics "the vacuum gradually became populated...there must be zero-point oscillations of the electromagnetic fields in the vacuum state". Under the heading "Triumph and Curse of the Filled Vacuum" Weisskopf then writes "Dirac's daring assumption had most disturbing consequences, such as infinite charge density and infinite (negative) energy density of the vacuum". "These ideas seemed incredible and unnatural to everybody". "Even if we consider the filled vacuum as a clumsy description of reality, the existence of virtual pairs and of pair fluctuations shows that the days of fixed particle numbers are over".
Here Weisskopf is referring to the ongoing electron-positron pair creation and annihilation activity that features in quantum electrodynamics. Note the use of the word 'virtual', which is a convenient way of referring to something aetherial that is there but yet is not real in matter terms. It seemed then that the 'infinities' were posing problems, but that these were solved, as by arguing by symmetry that two theoretical systems coexist in the same space, one involving infinite negative energy density and the other involving infinite positive energy. "There remains, however, the unpleasant fact of the existence of vacuum fluctuations without any energy". "The infinities of the filled vacuum and of the zero-point energy of the vacuum turned out to be relatively harmless compared to other infinities that appeared in quantum electrodynamics when the coupling between the charged particles and the radiation field was considered in detail". Then it seems several assumptions were made to avoid problems connected with an infinite electron mass and some numbers pertaining to the anomalous g-factor of the electron began to fit what was measured. Here were "the signs of victory in the war against infinities". [A reader having a copy of my book 'Aether Science Papers' should refer here to pages 48-53 for a simple 'aether-based' account of the electron's anomalous g-factor that is superior to the QED derivation]. Weisskopf continues: "In spite of these victories there remain nagging problems in quantum electrodynamics. There are definite indications that we understand only a partial aspect of what is going on." "Will there be a theory that avoids renormalization by using non-perturbative methods? Or will a future unification of electrodynamics and general relativity heal the disease of divergences? There is no way to understand and derive the mass of the electron within today's electrodynamics. The problem has become even more acute since heavier electrons such as the muon and the tau-electron have been discovered. There is not the slightest indication why electrons with different masses should exist." [Again, I say, read my book 'Aether Science Papers' and you will see all the answers to all these issues, save that I do not unify electrodynamics and general relativity, but show instead that electrodynamic forces and gravitational forces are unified by the role played by an aether which has quantum electrodynamic properties. Indeed, the virtual muon form is the primary aether energy. It is seated in a central inertial frame intermediate the counter-balanced jitter motion oscillations of the matter frame (electrons and protons) and the graviton frame (tau-particles). The phenomena which are purported to support Einstein's General Theory of Relativity are also fully explained in terms of that same aether.] Later in his article Weisskopf ventures into the realm of the heavy bosons, notably the neutral Z boson. [This is high energy territory which concerns the 'supergraviton' of my theory and which I shall mention briefly at the end of Part III of this Report.] Concerning such theory, Weisskopf then mentions "spontaneous symmetry breaking". "It has the following remarkable property: Its energy is such that it has a minimum, not when the field is zero, but when it has a finite value...that would mean that the vacuum has a certain fixed direction in isospace." [I could not get my early papers on the aether theme accepted by orthodox journals because such a `fixed' direction was implicit in a dynamic system that has two-dimensional linear harmonic oscillatory motion
(i.e. circular) in its zero-point state of minimal energy. Einstein's theory did not predict the need for such a direction! You will soon see why that feature also has some bearing on the subject of this Report]. Weisskopf continues: "The situation is like that of a ferromagnet, in which a direction in real space is determined as long as the energy transfers are smaller than the Curie energy." [This was precisely the foundation on which I developed my aether theory, based on my research at Cambridge University in 1950-1953. I was testing energy anomalies in electrical sheet steels under varying mechanical stress conditions. Besides magnetization loss anomalies I knew there were stress energy anomalies to consider, but the standard theory of the ferromagnetic state, which relies heavily on Dirac's electron spin concept, needed to be adapted to have the 3d electrons of adjacent atoms sharing a component of synchronous motion. This model, which ran counter to the Dirac philosophy, was adopted as the basis of my aether theory which I began developing as soon as I left Cambridge. The aether itself is a 'crystal structured' system of aether charges in synchronized motion, a 'ferromagnetic' system in a sense, but the forces of attraction set up by the presence of matter are gravitational forces which are really electrodynamic forces characterized by the frequency of that synchronous motion, which happens to be that at which electrons and positrons are created. The embryonic form of this theory as it stood in 1959 is presented in my first publication on this aether theme 'The Theory of Gravitation', which I published in January 1960.] Weisskopf then moves on to QCD, `Quantum Chromodynamics', an effort to parallel QED, quantum electrodynamics in the realm of the proton, but the story advances relentlessly to a summary of the unresolved problems. "Is the renormalization procedure sound?" This is the name given to the trick used in QED to solve the problem of the infinities. "The answer to this question may save or condemn field theory". "The large value of the effective coupling constant of quantum chromodynamics at small momentum transfers causes serious problems as to the nature of the vacuum itself. The field fluctuations may turn out to be very large and may require new conceptions of the nature of the vacuum." "The present theories contain arbitrary constants. In QED it is the coupling constant 2e2/hc at large distances and the masses of the different electrons. Today three such electrons are known, but there may be more. There is no way visible at present to explain how their mass values may emerge from the field theories." "We have no explanation for the mass of the electron, that is the smallness of the ratio (1/1836) between the electron mass and the proton mass." "Our present view of elementary particles is plagued by the following problem: Nature as we know it consists almost exclusively of.. quarks (the constituents of protons and neutrons), and of ordinary electrons. ...But there definitely exist higher families of particles...They appear only under very exceptional circumstances that are realized during the early instances of the Big Bang, perhaps in the centre of neutron stars, and at the targets of giant accelerators. What is their role in Nature, why do they exist? Rabi exclaimed when he heard of the first of those 'unnecessary particles', the muon: "Who
ordered them?" Again, field theory does not seem to contain the answer to this question." "We will find out sooner or later whether field theory is able to clear up some of these outstanding problems. It may be that a very different approach will be required to solve the questions for which field theory so far has failed to provide answers. ... We have not yet been able to make sense of much of what Nature says to us." "Looking back over a lifetime of field theory, it seems obvious that we have learned much since 1927, but there is a great deal more that is still shrouded in darkness. New ideas and new experimental facts will be needed to shed more light upon the deeper riddles of the material world." This ends my quotations from Victor Weisskopf's 'Physics Today' article. Looking back over my own lifetime (I was born in that year 1927) I can but say that Weisskopf failed to realize that answers to almost all of those mysteries were of published record before 1981. My book `Physics Unified', published in 1980, gave the update as of that time. It tells you how to unify gravity and electromagnetism and validates the argument by showing how G, the constant of gravitation can be deduced in relation to the electron's electromagnetic charge to mass ratio by pure theory. The derivation of the mass of the virtual muon is a major feature of the theory and it is shown on pp. 115-116 of that book how from that one deduce the mass of the proton in electron mass units. It is found to be slightly greater than 1836.152. That coupling constant used in QED is a dimensionless physical constant measured to part per million precision. Using the aether theory disclosed in 'Physics Unified' that value is derived at p. 112 in full accord and with the same degree of precision. As to explaining the mass of the electron, that too is found in my published work, but mass is not a dimensionless physical quantity and so it cannot be derived by theory except as a ratio to other physical quantities. The task really boils down to explaining inertia and understanding why the electron is a favoured state of matter, given that the creation process of the proton is already explained. Finally, to conclude this digression into the world of the orthodox theoretical physics and its many mysteries which (dare I say it?) only my aether theory can resolve, I did not, at the time I wrote 'Physics Unified' in 1980 have a way of determining the mass of the super-heavy electron, the tau particle. I was then still busy working in my Director capacity in IBM's European Patent Operations, but my theory (see pp. 118-122 in my 1980 book) was yielding explanations for the creation of those short-lived `higher families of particles' mentioned by Weisskopf. It was only when I retired and began developing my theory further from a university base that the tau emerged in a rather beautiful form. It is vital to the gravity process, but to read about that requires reference a 1989 paper of mine, the eighth of the 14 papers reproduced in my book 'Aether Science Papers'. Weisskopf could not have written a better article from my point of view to set the stage for a presentation of my aether theory. But a stage and a performance need an audience and physicists are all too busy to pay attention. You must, however, now picture all those theoretical physicists in academia still trying to solve those mysteries and overcome the weaknesses of quantum field theory, whilst, I, knowing the solution, proceed here to address the real mysteries of physics, such as why overhead power lines pose a health hazard.
I would not write in such a strident style with its risk of offending the sensitivity of the elders of the scientific community were it not for the fact that at the age of 69 I feel I am obliged put my case with some force in order to claim attention. If that is seen as an excuse for ignoring the physics underlying my theory, then I lose nothing, as that is the way it has been for four decades now. If I can arouse interest amongst those who have to find a worthwhile future in researching theoretical physics, as in the student community, then that will be some gratification. However, to proceed and before coming to the documentary account in Part II of the initial version on which this Report is based, I will get this Report back on the track of its title by reverting briefly to that cyclotron question.
Introducing Cyclotron Resonance One perplexing question for any such student is that posed by claims that a strong permanent magnet strapped in close contact with the stomach can have a beneficial effect but only if it is correctly mounted with its north and south poles properly positioned. Why should a north pole of a magnet held against the body exert any action different from a south pole? As far as I know, the human body is not magnetically polarized, so if the action depends upon ions and their reacting motion in that field, the only factor of difference concerns whether those ions in our body fluids respond by moving clockwise or counterclockwise relative to the magnet's polar axis. This means that the response depends upon the perspective of whoever is viewing the action, whether from in front or from behind, and that surely does not solve the problem. There is, however, a topic I can discuss and one which features in my other writings that can be relevant here. See, for example, my Energy Science Report No. 8. I call it 'vacuum spin', but mean 'aether spin', knowing that this can induce electric polarization and, owing to that rotation, develop a magnetic field. The governing axis involved in this 'aether spin' is that needed for a 'fixed direction in isospace' which Weisskopf mentions. The very symmetry of the magnetic field set up by a magnet offers no scope for seeing the north and south poles as exerting any difference in their energy influence. The physicist's notion of the vacuum state gives no reference frame work that we can apply in trying to solve this problem. However, if we bring into play an aether with a preferred direction, then there can be differences in electrical induction arising from positive and negative ions reacting to the field set up by a magnet. I can see that àether spin' will develop in a stronger or weaker sense according to the orientation of the magnet relative to the àether spin' axis. This subject, however, is something that needs a great deal of evidence from observations which compare
effects at corresponding latitudes in the northern and southern hemispheres. My information on this topic was mainly gleaned from casual conversation with participants at various conferences dealing with other matters. Therefore I can only offer these tentative remarks on this magnet anomaly theme at this time. I am now going to jump ahead a little way by mentioning that I once ventured into a conference forum on the subject of the health hazards of low frequency electromagnetic fields to say why there is a problem. I spoke about this basing my comments on the paper reproduced later in this Report (pp. 16-22). My case was that there is a resonant reaction as our body fluids respond as if tuned to the 50 Hz or 60 Hz fields of the electrical power industry and that resonance is attributable to those hydronium and hydroxyl ions already mentioned. Water, incidentally, features in several other scientific anomalies involving unusual energy properties, but we will concentrate here solely on the theme of my talk at that conference. I declared that there was a kind of resonant effect similar to that produced by the cyclotron, the cyclotron being a device in which charged particles describe orbits when subjected to a steady magnetic field and pick up energy from a superimposed alternating electric field. Cyclotrons are used in high energy particle physics to pump enormous amounts of power into those charged particles. A physicist might find it amusing to hear the suggestion that our bodies can operate as cyclotrons but I believe the proposition is far more tenable than some of the other beliefs held by the physics community. I find it not only amusing but totally ludicrous for physicists to waste their time imagining what happened in the first 1042 seconds following the Big Bang, when the temperature of the universe was supposedly so high as to be equally meaningless. The operating frequency of an electron cyclotron can be more than 10,000,000 times that of the power frequencies of our domestic environment and the magnetic fields used in the cyclotron can be 1,000 times greater, but it is the ratio of these two large numbers that relates to the mass of the resonant particle. So, if there is a cyclotron reaction in the cells within the human body, the resonant ions would need to have mass of the order of 10,000 times the mass of the electron, which is the case for the molecular ions found in our body fluids. However, the point I wish to make here is the answer to a point put to me after I delivered my paper at that conference. The questioner stated that the theory of the cyclotron cannot apply to our body cells because it requires the orbital radius of the motion of ions to be about one metre. The radius r of charge motion in a cyclotron is determined by the balance of the force Hev/c and the centrifugal force mv2/r, from which the r is mvc/He. The cyclotron frequency in rad/s is He/mc. Here e/mc is the charge/mass ratio in electromagnetic units, v is the speed of the charge and H is the strength of the magnetic field. To find r, assuming it applies to ions moving at speeds set by the thermal activity with two degrees of freedom, we equate kT and mv2/2, where k is the Boltzmann constant and T is the body temperature in Kelvin. From this we can estimate v and find r by dividing by 314 rad/s, assuming
resonance at 50 Hz. Since m is of the order of 3x1026 kg and kT is 4x1021 joules we can estimate v as being 500 m/s. When this is divided by the power line frequency expressed in radians per second one sees that r is of the order of one metre. This is, I presume, one reason why those physicists who are attentive to the weak field health hazards of electrical power sources have not considered the cyclotron resonance hypothesis as relevant. In order, therefore, to defend my case I had but to muster the mathematical skills of my schooldays to come to the following argument, but I will present the result without using any mathematics. Imagine a particle to be enclosed in a confined space no greater than, say, 10 microns from boundary to boundary. Can that particle, in bouncing from the boundary walls as it proceeds on its course from one wall to the other, many thousands of times per second, have a motion that follows an orbital path of one metre radius? By this I am simply asking whether, if that particle is an ion constrained to follow a helical path of radius r centred on an axis parallel with the direction of a magnetic field, it can describe small arcs of that path between its collisions. The answer has to be: "Yes". Now, how does this differ from the cyclotron situation? The answer to that question is that in the cyclotron the ion is allowed freedom to describe a full circular orbit unimpeded so that, as it moves over one half of its orbit, it is accelerated by the electric field acting in forward direction and, as it moves over the second half of its orbit, it is still accelerated in its forward direction because by then the electric field has reversed its direction. There is phase-locking owing to the resonant tuning of the cyclotron frequency and the charge to mass ratio of the ion. As an aside here, it is noted again that the real mystery of this human cyclotron effect is that of understanding how one can have a resonance for a person situated under an overhead power line (or resting on a live electric blanket) in North America where the frequency is 60 Hz and also have resonance affecting a similarly situated person in Europe where a 50 Hz frequency is used. That was the formidable question that had to be answered! Explaining that was really why I was willing to stand before a conference audience to make my contribution to a discipline outside my main field of interest. Before coming to that detail in the main text, this matter of the scale of the cyclotron orbit has to be dealt with, because the ions in their thermal motion in our body cells simply cannot describe full orbits in synchronism with the weak field oscillations generated in homes close to overhead power lines. Well, imagine you are looking from above at a school playground and see thousands of schoolboys all rushing around and bumping into one another, bustling with energy and all moving at speed but all tending to veer to the right between collisions as they follow curves of the same radius r. What you will see might seem to be a state of chaos, but if you were to be viewing that from a platform which was rotating about your sighting position at an angular velocity exactly equal to that of the motion of the boys on the ground, only then you would be looking at the chaotic state of normal thermal motion. You see, there is a state of orderly circular motion superimposed upon the normal motion occurring when colliding particles travel in straight lines between collisions.
In other words, the ions moving in their basic thermal activity in the fluids in your body cells have a component of orderly rotary motion owing to the presence of the ambient magnetic field set up by body Earth. The fact that the mean free path, the distance travelled between collisions, is much smaller than that radius r, as determined by what is termed the Larmor formula, is irrelevant. It becomes relevant only in so far as we need now to consider how a pulsating electric field can have an effect. The main fact involved is that the angular frequency of that motion is the same, whether the cell housing the activity spans 100 metres or 10 microns. Suppose first that such a field were to be a steady electric field acting with a component directed in the plane of the orbital motion, that is at right angles to the direction of the magnetic field. The positive and negative ions would be displaced in opposite directions until there is equilibrium by the field reaction set up by charge displacement. Now suppose that the electric field oscillates in direction at precisely the angular speed at which the whole system of ions turns owing to the effect of that magnetic field. You will then see that the charge displacement is sustained. The charge displacement is not oscillatory in the sense that it passes through a zero value twice per cycle but is instead represented, in effect, by a dipole system rotating at the resonant frequency with its kinetic energy increasing progressively as the dipole spacing extends. The point of all this is the clear message that the combination of the Earth's magnetic field and the weak electric field effects of an overhead power line can induce a resonant response setting up a rotating electric dipole state within human body cells. There is a resonance condition and in the cyclotron used in high energy physics this pumps energy steadily from a weak field to build up high energies in particles which accelerate outwards as that radius r grows in proportion to particle speed. The same process applies to our dipole system formed by numerous charges in each of our body cells. The presence of an ambient electric field alternating at power frequency will pump energy into those cells, energy which sets up pressure across membranes at the cell wall. For experts, whether concerned with cyclotrons or with electrical power distribution, to deny that cyclotron-type resonance can occur in the human body, solely on the grounds that the cells in our bodies are too small, is, in my opinion, quite irresponsible. I make this assertion deliberately and with a conviction that stems from an analogous problem concerned with the nature of the magnetic field reaction in something as simple as a lump of copper! I will now digress briefly onto that subject before reverting to the health hazard theme. In simple terms, I ask the electrical engineer who denies cyclotron-type resonance in human body cells to tell me whether he has ever understood how a d.c. magnetic field can penetrate a lump of copper. There is one fast moving free electron in copper for virtually every atom present and, by the laws of electromagnetism, those electrons should all be deflected by that magnetic field to act in concert in setting up an enormous reaction field. The reason they do not cancel the field is because the energy deployment optimizes to permit them only to halve the magnetic field. Yet, even that halving effect is not recognized, so the electrical engineer lives on in ignorance of the truth, whereas the physicist sees only an anomaly in experiments comparing the magnetic moment set up by the electron reaction and the proportional angular momentum involved. The physicist refers to it as a g-factor (its value being 2), but what the physicist
cannot see is that all primary magnetic fields are really of double the strength assumed but they are invariably halved by that reaction of the electrons in orbit in their reaction to the applied field. Lacking such insight, it is then no wonder that those electrical engineers and physicists cannot cope with the more advanced problem of the ionic reactions in a human body fluid, where the reacting ions are not all electrons of the same mass and polarity. Instead, we are dealing here with a mixture of positive and negative ions having different masses. This introduces a recipe for a type of cyclotron reaction which is not governed by a single resonant frequency determined only by the mass of the ion and the frequency of the pulsating field. There is scope, given the extra parameters introduced by the dual ion composition, for a self-tuning action over a range of frequencies, which can develop that resonance which feeds power into the human system drawn from those weak fields that pulsate at power frequency. Explaining that is really is my main contribution in this Report, but I will aim to include other topics by which anomalous electrical phenomena can intrude into the health domain. For example, consider a facet of science where the space we occupy comprises something that is electrically charged, but neutralized by the displacement of ions in our body. Ostensibly, there is no net electrical field effective inside us, because everything is cancelled and is in equilibrium. However, now suppose that underlying space charge arises from a kind of induction process of cosmic origin and is liable to change over a period of time. Again, there need be no problem, because the ions in our body will adjust to neutralize the overall effect. Go now just a little further and suppose that for, say, six months of the year, the background space charge is of increasing strength, whereas during the other six months its diminishes in strength. The human body ions have to somehow find a surplus of one polarity for half the year and a surplus of the other polarity for the other half of the year. May it then not be that the body exhibits different responses to treatment in one such period from those experienced in the other such period? How do scientists cope with such anomalies, given that they pin their faith and their whole knowledge of electrical science upon empirical data confined to experiments on electron currents in metal wires? They will, of course, not have heard of a phenomenon which I call 'vacuum spin'. I believe that there is an aether capable of storing energy by developing a spin condition. That involves electrical charge displacement. Let me now speculate. There are in science phenomena referred to as 'Earth Lights'. Something can emerge from mountain sides, for example, which sets up a glow, as if a gaseous object exuded from the mountain side is burning away. Imagine that is a spherical aetherial form that has, within it, a radial electric field, because its core has electric charge. The air coextensive with that aetherial sphere will become ionized and so there will be a glow, wherever that aether sphere goes, until it disperses its energy by decay.
Now, that is a rather extreme manifestation of something that may be latent, almost everywhere where there is a source in which ions in motion interact with the weak magnetic field of the Earth to develop a rotary motion, leading in turn to that aether spin situation. The Earth itself may well have, internal to its structure, an intrinsic electric charge system associated with the induction of the geomagnetic field. Then a flow of water inside the Earth may become the seat of ionic displacement so that, for example, a stream of water may emerge from a hillside with an electrical charge transfer. I say: "may", well knowing that I am speculating here, but I did wonder about such a possibility when I read, quite recently, something sent to me by Dr. E. Larson of Northglenn, Colorado, USA. It was the text of a book by Owen Lehto entitled 'VIBRATIONS: A Practical Study of the Forces that Affect our Health', published in 1992 by Nutritional Research Center, P.O. Box 308, Keller, WA 99140, USA. Between pages 12 and 15 there is the story about putting two calves out to a field to graze. "The first calf was taken to a small knoll, where it started to eat contentedly. The second one was staked lower down on a flat piece of ground. The grass was slightly wet from rain the night before. I drove a metal stake into the ground and from this stake was a metal chain that went around the calf's neck. Instead of eating it began to run around in circles until it was able to pull the stake loose. It then ran up to where the other calf was eating and began to graze." Investigations to determine the reason for the calf's discomfort indicated the presence of something electrical. The author found that if he stood in the lower area of the pasture and allowed his right arm to hang like a plumb bob and held his left arm with his palm facing downwards, his right hand started to swing with a rapid counterclockwise motion. If he did this test at the top of the knoll the swing was clockwise. Further tests described in the book led to the conclusion that water in motion under the ground was somehow responsible for this phenomenon. Static electricity was in evidence. Now, I could dismiss this as being attributable to the Earth's electrostatic field. A field that can be as high as 500 volts per metre, particularly at night, exists and is a phenomenon long recognized by physicists. I have discussed this in my book 'Modern Aether Science' in Chapter 15 entitled 'The Earth's Electricity'. Contrary to orthodox belief it arises, not from the charging of body Earth by the periodic lightning discharges, but from solar radiation pressure which is absorbed by electrons. Although these electrons are in atoms that are electrically neutral overall, there is a displacement effect which puts the Earth's surface in a negatively charged state. The heat absorbed by the atmosphere during the day is sufficient to sustain this radiation pressure, even at night. The direct sunlight during the day can, however, partially ionize the air and cause the stored charge to leak a little then, which is why the fields are stronger at night than during the day. So, one could presume that such a field could be the cause of the distress of that calf. However, why do we all not experience such effects on a regular basis and why does the motion of water play a role? Well, I can but speculate. The feature of that knoll suggests an action which might involve what I referred to above as `vacuum spin'. A spherical aether form developing a spin condition inside a knoll and in some way attributable to a flow of water within that knoll could develop an aether charge distribution of one electrical polarity balanced by a charged state of the water having opposite electrical polarity. This
ES10PAGE00
'vacuum spin' could well also develop turbulence in the aether, resulting in the shedding of weak and invisible versions of those 'Earth Lights' I mentioned and that could the problem. The water flow would carry some of that electrical charge with it in its passage underground. Then one can glimpse a way of linking physics with what is claimed by those who practice dowsing. Our bodies are inevitably affected by all such extraneous electrical conditions that pervade the atmosphere and the very space we occupy. Indeed, as I shall indicate in Appendix VI on pp. 54-57, there could be activity within our body cells that involves a kind of electric motor action with superconductivity being in evidence. Also, there could be a low frequency field effect set up in the ozone layer which can further aggravate our existence (see Appendix III on pp. 40-41), but most of this Report concerns cyclotron resonance and the overhead power line and electric blanket problem. ********
The pages which now follow from here until the Appendix section constitute PART II of this Report and comprise a slightly edited but otherwise unamended collection of separate articles compiled by the author in 1990.
ES10PAGE14
THE HAZARD RISK
A U.S. PERSPECTIVE
The following are excerpts from 1988 and 1989 articles by Thomas F. Valone of Integrity Research Institute*, who has devised a 60 Hertz Magnetic Dosimeter expressly to measure exposure risks of weak but dangerous field conditions. "Since the New York State Power Lines Project, Scientific Advisory Panel's Report was released, (`Biological Effects of Power Line Fields') in July 1987, there has been an increased awareness of the potential health risks of 60 Hertz magnetic field exposure from power lines." "The study of Savitz confirms the results of previous studies to some extent and adds to the credibility that exposure to extremely low frequency magnetic fields might be the cause of childhood cancer" (Ahlbom et al, 1987)." "Another study which has also generated public concern is the finding that heating blankets and heated waterbeds are correlated to excessive miscarriages among pregnant women (Wertheimer and Leeper, 1986). This study has caused the manufacturers of these items to look into ways to design their products to reduce the magnetic field exposure for users. The average magnetic field ranges from 4 mG for heated waterbeds to 15 mG for heating blankets (Becker, 1985)." These concerns "have also sparked manufacturers to reconsider their designs of these products, though only one manufacturer is currently advertising reduced magnetic exposure." "With its implication in childhood leukaemia (Wertheimer & Leeper, Am. J. Epidemiol., 109, 273, 1979), childhood tumours (Wertheimer and Leeper, J. Bielectro. Soc., 7, 273, 1986) and, recently, learning disabilities (Wall Street Journal, p. B6 11 October 1988), the biological effects of electric power lines, both in the house and outside, are discovered by researchers." "The latest finding by the former president of the New York Academy of Sciences, Kurt Salzinger, indicates that rats exposed in utero to extremely low frequency (ELF) radiation showed signs of learning disabilities...a problem, he says, that 'didn't go away as rats got older'." * Address (1997): Integrity Research Institute, 1422 K Street NW, Suite 204, Washington, DC 20005, USA. Tel: 800-295-7674.
ES10PAGE15
MOLECULAR MECHANISMS OF MAGNETIC MEDICINE
The following is a quoted excerpt from an article of the above title which appeared in the April 1988 issue of U.S. Periodical MAGNETS. Its author is Lynn A. Surgalla of Department of Biophysical Sciences, School of Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo in U.S.A.
"ION TRANSPORT ACROSS CELLULAR MEMBRANES: A number of researchers have reported effects of time varying magnetic fields on the ion flux through membranes. Blackman et al (1982) reported that a 16 Hz sinusoidally varying magnetic field caused increased efflux of calcium ions from chick brain tissue in vitro. It has been purported in recent papers (McLead and Liboff, 1986; Liboff, 1985) that the influence of externally applied, low-level magnetic fields on biological ion transport can be explained by cyclotron resonance theory. The cyclotron resonance frequencies for several biologically important ions such as calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium, etc., all fall in the 10-100 Hz range when the static magnetic field is in the amplitude range of the earth's field. There is experimental evidence that cyclotron resonance in cells exists (Thomas et al, 1986). The calculated cyclotron resonance frequencies of the various ions were found to coincide with the experimental frequencies which induced ion flux through cell membranes (Liboff, 1985)." References Blackman, C., et al, Radiation Research, 92, 510 (1982). Liboff, A. R. "Cyclotron resonance in membrane transport" in "Interactions between Electromagnetic Fields and Cells": (Chiabera, Nicolini and Schawn (Eds.) Plenum, London, p. 281 (1985). Mclead, B. R, Liboff, A. R., "Dynamical characteristics of membrane ions in multi-field configurations at low frequencies", Bioelectromagnetics, 7, 177 (1986). Thomas, J. R., Schrot, J., Liboff, A.R., "Low-intensity magnetic fields after operant behaviour in rats", Bioelectromagnetics, 7, 349 (1986).
ES10PAGE16
CYCLOTRON RESONANCE OF HADRONIC IONS IN LIQUIDS

H. ASPDEN Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southampton, Southampton, England.
ABSTRACT Although cyclotron resonance is believed to be the cause of harmful effects on the human body when subjected to weak low frequency electromagnetic fields, a crucial problem is why evidence in America and Europe gives similar concern, bearing in mind that a frequency resonance is involved and the power frequencies of 60 Hz and 50 Hz used on these continents are different. A possible solution to this scientific problem is presented and, in addition, a simple practical solution which should eliminate the health hazard from electric blankets and, by analogy, underfloor electric heating systems is proposed.
INTRODUCTION A major problem now developing in biochemistry is that posed by the harmful effects of weak electric and magnetic fields, evidenced by the higher incidence of cancer and leukaemia in the vicinity of overhead electric power lines and even from proximity with underfloor electric heating systems and certain electrical appliances such as electric blankets.
It has been suggested that cyclotron resonance effects in the body fluids and particularly the bloodstream causes a build up of ion energy which promotes unwanted penetration or rupturing of cell membranes. On the other hand, in a healthy body suffering from a bone fracture, the accelerated actions caused by these fields might even aid the healing process. It is, therefore, important that we develop a better understanding of the cyclotron process involved.
ES10PAGE16
CYCLOTRON RESONANCE What we mean by 'Cyclotron Resonance' is the concerted action on charged particles of two independently acting fields known to the electrical engineer. Firstly, there is the steady field which constrains the thermal motion of the particles so that it has a cyclical or oscillatory component at a frequency governed only by the field strength and the particle mass. Secondly, there is an alternating field which, with the cyclotron resonant state, is in tune with that frequency. The cyclotron is a machine used in high energy physics to accelerate charged particles which move in circular orbit about the axis of a magnetic field whilst an alternating electric field having a frequency equal to the orbital cyclic motion of the particles pumps energy into them to cause them to go faster and faster. A weak A.C. field in voltage terms can produce particles with energies equivalent to those obtainable using enormous D.C. voltages and what is now to be discussed is the replication of this process in the ionized liquid in a human body which is ever subject to the Earth's magnetic field and can, under certain circumstances, be exposed to harmful weak A.C. fields at mains power frequency.
THE ION FREQUENCY It is clear that the primary factor in producing cyclotron resonance in our bodies is the Earth's magnetic field. This has a steady value wherever we are on the Earth's surface and differs little from a 50 T (microtesla) (0.5 gauss) field. Its direction does vary with both latitude and longitude owing to the angle of dip of the Earth's field and the fact that the geomagnetic poles are offset from the geographic poles. This direction is not relevant so far as the active random motion of ions in our body fluids is concerned. By a gyromagnetic process these ions will, in some measure, share in responding to that geomagnetic field to set up a reaction field by moving in helical paths about the field axis. It is characteristic of this cyclotron reaction process that the angular frequency of the response in the helical orbits is simply Hq/m, this being the product of the field strength H and the electromagnetic charge q to mass m ratio of the ion involved. The ion mass which matches a 50Hz power frequency is approximately that of the ions dissociated in aqueous solutions, namely the positive hydronium ion or the negative hydroxyl ion. The extraneous oscillating fields, whether electric or magnetic, can pump energy into a resonance building up the penetration power of the ions, but only if that power frequency is a good match for the particular cyclotron frequency of the ions present in that Earth field. The awkward question then faced is why there should be problems arising from power frequencies which can be precisely 60Hz in USA and precisely 50Hz in U.K. If 60Hz has harmful effect in the geomagnetic field in USA, then why should 50Hz be harmful in U.K. where the geomagnetic field has the same strength? This question is the main thrust of this paper.
ES10PAGE16
THE HADRON-LEPTON GYROMAGNETIC REACTION Our electromagnetic theories have been established on the basis of experiments performed by using electron currents or magnets which owe their magnetic field to internal electron motion. Electrons are leptons which means that they can interact with a field by creating and annihilating charge pairs of their own lepton form. The heavy positive ion nucleated by an atomic nucleus owes its net charge to a different particle form known as the hadron. The question arises as to whether hadrons interact magnetically as do leptons. Now, there are sound theoretical reasons for understanding how the electromagnetic interactions with which we are familiar can apply to the lepton-lepton interaction and the hadron-lepton interaction. However, there is equal reason to suspect that the hadron-hadron interaction is different and this seems to be indicated by experiments involving discharge currents in aqueous solutions. What this means to our cyclotron problem is that, if the Earth's magnetic field has its source in hadron charge and the reacting ions are hadrons, then the hadron-hadron interaction is affecting the cyclotron reaction and it is not truly determined by a formula based on the Lorentz force law. In general terms it must be realized that an applied steady magnetic field will develop reactions in ionized liquids which are partly produced by negative ions (lepton charge) and partly by positive ions (hadron charge). Thus if these react differently the resultant magnetic field which determines the forces on the reacting ions may effectively have a different strength from that deemed to apply in determining the cyclotron resonance frequency. More to the point, if the resonance can deploy energy between the two types of ion to optimize the action, then that effective field strength can adjust within limits so as cause the cyclotron resonant frequency set by the ion mass to conform precisely with the driving power frequency. This is the basis on which the damaging effects can stem from the same ion type, whether we have a 50Hz power frequency or a 60Hz power frequency. The task is, therefore, to analyse this proposition and to see how those limits are set, so that remedial design techniques can be found for eliminating the dangers involved.
PRIOR RESEARCH ON GYROMAGNETIC REACTION EFFECTS A consideration of magnetocaloric effects and gyromagnetic reactions leads one to question whether the basic g-factor of 2 is really due to Dirac's mathematical concept of electron spin. There are very sound reasons (including the fact that positrons in an electron gas respond as if they have twice the mass of the
ES10PAGE16
electron) for accepting that there is a half-cancelling field reaction. What this means is that, when we measure the gyromagnetic reaction and find that it is twice the value we had expected from basic theory, we should not look for new physics by formulating `spin' as an abstract concept. Instead we should realize that what we assume to be the magnetic field is not just that we apply by powering an electromagnet. It is really the difference between the field we apply and the natural field reaction of the free ions present. It seems probable that the field reaction invariably halves the primary field action and that we have not realized this and related what is measured to the primary action only. This is justified by the simple expedient of matching the reaction component of the kinetic energy of the reacting ions with the field energy of the resultant magnetic field. For optimum energy deployment the primary field action is invariably halved by reaction of Maxwell's displacement charge in the vacuum or by conduction electrons in copper. The question, however, is whether that halving effect applies to the positive, as opposed to the negative heavy ions in electrically dissociated liquids. The action of the negative ion is likely to be dominated by the surplus electron, whereas the action of the positive ion will be dominated by the surplus charge of the proton. In physics, the proton, as a hadron is different in properties from the electron, as a lepton. They do respond differently and anomalies are showing up in certain experiments involving electrical discharge through water. Hence there is a serious doubt about reaction effects in dissociated aqueous solutions. Subject to the latter doubt, and concerning the field strength halving effect just mentioned, all this means is that the calculation of any magnetic field action of current must introduce that g factor of 2 to enhance the field strength before it is halved by the inevitable offset reaction. The physical process involved in the interaction of moving charges is that of retarded energy transfer and this can be affected so as to enhance the primary magnetic field if a reaction field sets up effects which transfer energy in the reverse direction. This is all embraced by the inductance property of the primary circuit and it will be understood that, except where the core is ferromagnetic, the magnetic field energy calculated in the normal way in terms of the magnetizing current is a measure of that energy fed into the inductance. However, the actual magnetic field determining the Lorentz force on an ion in a liquid may be different or, if we prefer, the Lorentz force may not be that prescribed by use of the formula as it applies to interactions in free space. In order to understand the lepton-hadron involvement in this process we will perform an analysis assuming that the primary field is leptonic in nature and that the reaction is partially leptonic (by an energy share factor ) and partially hadronic (by a factor 1-). Hadron-hadron interactions should not, it would seem, then be regarded as contributing or even present and yet this is not so. First, imagine that is zero. We suppose that there is a primary field of strength gHp produced by a solenoid surrounding the test substance. We think the field produced is Hp but it is really gHp. Hp is that expected from the current action. g is an unknown factor involved in the inductance reaction. The net field strength, allowing for the reaction field Hr is denoted H. Therefore:
ES10PAGE16
gHp - Hr = H ............... (1) Now, the Lorentz force acting on the reacting leptons of charge q and mass m sets up an equation of motion: Hqv = mv2/r .............. (2) where r is the helical orbit of the reacting lepton and v is its speed in orbit in the plane normal to the field axis. The reacting magnetic moment is g times the reacting lepton density summation of qvr/2 and this translates into a reacting field component if, in the gaussion units used, we multiply by 4. Using equation (2) to express mv2/2 as Hqvr/2, the reacting field component becomes: Hr = 4g(E/H) ............... (3) where E is the kinetic energy density associated with the orbital reaction v motion components. It was suggested that energy deployment was optimum, meaning that E will tend to a maximum as potential energy minimizes. Therefore the task is to substitute (3) in equation (1) to see how H adjusts. 4gE = gHpH - H2 ............... (4) E/H is zero when gHp = 2H, but we imagine that, apart from a minor diamagnetic or paramagnetic reaction in a non-ferromagnetic substance, there is really no recognized diminution of the field strength owing to the gyromagnetic reaction. We then see that Hp and H are equal and this means that g must be 2. Thus the g-factor of 2 evidenced by gyromagnetic experiments is explained without recourse to the abstruse formalism of the relativistic Dirac formulations. Note, however, that E is then equal to H2/8, which is the magnetic field energy density stored electromagnetically. Clearly, it is the reacting orbital ion or other reacting charge that is the agent for feeding inductance energy back into a magnetizing solenoid when it is demagnetized. Also, instead of adopting this energy optimization argument we could simply have declared that E was (Hp)2/8 and put this in equation (4) to find that if g = 2 then H = Hp. The question now faced is what happens if that reaction field is partly attributable to hadrons, meaning that is not zero. To proceed, we will assume, pending further discussion, that the g = 2 factor applies for fundamental reasons. We examine the situation where there is a mix of single polarity (negative) lepton-related ion reaction and a single polarity (positive) hadron-related ion reaction. Note that we are not here discussing what is known as 'nuclear magnetic resonance', where the resonant spin states are set up inside the atom. Instead we are dealing with the case in which the atom has become ionized and is in free motion. The lepton-produced component field H derived from equation (1) is: H = gHp - f[]Hr ........... (5)
ES10PAGE16
and this is further offset by a hadron reaction component (1-f[])Hr. Here f[] is a function of representing reaction field strength apportionment, whereas is field energy density apportionment. However, the f[]Hr term can be written as 4gE/H, because the lepton interacts normally with both the lepton and hadron components of H. On the other hand, the (1-f[])Hr term can be written as 4(1-)E/Hp, because the hadron interacts in the normal electromagnetic way only with the lepton component of H specified by equation (5). Put g = 2 and E = (Hp)2/8. Then we obtain: H = 2Hp - (Hp)2/H - (1 - )(Hp)/(2) .............. (6) Evidently, if = 1 then H = Hp, as expected, but if = 0 then H = (3/2)Hp.
In other words, if the leptonic ion reaction predominates the effective H field governing cyclotron action is close to that normally expected, but if the hadronic ion reaction predominates the cyclotron action can occur at a frequency up to 50% larger than that normally expected. Evidently, if this ion reaction process has been correctly interpreted, there is then reason to understand how the power frequency that perturbs the cyclotron action in a liquid can influence the apportionment of the reaction energy density E between the two types of reacting ion to seek out a cyclotron resonance intermediate that of the two ion types. The energy exchange optimizes to assure maximum energy transfer. There is no need for a perfect frequency tuning with the specific individual ion mass properties and the background D.C. field. The only condition is that the positive ions involved must have masses which for the power frequency used need, for cyclotron resonance, a D.C. field that lies between 66.7% and 100% of that given by the cyclotron formula. Typically, therefore, the hydronium ion at 50Hz requires a D.C. field of between 41T and 60T, whereas at 60 Hz the field has to be between 49T and 74T. For the hydroxyl ion the 50Hz range is 36T to 54T and the 60Hz range is from 44T to 66T. Bearing in mind that the geomagnetic field is of the order of 50T we then see that the 50Hz and 60Hz power frequencies are virtually the ideal frequencies for activating the harmful effects of cyclotron resonance. Conversely, if these frequencies were to be doubled and the ion types specified are the ones which really are the prevalent variety causing the problem, then these field requirements would double and cyclotron resonance in the geomagnetic field could not occur. It is not suggested that A.C. power frequencies, as such, should be doubled. Rather, the proposition is that the powering of harmful heating appliances, such as electric blankets, should involve the use of an unsmoothed full-wave rectified version of the normal A.C. power frequency supply. This would
ES10PAGE16
eliminate the harmful frequency and leave a double frequency and higher harmonic frequency power supply with much weaker current amplitude. The main heating effect would be that of the D.C. component and no cyclotron resonance with the hydronium or hydroxyl ions could occur. CONCLUSION This paper has discussed cyclotron resonance in relation to the harmful effects of weak A.C. fields. Electric blankets are particularly prone to such problems because the electric current is carried by wires which are spaced apart. In a normal electric flex the current flows one way in one wire and returns through another wire twisted around the first wire. The result is that there is really no resulting electromagnetic field to worry about because the field of one wire cancels that of the other. This is not the case for the electric blanket, where the wires can be several cm. apart and therefore result in a field which penetrates well into a body resting on that blanket. The paper has addressed the key issue of how cyclotron resonance can apply both to the 60 Hz and 50 Hz environments. The explanation has brought to bear fundamental theoretical issues which the author has been studying and advocating for many years but which theoretical physicists will regard as controversial. However, less controversial is the belief that the health hazard is connected with cyclotron resonance and the practical remedy need not depend upon acceptance of the author's theoretical proposition. Certainly manufacturers of electric blankets would be well advised to provide suitable power converters in their blanket switches which eliminate the 50 Hz and 60 Hz frequencies. The cost of such a modification would only be a few percent of the cost of the blanket and this is seen as the first and easiest step forward that one can take in facing up to the real health hazard problems posed by the weak low frequency fields to which we are all exposed. REFERENCES The following references are not identified in the above text but they will give background to the matters raised above. F. Ogden, 'Killing Fields', Electronics World and Wireless World, p. 3 (January 1990). A. Philips, 'Killing Fields - Introduction', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 96-97 (February 1990). S. Best, 'Killing Fields - Epidemiological Evidence', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 98-111 (February 1990). R. Coghill, 'Killing Fields - Biophysical Evidence', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 112-119 (February 1990).
ES10PAGE16
A. Philips, 'Killing Fields - The Politics', Electronics World and Wireless World, p. 120-124 (February 1990).
APPENDED NOTE CONCERNING THE g-FACTOR Why should g be 2? Although physicists tend to view this as something relying on the mathematical analysis deeply involved with the relativistic-quantum electrodynamics of Paul Dirac, this author believes that the true answer probably arises from the energy transfer processes as charges in motion interact. The point is that energy supplied to activate the charges producing a magnetic field has to find its way into the orbits of the reacting ions. The energy makes this journey via the Coulomb field interactions of charge. Energy does not travel from one charge to the other along an infinitely thin line drawn between the two charges and the energy cannot travel at faster than light speed. Were we to assume that energy does travel directly along that line at the speed of light, then it can be shown that g = 1. However, the real journey is a mean distance to the distributed Coulomb field system of exactly the intercharge distance and this is followed by a second leg of travel of identical mean distance from the Coulomb field to that other charge. This doubles the journey time and so the Coulomb retardation which accounts for the Lorentz force and thereby makes g = 2. It is beyond the scope of this paper to give a full analysis of this action, but it can be understood by first reviewing how the Lorentz force can be deduced from the Coulomb interaction, as shown in detail elsewhere by the author, and then taking account of certain arguments used by the author to explain aspects of the gravitational interaction. The latter is not simply a propagation of energy to give basis for the deployment of magnetic field energy, but is one step advanced from this, since the gravitational interaction is a magnetic interaction and the magnetic energy redeployment with changing mass positions is an onward iteration of the primary process. The essential point is that there is a retardation effect that is greater than that assumed by line of sight propagation between the interacting charges.
ES10PAGE22
KILLING FIELDS - SOLVING THE PROBLEM OF OVERHEAD POWER LINES
H. ASPDEN Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southampton, Southampton, England. The health hazard posed by living in close proximity to overhead electric power lines and attributable to cyclotron resonance induced in human body cells by weak electromagnetic fields can be eliminated but only if we cease to use our 50 Hz or 60 Hz frequencies and rely on D.C. exclusively or double the operating frequency to 100 Hz or 120 Hz.
INTRODUCTION
The fact that cancer has been linked to electromagnetic radiation from power lines and appliances has now been recognized by the US Environmental Protection Agency [1]. A recent editorial in Electronics World [2] reports how, in 1974, epidemiologist Dr. Nancy Wertheimer established a connection between child leukaemia victims and 7600 volt feed lines to pole mounted transformers feeding house supply systems. This was later followed by a sequence of articles including 'Killing Fields' in their titles [3, 4, 5, 6] giving a devastating account of the risks posed by living under the influence of the effects of what are, in fact, weak electromagnetic fields. The problem has been traced experimentally to a resonance effect akin to what is known in physics as 'cyclotron resonance' [7, 8, 9]. In a cyclotron a modest cyclic field can be caused to accelerate a moving ion to enormous energy levels by a gradual resonant build up process which taps energy from the weak field pulsating in harmony with the orbital frequency of ion motion in a steady magnetic field. In the human body that steady field is the Earth's magnetic field and the ions in motion are those chemical ions in solution in our body fluids and present within our body cells. The activating field conducive to resonance is that extraneous electric or magnetic field set up by an overhead power line or an appliance
ES10PAGE22
such as an electric blanket, where the wires carrying compensating currents are well spaced. It is this spacing that is crucial to the existence of those small but hazardous weak fields. The question we now face is not so much that of understanding the cause, but rather one of eliminating the problem. Pending a discovery of a solution, those expressing responsible opinion on this matter are cautiously pointing out that, assuming electromagnetic radiation does have an effect, it can only be to help to proliferate cancers already present. This, however, is not a convincing assertion, given that we probably all have a latent capacity to develop cancer cells if exposed to fields which can accelerate transmutations. This article addresses directly the straightforward issue of eliminating the possibility of cyclotron ion resonance brought about by A.C. field influences in a domestic or normal commercial environment, where the only prevalent D.C. magnetic field is that provided by body Earth itself. Concerning electric blankets or underfloor heating, these can be remedied by the expedient of using D.C. power excitation or even full-wave unsmoothed rectified A.C. as by using what the author terms the `Harwen switch' [10]. This is simply a two pole switch having a bridge rectifier incorporated in the switch housing on the output side. However, the solution to be applied to overhead power lines, short of conversion to high voltage D.C. transmission, is not so easy in view of the very substantial voltages and currents involved and the heavy capital investment in existing structures.
THE HAZARD FREQUENCY RANGE Cyclotron resonance cannot occur if the hazardous frequency range lies outside that of the exciting field. We are singularly unfortunate in that the 50 Hz or 60 Hz frequencies, which relate to the two-pole structure of the magnetizing rotor fields of synchronous alternators running at a sensible design speed of 3,000 or 3,600 rpm, happen to be close to that of ions in our bodies responding to the Earth's 50 T magnetic field. The cyclotron formula requires that the angular frequency of the resonance should be simply Hq/m, where H is the strength of the geomagnetic field and q/m is the charge to mass ratio of the ion. For unit atomic mass on the C 12 scale q/m is 96 million coulombs per kg. Therefore, if H is 50 T, an ion of unit atomic mass and the normal unit charge will have a cyclotron angular frequency of about 4800 rad/sec or about 760 Hz. Table I shows the resonant cyclotron frequencies of single ions of different forms when subject to the steady geomagnetic field.
ES10PAGE22
TABLE I Ion hydroxyl OH Mass Frequency 17 45-67 40-60 33-50 32-47 22-33 19-29 19-28
hydronium OH3 19 sodium Na chlorine Cl potassium K calcium Ca 23 35 39 40 magnesium Mg 24
The lower frequency expressed in Hz is that at which a single presence of such ions in solution causes the thermal or Brownian motion of the ion to build up pressures by virtue of the transfer of energy as the ions accelerate to higher and higher speeds in weak but sustained perturbing fields having that resonant frequency. Independently, this author has shown that the inter-reaction processes involved when two dominant forms of ion are present can cause one ion form to develop its own field and so coact with the geomagnetic field to bring about a resonance at a frequency up to 1.5 times higher than that for a single ion, by a self-tuning of the system. This is indicated by the higher frequency listed. In other words, over a limited frequency range above that of natural resonance of the single ion form, there will be perfect resonance of one of the ion forms even though the external frequency is not exactly as required for that form assuming that H is exclusively the geomagnetic field strength. Whilst it is then easy to picture cyclotron motion of the positive and negative ions individually there are problems in imagining how they can build up their energy and set up pressures owing to their reacting orbital motion in the earth's weak magnetic field. The question at issue is that of why the oppositely charged ions, which travel clockwise and counterclockwise, respectively, do not simply collide to share their energy. That is the puzzling facet to the experimental evidence supporting the cyclotron resonant effects. To overcome this, in a simple pictorial sense, it may suffice to consider the positive and negative ions as grouping, respectively, in a sequence of alternate parallel planes defining their freedom of action by restricted motion about the field axis. This will minimize collision probabilities. The result is then equivalent to having two concentric solenoids producing augmenting reaction fields, with the ion type of larger mass constituting the outer solenoid. The author is aware of the extensive experimental research which has focused on ion forms involving Ca, Na, etc, but what may have been missed in this prior research is the appreciation that water forms its own ion form in that it dissociates into hydroxyl and hydronium ions as listed in Table I. It would seem, at least to this author, that the prevalence of such ions and their rather special relationship to the 50 Hz and
ES10PAGE22
60 Hz frequencies, both of which they encompass by their combined effect, and as illustrated in Table I, has to give the underlying basis for field-induced activity in body fluids. However, this is not a critical point. What is critical is the need to realize that no normal free and prevalent ion form in our body fluids has a resonant condition which corresponds to 100 Hz or 120 Hz. Only lithium of atomic mass 7 if it were present in solution as a free single-atom ion could come near to satisfying the resonance requirement. In this situation, bearing in mind that the very prevalent hydroxyl and hydronium ions, which are the natural dissociated ions of water, are probably the dominant cause in the hazard risk at 50 Hz or 60 Hz, it can reasonably be presumed that a hazard free situation prevails at 100 Hz or 120 Hz. Therefore, as a simple expedient, the object should be to eliminate the 50 Hz or 60 Hz basic frequency and operate instead at twice this frequency. Now, this is may not seem to be a feasible solution, except for the electric blanket or underfloor heating situation where full wave rectified unsmoothed 50 or 60 Hz A.C. will allow heating to rely on a mixture of 81% D.C. and 19% A.C. mainly at 100 or 120 Hz. In the case of the overhead power line, unless one can think in terms of screening power lines, which seems uneconomic, or using normal closely wound cable forms, as used underground, the most appropriate, but drastic, remedy long term is to adopt a new standard frequency for power generation and supply, such as 100 Hz.
THE FUTURE Given that weak electromagnetic fields at the power frequencies 50 Hz and 60 Hz do pollute our environment in the sense that they make it hostile for the chemistry of our body functions, there is no real choice other than making sure we live well removed from power lines or accept the higher incidence of cancer and leukaemia as tolerable. Hopefully the future will see technology advance, perhaps on the warm superconductor front, to the stage where overhead power lines will carry D.C. in preference to A.C. To the extent that converters are then used to generate A.C. domestically or industrially for special purposes, that conversion can be to 100 Hz to avoid risk. More likely, however, since appliances needing to be powered by A.C. are not like underfloor heating or electric blankets with well-spaced current and return currents productive of stray fields, the hazards of the latter can be avoided by powering by D.C. In the meantime, this author has considered taking the precaution of adapting the switches on his electric blankets to include, on the output side, a full-wave bridge rectifier to eliminate heating the blanket with
ES10PAGE22
hazard-producing current at 50 Hz, even though the power is drawn from a 50 Hz mains supply. On reflection, however, the best course seems to be not to use an electric blanket at all, an action which, if followed by many others should spur manufacturers to cause them to add such a hazard-eliminating feature to their blankets. As things stand they prefer to ignore the problem until its solution becomes an industry standard. Table II below shows how the power supplied to a purely resistive load is divided between the frequency components of an unsmoothed full-wave rectified sinusoidal 50 Hz voltage source. TABLE II Frequency Power 0 100 200 300 400 81.0569 18.0127 00.7205 00.1323 00.0408
Finally, the author is all too conscious that the personal views expressed in this article concerning the simple remedy of using a modified electric blanket switch is more a matter of opinion than something easily supportable by test data. All that can be said is that if those many researchers who point to cyclotron resonance are correct, then it makes sense to power those field producing appliances, and particularly the electric blanket, with a frequency that lies outside the possible hazard range.
REFERENCES [1] S. Shulman, 'Cancer Risks seen in Electro-magnetic Fields', Nature, 345, 463 (1990). [2] F. Ogden, 'Killing Fields', Electronics World and Wireless World, p. 3 (January 1990). [3] A. Philips, 'Killing Fields - Introduction', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 96-97 (February 1990). [4] S. Best, 'Killing Fields - Epidemiological Evidence', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 98111 (February 1990). [5] R. Coghill, 'Killing Fields - Biophysical Evidence', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 112119 (February 1990).
ES10PAGE22
[6] A. Philips, 'Killing Fields - The Politics', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 120-124 (February 1990). [7] L. A. Surgalla, 'Molecular Mechanisms of Magnetic Medicine', Magnets, 3, 14 (April 1988). [8] A. R. Liboff, 'Cyclotron resonance in membrane transport,' in: Chiabera, A. Nicolini, C., Schawn, H.P. (Eds.): "Interactions between Electromagnetic Fields and Cells" (Plenum, London) p. 281 (1985). [9] B. R. Mclead, A. R. Liboff, 'Dynamical characteristics of Membrane Ions in Multi-field Configurations at Low Frequencies', Bioelectromagnetics, 7, 177 (1986). [10] U.K. Patent Application No. 9002718 (7 February 1990).
EXPLANATORY NOTE
A contracted version of the above article has been published in Electronics World + Wireless World, at pp. 774-775 in the September 1991 issue. The U.K. Patent Application of reference [10] was deemed by the U.K. patent examiner as constituting two inventions and eventually published by the U.K. Patent Office on November 27th, 1991 as Serial Nos. 2,244,393 and 2,244,394 but neither were followed through to grant. On the other hand, a corresponding U.S. Patent Application was granted on September 29th, 1992 as Serial No. 5,151,577 (see Appendix V below), but the author has decided that commercial restrictions on the use of such an invention are not warranted and has allowed that patent also to lapse. It is hoped that the invention will be used freely by manufacturers of electric blankets. The author at the time this 1990 section of text was written had formed a company in U.K. named HARWEN LIMITED to take forward research on various inventions in the new energy field, including the device to be used to avoid the hazard risk with the electric blanket. At the outset it was also sought to register in U.K. the name HARWEN as a Trademark on Part A of the U.K. Trademark register. The examiner accepted that HARWEN was an ìnvented word' which qualified for registration, but imposed the proviso that I secured a sanction from Harwell, the seat of the atomic research activity sponsored by the U.K. government. I then discovered that the U.K. Atomic Energy Authority had taken extreme precautions in themselves registering a series of trademarks, virtually as a defensive action, to block anything external which might possibly seem connected with Harwell. In these unexpected circumstances and knowing that I would be mounting efforts to encroach upon the power generation field by my patent filing, I thought it prudent to abort my use of the name HARWEN and not solicit the sanction from Harwell that would allow me to proceed with trademark registration. It was for this reason that I then changed the company name to THERMODYNAMICS LIMITED. I hope this note will therefore explain the use of the word HARWEN as used in the next item in this Report and, incidentally, and for the record, as used a 1990 paper in Speculations in Science and Technology [13, 295-299 (1990)] entitled 'The Harwen Energy Radiation Regenerator'. The latter is a subject unrelated to the electrical blanket theme.
ES10PAGE27
THE HARWEN BLANKET SWITCH

A remedial design aimed at eliminating harmful electric effects. While scientists are still struggling to understand how the very weak electric fields set up by electric blankets can possibly be linked with miscarriage or leukaemia, the HARWEN switch offers a safeguard against the likely cause, which is `cyclotron resonance'. The switch includes a converter which converts all the power into a form which excludes the harmful frequency range before the electricity reaches the spaced wires which set up the fields that can act on the user's body cells. Question: What is cyclotron resonance? Answer: The cyclotron is a machine used in high energy physics to accelerate charged particles which move in circular orbit about the axis of a magnetic field whilst an alternating electric field having a frequency equal to the orbital cyclic motion of the particles pumps energy into them to cause them to go faster and faster. A weak A.C. field in voltage terms can produce particles with energies corresponding to enormous voltages. Question: What has that to do with the human body? Answer: The replication of this cyclotron resonance process can occur in the ionized liquid in a human body which is ever subject to the Earth's magnetic field and can, under certain circumstances, be exposed to harmful weak A.C. fields at mains power frequency. The enhanced activity resulting from the consequent energy transfer sets up pressures which can cause penetration of cell walls and thereby produce abnormalities. Question: Why are electric blankets singled out as being harmful? Answer: There are stray field effects at mains frequency because manufacturers find it safer to space the wires carrying currents in the forward and reverse directions, whereas in normal power supply cables the wires lie close together. Question: What is so special about the mains frequency of 50 Hz? Answer: It is characteristic of the cyclotron reaction of a moving electric ion that the angular frequency of the reacting motion is simply Hq/m, this being the product of the field strength H and the electromagnetic charge to mass ratio of the ion involved. The ion mass which matches a 50Hz power frequency is approximately that of the ions dissociated in aqueous solutions present in the human body, as in the blood stream, namely the positive hydronium ion or the negative hydroxyl ion. The extraneous oscillating fields, whether electric or magnetic, can pump energy into a resonance building up the penetration power of the ions, but only if that power frequency is a good match for the particular cyclotron frequency of the ions present in that Earth field and 50 Hz is critical in this regard.
ES10PAGE27
Question: Does not the problem arise also in U.S.A. where the mains frequency is 60 Hz? Answer: Yes, but there is reason to understand how the power frequency that perturbs the cyclotron action in a liquid can influence the apportionment of the reaction energy density between the two principal types of reacting ion and so seek out a cyclotron resonance intermediate that of the two ion types. It can be argued that cyclotron resonance will occur when the ions involved have masses which, for the power frequency used, needs a D.C. field that lies between 66.7% and 100% of that given by the cyclotron formula. Typically, therefore, the hydronium ion at 50Hz requires a D.C. field of between 41T and 60T, whereas at 60 Hz the field has to be between 49T and 74T. For the hydroxyl ion the 50Hz range is 36T to 54T and the 60Hz range is from 44T to 66T. Question: Is the Earth's magnetic field in the danger range for both 50 Hz and 60 Hz power supplies? Answer: Yes. The geomagnetic field, which penetrates into our houses and our bodies, is of the order of 50T. This means that the 50Hz and 60Hz power frequencies are virtually the ideal frequencies for activating the harmful effects of cyclotron resonance. Conversely, if these frequencies were to be doubled and the ion types specified are the ones which really are the prevalent variety causing the health risk, then these field requirements would double and cyclotron resonance in the geomagnetic field could not occur. Question: So how does the Harwen switch work? Answer: It incorporates a semiconductor device which converts the mains power into an unsmoothed fullwave rectified version of the normal A.C. power frequency supply. This eliminates the harmful frequency, puts 81% of the power into D.C. and the rest of the power into a double and higher harmonic frequencies of much weaker current amplitude. No heat is wasted and no cyclotron resonance with the hydronium or hydroxyl ions can occur. Question: Does this mean that the switch offers guaranteed assurance that there will be no harmful effects arising from the blanket? Answer: No. It will be quite some time before scientists can be sure about this matter and the risks are small anyway. The Harwen switch is a simple and cheap way of taking a precautionary measure, bearing in mind that the evidence points to a problem with normally powered blankets. The problem is elusive and, though the design of the Harwen switch is based on physics, scientists generally are very slow to respond to changes which involve revising existing theory. Question: Will all electric blanket manufacturers need to offer some such precautionary measure aiming to reduce the health hazards? Answer: Certainly manufacturers of electric blankets would be well advised to provide suitable power converters in their blanket switches which eliminate the 50 Hz and 60 Hz frequencies. The cost of such a
ES10PAGE27
modification would only be a fraction of the cost of the blanket and this is seen as the first and easiest step forward that one can take in facing up to the real health hazard problems posed by the weak low frequency fields to which we are all exposed.
____________________________________________________
The following paper by H. Aspden was published In volume 12, the 1989 issue of Speculations in Science and Technology at p. 17.
EXTREMELY LOW FREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION AND BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
ABSTRACT: Although there is a vast amount of evidence to show that extremely low frequency electromagnetic (ELF) radiation is a health hazard, there is no currently accepted physical reason why this should be so. One possible explanation is presented, based on an existing theory for the gyromagnetic reaction anomalies. INTRODUCTION: The analysis in this paper brings together three separate physical phenomena in an attempt to explain why ELF radiation is harmful to health. The phenomena with which we are concerned are: (a) The well-researched and documented evidence that ELF radiation can cause leukaemia, enhanced DNA synthesis, mechanical vibration of brain tissue, tumours, calcium transport across cell membranes, chronic stress and other disorders. (b) The gyromagnetic oscillations which exhibit the resonance of an atmospheric field cavity enveloping the Earth. (c) The gyromagnetic reaction that opposes any magnetic field that penetrates through ionized gas plasma, ionized liquid solutions or even the vacuum if the latter contains active charge that can be displaced according to Maxwell's equations. It is already established that there is a link between (a) and (b), as discussed in a review paper by T. F. Valone [1]. The seriousness of the connection between ELF radiation and health is such that Valone reports on the development of a special ELF Spectrum Analyzer the object of which is to provide an instrument capable of detecting and analyzing electromagnetic fields having frequencies ranging from 10
ES10PAGE27
Hz down to 0.01 Hz. In Valone's paper there are more than 20 references that support the statement in (a) above. Here, however, we present just one such reference besides the Valone reference itself. This is to a paper in SCIENCE by A. R. Liboff et al. [2] entitled `Time-Varying Magnetic Fields: Effect on DNA Synthesis'. So far as the (b) phenomenon is concerned this relates to what is called the 'Schumann resonance' [3]. There is a fundamental frequency of about 7.8 Hz arising from the time it takes for electromagnetic radiation trapped within the ionosphere-earth cavity to propagate around the body Earth. 186,000 miles per second and a wavelength of about 24,000 miles, corresponding to the Earth's circumference, gives the 7.8 Hz frequency. This resonance is known to regulate in some way the timing of the biocycles. Valone states: 'It has been noted that the basic oscillation frequency of the brain (alpha rhythm) is the same as the Earth's fundamental resonant frequency.' THE GYROMAGNETIC REACTION: In reading Valone's fascinating review of this subject the author's attention halted at: 'ELF magnetic fields on the other hand pass right through the body without any appreciable attenuation but ironically have been found to have many significant biological effects.' It is this statement which is, indeed, an accepted proposition in established physics that this author finds can be challenged. The reasons are of record in the first volume of Speculations in Science and Technology in a 1978 paper by the author entitled 'Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism' [4]. The reader will, of course, see no connection between ferromagnetism and the human biocycles. However, the point is that the author gave very good reasons for suggesting that a steady or low frequency magnetic field acting an a medium containing charge in motion would cause that charge to react to the extent that the reaction kinetic energy density was equal to the magnetic field energy density. In a fuller treatment of the theory involved it is argued that it is this reaction that feeds the inductive energy back to the magnetizing system as it is de-energized. Furthermore, in asserting priority to deploy kinetic energy to match the magnetic field energy density, the reacting ions having the greater mass will take priority in asserting the reaction. It is not proposed here to enter into the full physical support for this contention, as reference [4] should suffice to sustain the proposition. However, what we can do is to show why this reaction effect is very relevant to the ELF hazards. The crucial formula governing the reaction is that associated with the cyclotron notion of a charge reacting to a steady magnetic field of intensity H. In the cgs system of units the cyclotron angular
ES10PAGE27
frequency is given by Hq/m, where q is the electromagnetic unit of electron charge of a typical ion and m is the mass of that ion. Therefore, if we are looking at the effects of the field H on a saline solution, for example, we will find that there is a characteristic frequency of reacting motion for each type of free ion in that electrolytic solution. Consider the chlorine ion as one prevalent in a resonance attributable to the presence of sodium chloride. This has a mass of very nearly 6xl023 gm, whereas q has the numerical value 1.6x1020. It follows that the angular frequency of the motion will be 266(H) rad/s or, as a frequency, about 42(H) Hz. Already, therefore, we have reason to see that there is the possibility of resonance between this frequency and that 7.8 Hz fundamental of the Schumann resonance, but that such a resonant condition will only occur at or very near to a specific value of H, which in the case of the Cl ions is (7.8)/(42) or 0.19 gauss. THE ELF RADIATION INTERACTION: Now the Earth's magnetic field has an intensity of about 0.5 gauss (i.e. 50 T) and, though this is not the same everywhere on the Earth's surface, a value of this order is the steady field applicable wherever we choose to be. Consider then the effect of a slowly varying magnetic field that is of sinusoidal form and has an amplitude of, say, 0.4 gauss. In this context 50 Hz is slow. The excursions of the combined field will pass very slowly through that critical value of 0.19 gauss twice per cycle. This means that the electric field pulsations at 7.8 Hz associated with that geomagnetic cavity resonance will combine with the rhythm of the reaction ion motion at exactly the same frequency to build up resonant lateral pulsations at exactly that 7.8 Hz frequency. On the other hand, if the disturbing field has a high amplitude or a very rapid cycle of change, the passage through the 0.19 gauss threshold will be very rapid and there will be no progressive build-up of oscillations. Even allowing for the fact that the opportunity for resonance occurs more often, owing to the increased frequency, the progressive build-up has no opportunity to establish a strong concerted cyclic displacement of the ion population in, for example, the human blood stream. What this amounts to is that strong electromagnetic radiation at power frequencies or weak radiation at high frequency will excite no ion resonance with the 7.8 Hz field. However, ELF radiation of small magnetic field amplitude can be a cause of pulsations that might well promote such resonance and affect cell behaviour in our bodies. This seems consistent with the evidence presented in (a) above. There is, of course, scope, based an the theory presented, for examining how the type of free ion present in a reacting medium might be sensitive to different critical magnetic fields. The use of controlled ELF signals of different amplitudes might then operate selectively in developing the resonance under discussion. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, given a physical basis for the way in which ELF radiation operates to affect our health, such as that just presented, we have then the means by which to devise verifying tests and even equipment that can reduce or eliminate the hazards.
ES10PAGE27
We will not speculate on that here. The author does, however, believe that there is something of basic scientific importance in this biomedical connection with the gyromagnetic reaction. Generally, physicists believe that in a metal conductor, where the electrons are the free ions, there is no such thing as `free electron diamagnetism'. They argue this on statistics but with the hindsight knowledge that there seems to be no attenuation whatsoever of the applied magnetic field. The author has reason to believe that the magnetic fields produced by isolated charge in circuital motion are twice as strong as predicted on conventional theory. This affords the scope for a reaction effect that normalizes the net field at its unity value. The optimum reaction in terms of energy deployment leads to that factor of 2 and ensures that just enough ions react to half-cancel the primary effect. This is why experiment shows that there is an anomalous g-factor of 2 when the angular momentum change in a steel rod is related to the change of magnetic moment of the orbital electrons deemed to account for the change of magnetization of that rod. The orthodox theory has led to the notion that a point charge can set up magnetic moments by spinning but it takes a specific and somewhat abstract mathematical treatment to give basis to such a proposition. One would not normally be able to make sense of a statement that a point can spin. However, this could be an erroneous interpretation, in which case we see scope for using the cyclotron theory to explain the ELF-resonant ionic reactions in, for example, the human blood stream. In a strange way, therefore, the mysteries of the health hazards of ELF radiation might be connected with the mysteries of the ferromagnetic or gyromagnetic state. The anomalies may well have a common solution on the lines indicated above. REFERENCES: [1] T.E. Valone, 'Electromagnetic Fields and Life Processes', Paper presented at the MFPG Symposium on Technological Innovation at the National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD.,USA an 15th September 1987. [21 A. R. Liboff, T. Williams, D,X. Strong and R. Vistar, 'Time-Varying Magnetic Fields: Effect an DNA Synthesis', Science, M, 818 (1984). [31 W. 0. Schumann, 'On the Radiation Free Self Oscillations of the System Earth-Air Ionosphere', Z. Naturforsch., 72, 250 (1952). [4] H. Aspden, 'Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism', Spec. Sc. Tech.,1, 281 (1978).
ES10PAGE32
NOTE ON SCHUMANN RESONANCE

H. Aspden The Schumann resonance ELF hazard discussed in the previous section does not apply to problems connected with electric blankets or proximity with overhead electric power lines. It is an action which occurs wherever one is positioned on Earth, because it derives its power from oscillations in the ionospheric cavity enveloping the whole of body Earth. It is in the category of the ever present cosmic radiation which, to some extent, must contribute to our limited life expectancy. It is therefore a natural hazard, rather than one which man has created by design of electrical appliances or distribution systems. However, we must recognize that the hazard effect from this Schumann resonance relative to that of electric blankets or overhead power lines is small, bearing in mind that it provides the statistical background or data norm on which the hazard risks of electric blankets and power lines are measured and found to be excessive. While one could think in terms of neutralizing the Earth's magnetic field and any extraneous D.C. field in our homes and workplaces, that is a formidable proposition which lies outside the bounds of practicality. However, we can, as has been shown earlier in this report, take simple precautionary measures to overcome the blanket problem. Concerning, the effect of overhead power lines, this is a topic already discussed on pp. 22-26. [Added Note: More will be said about Schumann resonance on pp. 35-37 (Appendix I). It is suggested that in the upper atmosphere in the region of the ozone layer, where oxygen molecules are ionized, there could be cyclotron resonance activity developing effects which are superimposed upon the basic Schumann resonance phenomenon.]
ES10PAGE32
DEBATABLE ASPECTS OF CYCLOTRON RESONANCE IN IONIZED LIQUIDS

H. ASPDEN Although there is a developing belief that cyclotron resonance of ions in body fluids plays an important role in biological systems, and this is claimed to have experimental support, certain other experiments aimed expressly at detecting such resonance are reported to give a null indication. Thus Durney et al [1] attempted to measure the effects of resonant magnetic fields on transport of ions across simulated cell membranes. They used an electrolyte containing either calcium, potassium or sodium ions and varied the field strengths at 100 Hz or lower. They measured membrane capacitance and electrical conductance only to conclude that, as these did not vary by as much as 1%, there was no evidence of any resonance. One must, therefore, ask the question as to why the cyclotron action is presumed to be evidenced by discernable electrical displacement. One should not assume that the resonance process is the same as that of free electrons in solid conductors. In this latter case the positive ions are not free to move as they are in a liquid. In so far as the cyclotron action stimulates cell growth or cell damage in biological systems this can presumably be attributable to the concentration of thermal energy into the ions as opposed to the neutral molecules in solution. In a sense, since there are positive and negative ions which must neutralize one another macroscopically, there can be no significant electrical displacement, but that does not mean that there is no enhanced activity by the ionized components of the system. The effects could be those we associate with temperature, as if some molecules are at a much higher temperature than the mean value applicable to the body as a whole. Of course, a critic will argue that the ions will collide and the heat become dispersed by being shared according to conventional thermodynamic principles and statistics. However, here one must remember that the cyclotron action involves ordering of motion so that collisions are less likely and, furthermore, there is a case for saying that the usual three degrees of freedom applicable to thermal interaction is reduced to two. If that were so then in the ultimate situation, and without adding any heat energy, the effective temperature could rise dramatically by tens of degrees. We need then to be mindful of the possibility that temperature anomalies can present themselves where ionized aqueous solutions are tested under conditions conducive to resonance. This author has suggested [2] that resonance can involve a band of frequencies, including 50 Hz and 60 Hz, for mixed ion mass conditions such as must always apply because the positive ions are always matched to negative ions and their masses are always different. This, in itself, will make detection of a resonance peak virtually impossible. Looking then for temperature anomalies one could even suspect that weak environmental fields at the laboratory power frequency could excite some very curious effects in water which contains an ionizing agent.
ES10PAGE32
The cold fusion scenario comes to mind here, but one needs also to take note of research on force anomalies discovered by various researchers. Zinsser, for example, using a signal generator of special design [3], found that pressure across the plates of a capacitor having water as a dielectric decayed very slowly when the system was switched off after being primed to resonance by an oscillatory field. The purpose of this note is to warn against genuine research endeavour becoming polarized by null findings which merely disprove a particular hypothesis. In the cold fusion world, the orthodox nuclear physicist cannot abide the thought that there can be atomic fusion without neutron emission. Since no neutrons are found, the cold fusion discovery is discredited. In the case of cyclotron resonance in ionized liquids, we must not presume that this can be sensed by direct electric fields effects. What matters in cold fusion research is whether there is a true excess of thermal action and what matters in the weak field hazard research is whether there is enhanced action that can damage our body cells. Theory can also get in the way of the truth. A critic of the cyclotron resonance theme could say that the radii of the ion orbits would need to exceed by far the mean free path of the ions, pointing out then that collisions must occur because positive ions orbit one way and negative ions orbit in the opposite sense. This brings us to a debatable issue. It could be the ordering of the collective motion of the opposite polarity ions that puts their motion about the magnetic field axis in different planes orthogonal to that axis and in an alternating sequence along that axis. As to the orbital radius involved, that can simply apply to the small arcs traversed by the ion motion between collisions. Whatever the reason, our theory must adapt to the truths of experiment pertaining, not to ion acceleration in a cyclotron as such, but to the activity in an ionized liquid in reacting to a magnetic field. If accepted theory is given a God-like reverence and applied to overrule what we might propose then we cannot progress in our research. We must therefore begin to take more interest in how resonant cyclotron effects in ionized liquids can be sensed, possibly in terms of such resonance being used as a catalyst in aiding chemical reactions. Much may depend upon the containing cell and particularly its cross section in relation to the cyclotron ion notion. One may also wonder if this research can be extended to the broader technological fields, where anomalous energy-related actions supposedly occur in aqueous solutions. This author finds it very difficult to credit the claims of those who try to run car engines on water by using engine power to generate electricity, in turn used to excite resonance by which water molecules are dissociated to yield hydrogen and oxygen to then power the engine by combustion. However, it would be foolish to ignore such claims completely merely on academic principle. After all, someone might well find that there are creative forces in our body chemistry by which the chaotic field energy of our body heat and the environment can produce that dissociation which precedes combination to grow new cell structure.
ES10PAGE32
References [1] C. H. Durney, A. A. Anderson, A. A. Peterson & J. Janata, 'Cyclotron Resonance and the Effect of Low-Level AC-DC Magnetic Fields on Electrical Impedance and Ion Transfer in Bilayer Phospholipid Membranes', Paper in Session A-16 of BEMS Tenth Annual Meeting, Stamford, Connecticut (June 1923, 1988). [2] H. Aspden 'Power Lines, Cancer and Cyclotron Resonance', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 774-775, September 1991. [3] R. Zinsser, U.S. Patent No. 4,085,384.
ES10PAGE35
APPENDIX I
The following Research Note dated March 31st 1997 was published in the author's Web pages on Internet. BRAINWAVES AND ALPHA RHYTHM Schumann Resonance Did you know that there are electric field effects in the atmosphere that affect your brain? We need to solve the mystery of why it is that your alpha rhythm, as measured by detectors sensitive to brainwaves, has a frequency equal to that detected by the study of weak electric field oscillations in the atmosphere. The frequency is 7.8 Hz, about one sixth or one seventh of the frequency of electricity supplied to your home. It was Tesla who first discovered those atmospheric oscillations. He even embarked on research to exploit the phenomenon, aiming to transmit power to homes everywhere around the world by low frequency 'radiowaves'. That was deemed to be a venture that could put power companies out of business. How would they be able to charge for the service? So now we have to concentrate instead on the power of our own brainwaves to progress in the world of `free energy'. It was Schumann's research reports which gave formal scientific recognition of this physical phenomenon of our atmosphere and so it has the name 'Schumann Resonance'. When I first heard about this from Tom Valone at a conference I attended in Canada in 1988 I was mildly interested. I was there to air my views on how one might be able to generate power using magnetism as a catalyst in tapping aether energy. I was told not to use the expression 'free energy' in the title of my talk as that might destroy my credibility! So I was a little restrained in my pursuit of the technological implications of my `brain child' and atmospheric resonance effects were not uppermost on my mind - or so I thought! What I did learn was that the Schumann resonance was deemed to be a phenomenon occurring as electromagnetic waves travelled around the Earth in the concentric spherical cavity between the Earth's surface and the ionosphere. If one takes the circumference of Earth and compares it with the speed of light then one finds that electromagnetic waves travelling around body Earth would set up a kind of standing wave resonance effect at 7.8 Hz. This is the alpha rhythm frequency. So we, meaning our brains, may be phase-locked in some way with body Earth and its atmosphere. The expression `phaselocked' means that everything in this merry electrical dance is in step and moves at the same frequency. Aspden Resonance Dare I now put my name on another interpretation of this resonance phenomenon? I leave it to you to judge. Firstly, as background I note that in 1988 my interest in aether theory led to contacts between me
ES10PAGE35
and Dr. P. E. Rowe of Mashpee, Massachussetts, USA . I had a theory which explained how protons were created from the aether. Dr. Rowe had experimental evidence that protons were created inside his electrical discharge tubes which he operated at 50,000 volts and he too believed the aether was the source. It seemed to me that he had found a way of focusing the work done by the aether in creating matter so that, in a sense, he was harnessing the power of Creation! I saw in this also the danger of effects on our bodies if we were near enough to electric power lines to be in the 'proton creation zone', but far enough away not to be electrocuted. I then wrote the 1988 paper 'The Proton Factor and Its Unknown Effects' here reproduced in Appendix IV. I had forgotten 'Schumann Resonance' because my mind was on my own theory and protons, deuterons, neutrons etc. There was not much I could do anyway, even though I was aware that if protons could be created inside my body in existing atomic nuclei I might suffer some consequences. I wondered about DNA and whether its chemistry took account of isotopes. It may have been A. A. Berezin, an academic researcher in Canada, who pointed out that there were more people in the world than possible DNA combinatons of atoms in the DNA molecule but yet we were all different. The implication I saw in this was that there could be different isotopic combinations in the DNA structure. Maybe the odd deuteron replacing the proton in the hydrogen atom in DNA can make a difference! If so, then the odd proton causing a transmutation to a deuteron could make the odd DNA molecule a misfit in our composition. Would that promote cancer? I do not know but I do know that someone somewhere should be researching that possibility. I may have done no more on this theme if it had not come to my attention that an electric blanket manufacturing company had sought certain assurances from staff members of the Electrical Engineering Department at my local University. They wanted to be assured that the electrical and magnetic fields produced by their blankets were so weak as to be non-harmful to health. I was a Visiting Research Fellow in that Department pursuing my own research on energy from a technological viewpoint, but I was not consulted on that question, nor was there any reason for such consultation. Measuring those electric and magnetic fields is quite straightforward, given the necessary test equipment. In my opinion, thinking about the matter privately, it was not sufficient just to measure the strength of those weak fields and assume that they could do no harm. If the medical world said there was evidence of a problem, then there was a problem! Now an electric blanket and an overhead power line have something in common. Unlike the cables which come into your home and in which the forward current carrying wire is wrapped around the return current carrying wire, the overhead power line and the electric blanket have these wires well spaced. In one case it is to reduce the risk of bad contacts causing hot spots and so a fire hazard. In the other case it is because the voltages are so high that the wires need to be well spaced to preclude arcing. The point neverthess is that, if wires are well spaced, they do set up stray pulsating electromagnetic fields at the power frequency. They may be too weak to matter in normal physical terms but they may be too strong to be tolerated in biophysical terms! The reason for this is 'resonance'. Now, I like to think that I am not stupid. I also have an aptitude for understanding something new, otherwise I could hardly have spent my working life in the world of
ES10PAGE35
invention. As a corporate patent attorney in the high technology world of electronics and power engineering one needs to be able to grasp what is new and find a rational way of describing it in terms meaningful to a patent examiner. So, the obvious question, if resonance is involved, is why electric blankets and overhead powerlines have harmful effects in U.K. and in USA, where the electric power frequencies are 50Hz and 60Hz respectively. To answer this I asked myself what was different about the human body versus action in a metallic conductor when it came to reaction to a low frequency alternating magnetic field. Now, although I was experienced in patent attorney work, I happen to have a Ph.D. for experimental research on the energy anomalies involved when metal reacts to such fields. I was aware of a kind of resonance in copper or iron when subjected to a magnetic field, what is termed a diamagnetic reaction, which occurs even in a steady d.c. field. In copper or iron there are free electrons moving about and setting up that reaction. In our bodies, in our blood, there are instead relatively-very heavy ions that set up that reaction. If there are two types of reacting ion present then, within a limited range, one can screen the field of the other to the extent needed to adjust the effective field to the optimum resonance of one or other of the ion masses. I knew this could explain the 50Hz-60Hz resonance question. The expression 'Aspden Resonance' refers to my suggestion that the field oscillations in the Earth's atmospheric cavity, as bounded by the ionosphere, are encouraged by cyclotron resonance involving ionized oxygen or ozone. Now, I say cyclotron resonance here, but I must qualify that statement. In physics there are two Larmor formulae. The first, which is called the 'Larmor formula', is the one applied to the cyclotron. It applies to the effect of fields which pump energy into the ion motion. The second formula, that termed the 'Larmor precession', applies to an action in which the motion in orbit is perturbed, with the result that the plane of the orbit alters the direction of the axis about which the ion moves. This sets up a radiated field disturbance at the precession frequency, which is half that of the cyclotron resonance frequency given by the 'Larmor formula'. Now, owing to the Earth's magnetic field, the 'Larmor precession' frequency of the ionized oxygen molecule, which comprises two oxygen atoms, would be about three times that attributed to the basic Schumann resonance. Also the ionized ozone molecule, which comprises three oxygen atoms would imply a precession frequency that is about twice the frequency of the basic Schumann resonance. In short, therefore, there would be harmonics of the basic cavity resonance set up and the relative strengths of the components observed in the harmonic spectrum of radiation should tell us whether this interpretation is viable. To take this further I need to deflect your attention along different routes according to choice. You may choose to follow my account of the basic cyclotron resonance theme, which may hold the secrets of the hazards we risk from using electric blankets or living too close to overhead power lines. Alternatively, you may be more interested in the question of those brainwaves and the Schumann resonance and Aspden resonance topics. The latter has a special interest from the viewpoint of my aether theory. A feature of my theory is that there is a phase-lock throughout domains in space set by the range of gravity force. The phase-lock merely implies that electric charges are all moving in a common rhythm, keeping their separation constant and so not exchanging energy. I predicted long ago that this was an ongoing
ES10PAGE35
state in the aether. As can be seen also from the pattern of electron field cavity resonance illustrated on page 51 of my 1996 book 'Aether Science Papers', the phase-lock action is at work in containing the electron's energy in a way which explains what is known as the anomalous g-factor of the electron. Therefore the Schumann resonance theme, which involves a phase-lock having a much smaller frequency than that of the aether or the electron, has a special significance in defining an enclosing boundary, not just for a weak form of radiation, but also for the aether system which is carried along by body Earth. Already, in the bulk of this Report we have concentrated on the basic cyclotron resonance theme, which is about the hazard risks that can be avoided. The other theme linked to the Schumann resonance will be discussed further in the following pages in Appendix III. *****
ES10PAGE40
APPENDIX II The following Research Note dated January 22nd, 1997 was published in the author's Web pages on Internet.
POWER LINES AND HEALTH

The above is the title of an article in the November 1996 issue of Physics World. Its authors are John Swanson, David Renfrew and Nigel Wilkinson, who belong to the Technology and Science Division of the National Grid Company in U.K. They conclude that, though it would be arrogant and rash of physicists to argue that, because we have not yet been able to think of a possible physical mechanism, it is impossible for there to be an effect.. however, the absence of a mechanism and reproducible laboratory results inevitably means .. scepticism'. I note that in their article they say that various resonant mechanisms involving the Earth's static (magnetic) field have been proposed, for example ion cyclotron resonance of the calcium ion. Of this they declare that such cyclotron resonance cannot actually occur in a cell as the orbit of the ion would have to be more than 1 metre (in radius). This shows that they have not understood the physics of cyclotron resonance as applied to ionised liquids. To pump energy from a pulsating electric field into a system of ions moving in a magnetic field the only governing condition is that the pulsating frequency is in or near to resonance with the natural frequency of the ion in orbit in that field. The cyclotron as used in high energy particle physics pumps energy into an ion by increasing its speed and so it orbital radius. If we are not seeking to put that energy exclusively into an ion output stream, it matters not if there are collisions limiting the mean free path to sub-micron-sized dimensions. There is still energy transfer from that field to the ion system. To understand this it may be that a mathematician will be required to supplement the "skills of physicists alongside those of biologists, epidemiologists and engineers" (quoted as the last words in the referenced article). You see, if there were no magnetic field, the ions in collision in the fluids in our body cells would merely move in straight lines between those collisions. A straight line is a curve of infinite radius! If, however, a magnetic field is present, then that same rectilinear motion would apply if the system of ions in motion could be viewed from a reference frame rotating about the magnetic field axis at the cyclotron frequency. Each and every positive ion would share a motion as if the whole of the fluid in the cell were rotating at the same angular velocity. Collisions would not cause a clockwise moving ion to take up anti-clockwise motion. It follows therefore that the superimposition of a 50Hz or 60Hz pulsating electric field attributable to an overhead power line will act selectively in pumping energy into those ions moving with the field. The ions on one side of a cell will gain in speed in their cyclotron orbit (or rather, minute arcs of such an orbit), whereas those on the opposite side of the cell will reduce in speed. However, owing to the
ES10PAGE40
rotation, if there is a match between the cyclotron frequency and the frequency of the pulsating field, the ions on one side of the system which gain energy will have moved around to the other side as the field reverses direction and so will continue to gain energy. This is an escalating effect in which the ions gaining in speed acquire more energy than is lost by those losing speed. Overall, there has to be energy transfer and a net heating effect concentrated by the cyclotron resonance process. Note further that, if a mathematician amongst those ions were to run around in circles, speeding up on one side of the orbit and slowing down on the other side, but yet keeping a steady angular velocity about a central point, his mean position would have to be displaced in the plane of motion owing to that constraint of a fixed angular velocity. Cyclotron resonance ensures that the angular motion has a constant rate, notwithstanding any changes in kinetic energy. Angular momentum of ions is not conserved in a cyclotron situation, because as the ions are accelerated to faster speeds they spiral outwards. Now, there is research in new energy physics which points to anomalous energy inflow from the field environment if electric charge can be held displaced in stable concentrations inside an electrically conductive medium. This is found in systems involving rotating magnets and in plasma discharge devices. There is clearly a scientific mechanism by which one can predict the setting up of electric fields in human body cells primed by the pumping of energy by cyclotron action. For my part I have, some years ago, addressed the more difficult question of why there can be similarly-harmful cyclotron resonance in U.K. and U.S.A. where the power frequencies are 50Hz and 60Hz, respectively. Explaining that is the primary question, but there is an explanation based on the dual presence of positive and negative ions of different molecular masses. Understanding how the cyclotron frequency adapts over a limited frequency range in such circumstances raises fascinating questions of basic importance, but directly connected with the gyromagnetic reaction phenomenon found in ferromagnetic substances. I shall be writing more on this subject in due course, but I emphasize here that the authors of the above Physics World article have not understood the cyclotron mechanism as it can apply to human body cells and they must rethink their views on the way in which weak electric fields from power lines can interact with a weak geomagnetic field to pump energy into the resonant ions in our body fluids. *********
ES10PAGE40
The following Research Note dated March 31st 1997 was published in the author's Web pages on Internet.
APPENDIX III
IONOSPHERIC RADIATION
It was in August, 1996 that I received a communication from A. G. Callegari of Dane Bridge Nursery, Much Hadham, Herts SG10 6JG, England. It was dated August 2nd and concerned his experimental findings on the measurement of 'Schumann Resonance'. What he had to say led me to look up the comments expressed by Tom Valone in his paper "Powerline EMF Radiation and Your Health" (Proceedings of United States Psychotronics Association Conference, 1990), my copy being a pamphlet version issued by Tom Valone from the Integrity Research Institute, 1377 K Street NW, Suite 204, Washington, DC 20005, USA. I began to make sense of a figure (Fig. 2 on p. 15 of that pamphlet) which gave a radiation intensity spectrum of the frequency pattern for the observed Schumann resonance. My concern was that the fundamental frequency component peaking at roughly 8 Hz was about 10 per cent weaker in strength than the second harmonic component which peaked at about 15 Hz, whilst the third harmonic at 20 Hz was about 85% of the strength of the fundamental component. The fourth and fifth harmonics seemed to be at 26 Hz (55% strength) and 33 Hz (30% strength). Now, this simply should not be, unless there is some factor at work other than the action setting up the fundamental oscillation. The Callegari communication indicated that he was using a frequency counter model WFC 308 made by Wisher in Taiwan. It specified that no antenna was used, by which I inferred that there was no resonant circuit which could distort the frequency spectrum of the signal to be analyzed. It then stated: "Frequencies in the range 7.06 to 8.45 Hz have been measured continuously at this site since January 1993, except in February 1996, when values increased suddenly to a temporary range (13.4 to 14.25 Hz) which lasted for about half a minute before falling back to the saturating value. Relaxation from that
ES10PAGE40
value appears to be semi-asymptotic of the order of 15 minutes. Analysis of existing data shows strong correlations with Schumann resonance, atmospheric and Telluric temperature changes and discontinuities, brain-wave frequency band limits (theta to alpha and alpha to beta), .... " The letter then added the comments: "I've just acquired a second WISHER 308 counter in which frequencies have displayed mostly (90%) in the range 15.5 to 16 Hz, with occasional jumps (10%) up to about 17 to 19 Hz - rarely below 15.45 or above 19.5 Hz." This suggested to me that with the newer equipment he was getting a more reliable measure of the stronger signals in this low frequency range, possibly supporting the indication in Tom Valone's paper that the second harmonic of the Schumann resonance was stronger than the fundamental component. I wrote to him, expressing my thought that the oxygen and ozone in the ionosphere might be a radiating source supplementing the basic Schumann resonance, thinking also that variation in concentration of a different mix of O(18) and O(16) isotopes might account for the anomalous frequency shift. At the time, it was on my mind that the London newspaper, The Times, had in their August 8th issue just declared that life had been discovered on Mars, the evidence being a fossil-containing fragment which came from that planet and contained the heavier form of oxygen, O(18). Then, by letter dated August 26th, Callegari reported his investigations on his new equipment used in a test run between 4.00 pm and 4.11 pm on that same day. He had a reading every 2.56 seconds and the measurements showed little variation about a mean of 15.79 Hz. Now, based on the Larmor precession formula, w = Hq/m, the angular frequency resulting from motion of an ion in a magnetic field H of strength 0.5 gauss (the Earth's magnetic field), would correspond to 768/N rev/s, where q is the unitary electromagnetic charge of an ion and m is the mass of the ion, which mass is also N atomic mass units. N is 16 for an isolated oxygen atom, and 48 for ionized ozone. Since 768/48 is 16, this tells us that ozone in the ionosphere could be a source of electromagnetic radiation at 16 Hz. Now this is virtually that second harmonic frequency, bearing in mind that the 0.5 gauss Earth's magnetic field strength is only a close approximation. However, there is the very clear message here that this could explain why there is a dominant second harmonic in the radiation intensity spectrum associated with the Schumann resonance. Going even further, we can look at the oxygen molecule in its ionized condition in the ionosphere and expect that to produce radiation at the frequency 768/N Hz, where N is 32. This would indicate radiation at 24 Hz. This would be the third harmonic frequency associated with the Schumann resonance. A strong fourth harmonic could then arise as a second harmonic of the ozone radiation, but a fifth harmonic of the Schumann resonance is not so easy to explain. I do, however, feel that I have made out a good case for asserting that the ionosphere, besides providing a cavity for setting up the Schumann resonance, has another way of generating ELF radiation. If tests were
ES10PAGE40
made in polar regions where the ozone layer is absent, then that second harmonic associated with the Schumann resonance should fall off in strength. That would confirm this theory. In conclusion, identifying this new interpretation of the anomalous strength of that second harmonic by the name 'Aspden resonance', I express the opinion that neither the Schumann resonance nor the 'Aspden resonance' warrant concern from the hazard risk point of view. Unlike cyclotron resonance in our body cells attributable to overhead power lines and electric blankets, there is really nothing we can do in any event by way of a preventive measure. ******** The reason this Research Note is dated 31st March 1997, bearing in mind that what has been presented dates from August 1996, is the deferment of its preparation to the time when this Energy Science Report No. 10 is ready for publication.
ES10PAGE42
APPENDIX IV
The following paper was published in The Toth-Maatian Review at pp. 3725-3734, vol. 7 (1988)
THE PROTON FACTOR AND ITS UNKNOWN EFFECTS

H. ASPDEN Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southampton, Southampton, England. ABSTRACT: By speculating on a theme related to the proton, the mysterious appearance of hydrogen gas in high voltage electric discharges and the proton structure of atomic nuclei, it is shown that we have reason to doubt the way in which experts portray atomic nuclear structure. There are uncertainties as to how protons can migrate through solid matter and how they can suddenly appear in a discharge environment and possibly disappear from nearby substance to keep a balance. These uncertainties can cloud our knowledge of how our body cells might be affected in physical environments in which this proton factor is of concern, and particularly the danger to health should one live in close proximity to overhead high voltage electric power lines. INTRODUCTION: There is a developing concern that people living very close to high voltage overhead power lines can suffer from medical problems related to those specific environmental conditions. This has been the subject of research that does give reason to believe that there are health hazards associated with the near presence of such power lines. The general assumption is that the problems arise from the effect of the magnetic fields that penetrate into the dwellings closely adjacent to these high current sources. However, though there is some evidence that magnetic fields, and particularly weak or low frequency magnetic fields do have some effects on our body chemistry, the general expert opinion is that such fields are not harmful. Furthermore, those who work near powerful electrical power generators or in electro-chemical plants should be equally subject to hazards associated with magnetic field effects. The difficulty with any investigation on this subject is that it involves several professional disciplines and this makes any objective research dependent upon an interaction between several scientists of very
ES10PAGE42
different skills and training. It takes an exceptional person in any one such field to make any progress in dealing with an unknown phenomenon and the chances of bringing the right people together in the several fields involved are very small. One needs the knowledge of the electrical power engineer, the physical chemist specialist in electrical effects on matter, the relevant medical experts and, perhaps surprisingly, the nuclear or atomic physicist familiar with isotope transitions. It is the latter proposition that is the basis of this paper, because whilst we think that the magnetic fields account for the hazards of living in proximity to an electric power line, it might well be that there are certain atomic transitions some of which are induced in the atmosphere if not directly in our body cells, so affecting the air we breath and, indirectly, our health. A general comment that is often made is that the weak magnetic fields set up at tens of metres from an overhead power line can be little different from those arising from power equipment in the home, including fluorescent lamps, and that any electromagnetic radiation effects can hardly be different in intensity from those set up by television tubes. Indeed, they may be little different from the strength of the Earth's magnetic field and there is no escape from that, however far we might live from an overhead power line. This magnetic field consideration does not apply, however, to the chemical effects, such as the action of the corona discharge which occurs continuously around the power line. One well-known effect of this is to convert atmospheric oxygen into ozone in the open air. The gases in a fluorescent lamp and a television set are contained within sealed tubes so even if they are affected by a discharge of current they will nevertheless be contained and so cannot be harmful. However, in making this comparison it should be kept in mind that the voltages employed in such domestic appliances are far below those of the primary transmission lines used by the electrical power industry. However, the task of investigating the effects of ozone is not seen as a primary problem warranting our attention in this paper. What we wish to discuss is a more `way-out' possibility that stretches our insight into physics to the limit or, as some might say, beyond the limit and into the realm of pseudo-science. Where health considerations are concerned we cannot afford to confine our minds to what, in science, is practical and proven. We know all too little about what it is that causes our bodies to deteriorate with age and if pseudo-science can give us a tentative insight into àetherial' processes that can have a physical effect on our body cells, then such research can be of value. The thoughts outlined in this paper are based upon some disconnected observations that might come together to offer us a totally new insight into a more basic cause for the medical upsets that stem from the proximity of the electric power line. It is stressed that what is proposed is speculation and that the views are aired here only so that those who make decisions as to what research should be funded can decide whether to include this subject in their list of options. The general reader can, of course, make his or her own judgement as to whether any such research can possibly be conclusive if it does not extend into the field to be described below.
ES10PAGE42
THE BASIC PROPOSITION The activity in an electrical discharge that is powered by some 50,000 volts has been found to lead to the mysterious appearance of what seems to be hydrogen having no clearly determined source. This is an experimental observation in the laboratory and those researching this subject have tended to the view that the hydrogen comes from hydride compositions formed by the metal substances that comprise the electrodes associated with the discharge. There are, nevertheless, problems with this interpretation, problems which have led one experimental investigator Dr. Paul E. Rowe [1] in U.S.A. to urge that the vacuum is itself a source of the protons which, together with electrons can account for the anomalous appearance of hydrogen. It needs little imagination then to ask how it can possibly be that a proton, which has an intrinsic energy that we know from the formula E = Mc2 to be equivalent to the power of one electron accelerated through 938 million volts, can be created by the action of a 50,000 volt discharge. One answer to this could be that the proton is not created in isolation. Just as electrons can tunnel through potential barriers which, in theory, they should not cross, so it may be that the proton can be transposed in some way from a position A to a position B by an influence far weaker than that needed to match the rest-mass energy. Protons, like electrons, if left alone have no measured lifetime. They seem to live forever and yet electrons paired up with positrons can be annihilated and recreated in the vacuum field. Whether such a process is involved in the barrier tunnelling is a matter of speculation but the fact is that electrons can 'tunnel' mysteriously through barriers that should keep them contained. Therefore, given that it is an experimental fact that hydrogen does appear, as it were, from nowhere, it does not seem at all outrageous to suggest that a proton can appear at B accompanied by the demise of a proton at A. Whether the aether is the source of that proton at A is debatable, but if it is not the aether then the source must be the nucleus of an atom of matter in the near vicinity. Therefore, thinking of that medical problem, if a proton can appear mysteriously in the corona discharge close to an electric power line, a proton in matter, possibly in human cells nearby will disappear. An atomic transmutation, an isotopic transition, may well initiate activity in that human cell that could initiate cancer, but this is where one needs that specialist knowledge. What do we know of the effects of substituting isotopes of the same atom in a living cell? Research on this must have been performed but this author, being more a specialist on electromagnetic actions in the context of physics or engineering has no knowledge of any research literature in this field. In particular, research must have been performed on the effects of consuming heavy water, meaning water in which the hydrogen atoms have atomic nuclei that are constituted by deuterium rather than the proton. As far as the author is aware it has been suggested by Berezin [2] that different isotopic combinations in a DNA molecule are essential to give basis for our human differences since the number of such possible combinations is vast, whereas the basic molecular chemical composition of DNA does not offer a sufficient variety of human forms. This suggestion comes from an electrical expert rather than a biochemist or medical specialist and so it must be viewed as mere speculation. However, if the generation of
ES10PAGE42
DNA involves the replication of the exact isotopic combination in each of our bodies, then any isotopic transmutation that occurs in a spurious way, as by an atom shedding some of its mass to become a different isotope, must initiate a mismatch that could signal trouble medically. The point of the above discourse is merely to show that a research theme pursued by Rowe, which involves an interest in a fundamental chemical problem, may have relevance to the medical concerns that arise from living close to an electric power line. Yet, no amount of research on the adverse effects of a magnetic field on our bodies can possibly lead to the proton transmutation that has just been suggested. Hence, if there is anything in this proposition, such research effort will be looking in the wrong direction and will not resolve the problem. THE UBIQUITOUS NEUTRON We will next digress into the field of the atomic nucleus to ask whether we really know enough about the composition and structure of such a nucleus to pass judgement on the thoughts expressed above. The idea that a free proton can appear suddenly in an electric arc as an event corresponding to the demise of a bound proton elsewhere is likely to attract scorn from a nuclear physicist. There is the question of the binding energy involved in such a transmutation and such energy is not by any means minute. It certainly involves energy quanta that we associate with powerful gamma radiation, that is, energy far in excess of that of X-rays. The nuclear physicist would ask how enough energy is fed to the atom in a human being to cause it to release the proton, especially if the only source of energy we are considering is the electric voltage of a power line several metres away from the affected atom. Now, we must respect the knowledge of the nuclear experts, bearing in mind that they have successfully harnessed the nuclear energy of the atom in their atomic reactors and they have had at their disposal some very powerful tools for probing atomic structure. However, there is something very simplistic in the way the nuclear physicist looks at an atomic nucleus and the non-specialist in these matters should find it interesting to take what could be a rather cynical look at their picture of the atom. Firstly, the atomic nucleus has an electric charge that comes in units of the positron charge, the positron being like an electron but positively charged instead of negatively charged. Secondly, the atomic nucleus has a mass which indicates that it is assembled from a number of `nucleons' that are roughly of mass equal to that of the proton. The proton is, in fact, the nucleus of the most prevalent isotope of hydrogen. Thirdly, the radioactivity of some heavy atoms involve powerful emissions which can induce an artificial radioactivity in other atoms and lead to the appearance of a neutron. This is a very penetrating particle, just a little more massive than the proton. It has a limited mean lifetime of 898 seconds and no electric charge. It is a particle that can have lethal effects and it is, of course, the catalyst that jumps from one atom to another and stimulates fission in atomic reactors.
ES10PAGE42
Now, given the above facts, is it not surprising that our nuclear physicists were satisfied by a very simple algebraic calculation which said that if an atomic nucleus has Z units of charge and A units of nucleon mass, it must comprise Z protons plus (A-Z) neutrons? Why should we suppose that all matter and, indeed, our very body substance is full of those lethal neutrons that somehow only live for 898 seconds when they escape, but yet, for some reason that no one bothers to explain, are happily enjoying a much longer lifespan as part of our personal atomic substance. One would think that we should be exuding tremendous amounts of radiation if we were so full of neutrons. We should be intensely radioactive. Moreover, would one not think that, if neutrons have a dominant presence in atomic nuclei, the atomic elements that are naturally radioactive would emit neutrons, rather than the alpha particles. Alpha particles are, in effect, the nuclei of a helium isotope? Dare we venture to suggest that there are no neutrons in the atomic nucleus of any atom? Let us say, instead, that the neutron is a particular excited form of the antiproton (a proton that has a negative charge) that has an electron-positron entourage that includes a surplus positron to assure overall electrical neutrality. Such a neutron only exists outside the atomic nucleus because it comes into being as an antiproton in the nucleus is driven out. The reason we are discussing this is simply that we are striving to understand how our body cells can suffer transmutations at the level of the atomic isotope. The word isotope merely signifies the forms of different atomic nuclei that have the same charge (Z value) but different masses (A values). If we have to talk about neutron exchange to discuss isotopic transformation then we are not speaking from the same energy criteria that apply if we really should be speaking about proton or antiproton substitution. The proposition put here in this paper is that there are no neutrons in the atomic nucleus. This is the independent research theme that this author brings to this study for combination with the findings of Dr. Rowe. INSIDE THE NUCLEUS Physicists cannot be sure what there is inside an atomic nucleus. If they bombard it with other particles to see how these scatter then it takes some very powerful particles to detect anything and then they cannot be sure that the energy of those particles has not caused its own transmutations and made the atomic nucleus something different from its natural self. So let us just consider the options if we look for a different solution to that simple algebra mentioned above. Firstly, Z could be the measure of the number of positrons that have clustered together to form the core charge of the nucleus and there could be A neutrons in a surrounding cloud. The problem with this is that the basic hydrogen nucleus is not seen as a positron plus a neutron, but is in fact a proton. Hence the logic of building atoms from protons and adding some neutrons. Now let us try a second line of argument. This time we will take note of the theory that Dirac advanced
ES10PAGE42
according to which the vacuum itself contains sites occupied by charges that cancel one another. When an electron is removed from such a site, the `hole' that is left behind is a positron. So, we take out Z electrons to form a 'hole' of Z units of positive charge. The electrons go to form the atomic shells of electrons surrounding the nucleus. Then how do we account for the mass number A? Well, all we need to do is to substitute A antiprotons for the negative charges that occupy sites close to the centre of the nucleus. This may sound very speculative and it still does not quite fit our picture of the isolated proton when Z = 1 and A = 1, but it is a possibility. Note that in this latter case we avoid the presence of neutrons in the nucleus, but recognize that, if an antiproton escapes as an electron moves in to take over its site, the antiproton can jump into the site vacated by the electron and be seen to move through space in similar successive jumps, just as if it were an antiproton in company with a positron. This is similar to the form of neutron envisaged above. Still speculation? Well, let us take note of the fact that the neutron might be electrically neutral as judged by its electric field seen from a distance but it exhibits a magnetic moment in spin that implies that it has a negative charge. The model of the neutron advanced above has, in fact, been used as a basis for calculating the neutron mass, the neutron magnetic moment and the neutron lifetime [3]. All three of these quantities were found to be in full agreement with their measured values, even to the precision of the part per million measurements of the magnetic moment and mass. So there is an extremely good case for saying that the nuclear physicists have got it wrong. Instead, the atomic nucleus with Z greater than unity does comprise a halo of A antiprotons neutralized by occupancy of positive sites in the vacuum field. Given Z, what then determines A? Physicists have no answer to this on conventional theory. However, we have a simple argument that develops the link. In developing this argument it is preferable to regard the nuclear charge as a true charge cluster. Firstly, suppose that we have a single spherical shell of A antiprotons seated at a radius r around the central positive charge Ze, where e is the magnitude of the unit electron charge. The potential energy, according to Coulomb's law, is then -AZ(e)2/r for the antiproton-nuclear charge interaction and (Ae)2/2r for the interaction between the antiprotons. The sum of these energies is crucial to the stability of the atom. The positive energy term cannot exceed the negative term if the atom is to be stable. The reason is that an additional antiproton coming into the nucleus would sense the full attractive force of the Ze charge of the core acting along a radial line from the centre of the nucleus, but it would only sense a half effect from the 2Ze repulsive shell of distributed antiprotons. These act from side directions or from a further distance, so weakening their force action, but at the critical threshold even the weakened force can outweigh that of the central core and preclude increase of A. So far as the action between the antiprotons and the positive `holes' is concerned, this appears not to affect the stability of the nucleus. It is as if the àether' involved at such close quarters cannot set up or withstand the short range forces that are under consideration. In any event, there is an argument that the single shell of antiprotons can contain twice as many units as the central charge core. Should the atom have a large A value then the distribution will be more nearly uniform over a solid sphere of radius r. Then the first term becomes (3/2)(AZ)(e)2/r and the second term (3/5)(Ae)2/r.
ES10PAGE42
It can be seen from these considerations that the value of A must increase with Z over a range from A = 2Z to A = 2.5(Z), excluding Z = 1. Above this range the atom is unstable. Now, as anyone can see by inspecting the periodic table applicable to atoms, the argument just presented does hold true for actual atoms. Starting with the more abundant isotope of Helium, with Z = 2 and A = 4, we progress to Bismuth before encountering unstable atoms. Bismuth has a Z value of 83 and its abundant isotope has an A value of 209. This is just on the threshold of the 2.5 factor. This theory of the atomic structure is published elsewhere [4, 5], but it does serve to show that there is a very good case for saying that what appear to be antiprotons form a neutral cloud around a nuclear core charge by occupying positive `holes' in the vacuum field. To allay the criticisms of the nuclear physicist, it should be mentioned that there are two atomic elements in the mid range of the periodic table that do not exist naturally on Earth. Technetium (Z = 43) and promethium (Z = 61) are only identified by the fact that they are created by unnatural processes as byproducts of atomic fission reactions in atomic reactors. These two atoms are short-lived for reasons that actually verify the theory underlying the 'aether' physics advocated by the author, as explained elsewhere [6, 7]. Even so, their A/Z relationship strictly conforms with the theory just presented. It is just that technetium and promethium have an instability that has nothing whatsoever to do with the overloading of the nucleon number A in relation to Z. PROTONS IN THE BODY Our next problem, if we are to suppose that protons can be created by transfer from nuclei in our body cells is to explain how the antiproton can possibly become a proton. The answer to this is quite simple. Once the antiproton is free it really has captured a positron to become a neutron and we well know from experiment that a neutron decays into a proton and an electron. These are the ingredients which constitute the hydrogen atom. Apart from this, however, there is the clear possibility that a source of protons exists by the actual migration of protons or even antiprotons through the metallic conductors that form the electrodes or power lines setting up the arc discharges into which these particles penetrate. A free proton and a free antiproton would annihilate one another but we are not here concerned with a mix of matter of this kind. However, imagine that such annihilation could occur in some limited sense. That would constitute an energy source and set up a neutron field. It may even explain some of the incredible anomalies reported in powerful electric discharges studied with the object of measuring the electrodynamic force reactions involved. There is reported evidence that the forces on the heavy ions can be several thousand times greater than any expected from conventional electron interaction theory [8, 9 10]. There is definite evidence that protons gain more energy when involved with a powerful electron field than they should, by a factor of thousands of times [11]. Physicists are still researching this subject, but their interest lies in fusion reactors or the star war scenario of powerful railgun accelerators for launching missiles into space. Of
ES10PAGE42
particular relevance is the discovery that the most powerful anomalous forces can be developed by an electric discharge in water, this being a direct indication that the protons in the hydrogen constituent in water can become involved in the process [12]. Surely, there may be some effects triggered by such anomalous power amplification that can cause the 50,000 volt discharge of an overhead power line to induce the sporadic activation of protons to levels which could cause isotopic change in, say, the oxygen atoms in the ambient air or in the moisture of that air. If a free proton is created to produce, with an electron, a hydrogen atom and ultimately a molecule of hydrogen gas, the trade-off could be the demise of a nucleon from an oxygen atom, changing the oxygen17 or oxygen-18 isotope into oxygen-16. A similar alternative trade-off could involve a hydrogen-2 isotope in a water molecule converting to hydrogen-1 or, in a carbon dioxide molecule, carbon-13 converting to carbon-12 or nitrogen-15 converting to nitrogen-14. One could think that by breathing such specially activated air the human body could develop a contamination that would manifest itself in due course as the activated atoms reverted to their original state. However, this proposition must be ruled out because the lower-nucleon valued isotopes are by far the most prevalent and, in a sense, one could think that, in normalizing more atoms, this would work beneficially from a health viewpoint. THE PROTON CREATION THEORY However, yet another possibility emerges from the consideration that in space, whether we consider outer space, the space within our body or that close to an overhead power line, there could be certain activity of what is known as the zero-point field that actually is trying to create protons constantly everywhere. The zero-point field is a reality that features in what is known as stochastic electrodynamics. It is an energetic field that exists everywhere even at absolute zero temperature, 273 degrees centigrade below the freezing point of water. According to Dr. Harold E. Puthoff of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, Texas: "The amount of energy associated with this (usually unobserved) background is conservatively estimated to be of the order of nuclear energy densities or greater. ..... One example is a unique zero-point quantum force between closely spaced metal plates, known as the Casimir force, which results from unbalanced pressures in the zero-point energy due to the presence of the plates. .... Now yet another indication of the reality of this ubiquitous energy density has turned up, while at the same time resolving a long-standing mystery from the early development of quantum theory. (Puthoff here refers to his paper in Physical Review [13] which explains why electrons in atoms do not radiate their energy) ... The significance of this observation is the understanding that the very stability of matter itself depends upon, and verifies the presence of, an underlying sea of electromagnetic energy of almost inconceivable magnitude, a vast reservoir of random energy that is universally present throughout space." With this as the active situation today how can we believe that research on the harmful effects of electric power lines based on the orthodox teachings of electromagnetism, meaning an absence of energy when
ES10PAGE42
no detectable field is present, can possibly focus on the truths of the effects involved? Suppose that the proposition that the aether is trying to create protons everywhere all the time is true. A full theoretical basis as to why this should be so is given elsewhere [14, 15], but that need not concern this speculative enquiry. The reason that protons are not materializing all the time is simply that there is a limiting energy threshold that has been reached. The aether tries to create protons but any that are created in the zero-point energy field immediately decay. Their existence is very transient, but sufficient to account for the missing matter that cosmologists believe pervades the universe and sufficient to provide the attenuation of radiation that we associate with the Hubble redshift, the basis of the Big Bang theory [16]. Now suppose that we do provide that local stimulus that can momentarily upset the energy balance. Maybe we can create protons and this will lead to that mysterious appearance of hydrogen found by Dr. Rowe in the electric discharges. However, the zero-point energy balance of the vacuum field might reassert itself and cause the overall number of protons (or antiprotons) to be kept constant. Then there would be a proton decay in the near vicinity and possibly in the substance of the human body, especially if the hydrogen atom was the favoured source. Organic substances and water contain hydrogen and so protons with their full unbound rest-mass energy, corresponding to the energy involved in their creation. Again, a nuclear physicist will say that protons are stable and do not decay, but so he will tell you that electrons also are stable and do not decay. Yet electrons can vanish on one side of a potential barrier and reappear on the other and they can be annihilated with their antiparticle to yield 1.022 million electron volts of energy. So who is to say that a proton cannot behave in much the same way? The fact is that the number of protons in a vast tank full of a special organic chemical can reduce as neutrinos are intercepted, but the protons are upgraded to neutrons which decay back into protons. This does not mean that the protons cannot decay, especially if they can eventually reappear elsewhere inside or outside of that same tank or even appear ab initio by some zero-point energy fluctuation to be followed by a balancing decay. It is only if we make the right assumptions as to what phenomena occur during such events that our means of detection of decay are of any significance. THE WAY AHEAD It has to be conceded that as yet our scientific knowledge, especially on matters of fundamental importance, is incomplete. We have probably encountered all the obvious scientific phenomena by now and, in the main, have theories that are adequate for our practical needs. However, there are surely phenomena that have yet to be discovered and it may be that we are not looking for such discoveries because they do not fit what we regard as obvious patterns based on accepted theory. In these circumstances it is going to be very difficult to make further progress. We cannot, under any circumstances, afford to ignore the occasional and possibly accidental exposure of any unusual phenomenon. Nor should we be too complacent about what is regarded as established theory, bearing in mind that much of the theory evolved very rapidly as a matter of expediency before the fullest facts were assimilated. In particular, we must stand ready to change our theories. Experts on existing facts and
ES10PAGE42
theories are not authorities on what may be future more embracing theory based on new discoveries. How can we be sure that an atomic nucleus contains Z protons and (A-Z) neutrons, especially when we know that neutrons live for an average of 898 seconds and decay into electrons and protons? Why not say that there are A protons and (A-Z) electrons in an atomic nucleus, bearing in mind that this gives the atom the same overall condition? The author prefers the Z group positron core with A antiprotons occupying positive `holes' in the structured vacuum field surrounding the core, but the way ahead is to find the true answers. Also, and of more importance, is the basic question of determining whether those mysterious hydrogen atoms that Dr. Rowe has detected in electric discharges come from the vacuum medium or are fully accounted for by a flow through the metal circuit feeding the electricity. This is straightforward experimental work that needs funding to get at the truth. If Dr. Rowe is proved correct and the protons and accompanying electrons do come from the vacuum medium, the 'aether', then that will be an Earth-shattering discovery that would penetrate the complacency of our scientists in authority. They would respond to such a discovery, if it were fully verified, and we could expect to see progress on the subject of our discussion. If, on the other hand, the mysterious hydrogen source is traced to the flow of protons through the metal then we may still need to urge for that extra research. Firstly, we would need to establish whether the flow is a true flow similar to the migration of electrons through the metal conductor. If it were to be a chemical effect of hydride compositions merely exuding hydrogen then there is little basis for any hazardous condition such as we have contemplated. However, apart from what Dr. Rowe says, it does appear that there is some evidence that there is a true flow of proton-sized charge carriers. Tests by Winchester [17] show that hydrogen gas continues to be produced provided the voltage of the discharge is high enough and the damage to the cathode leaves sufficient cathode to act as an electrode. Winchester's research, therefore, leads us to suspect that there is a flow through the circuit rather than a mere surface effect of release of hydrogen from hydride compositions. Skinner [18] went further in his research. He confirmed the mysterious appearance of hydrogen and was led to state: "This experiment repeated at various times since and with different metals showed beyond doubt that the source of gas was solely in the cathode." This is an intriguing factor because, if we are thinking of positively charged protons being supplied as part of the current flow, these should come from the anode and not the cathode. Here, then, we have evidence that it is a flow of antiprotons that we are considering.
ES10PAGE42
Skinner then referred to further experiments of which he said: "Experiments described below indicate that in this case the anode absorbs at the same rate as the cathode evolves hydrogen." This was further confirmation of a flow that could be taken to involve antiprotons. Skinner's paper then proceeded to show experimentally that the quantity of hydrogen involved obeyed Faraday's law: "All metals show that the hydrogen is liberated for a time at a rate sufficient to carry, as negatively charged atoms, the whole current between cathode and gas." Yet, though this was Skinner's experimental conclusion, it is difficult to believe that the full-bodied hydrogen molecule has acquired an extra electron and is literally dragged through the metal circuit in preference to a simple flow of electrons. The antiproton is something else. It is very small in physical size and could well respond with a preferential conductivity in flowing through the interstices of the metal. The antiproton once within the arc discharge would suffer the anomalous energy transfer from the electron gas in the discharge, as already mentioned [11]. It could easily acquire sufficient energy in a 50,000 volt discharge to combine with a positron produced in company with an electron by the zeropoint field fluctuations and so form a neutron. The latter survives for an average of 898 seconds before decaying into a proton and an electron. The result is the production of hydrogen and there is still an electron surplus to carry the current to the anode. The energy released by neutron decay will revert to the zero-point field to keep things in balance, but the driving force has been that 50,000 volts. The neutron can travel quite a distance in that 898 seconds and can find its way into living cells. However, if produced in the open air close to the overhead power line it might decay by combination with nitrogen-14 to produce carbon-14 plus the proton. Carbon-14 has a half life of about 5600 years. It is known to be produced naturally in the atmosphere and has a general equilibrium. Besides this it has found its way into the carbon dioxide of all living plants. Hence the basis for radioactive carbon dating. That equilibrium arises presumably from the neutrons produced by cosmic radiation bombardment that spreads the effects in a weak concentration worldwide. So, is it unrealistic to suggest that there is a much more intense local creation of carbon-14 owing to the sustained excitation of an overhead power line? Is it unrealistic to suggest then that an excess of radioactive carbon-14 can build up in the bodies of people living close to those overhead power lines? Radioactivity can be harmful to one's health. Maybe if these people are carbon-dated they will be found to have aged prematurely? Maybe too much carbon-14 can distort the DNA cell composition in our bodies via an isotope effect as considered by Berezin [2]. This then is the scenario that we should be examining, especially if our scientists are confident that magnetic fields are not the culprits causing the anomalous health problems of those living in the near proximity to corona-discharging power lines.
ES10PAGE42
The author acknowledges the stimulus for what is reported in this paper provided by information supplied by Dr. Paul E. Rowe of 7l West Way, Mashpee, MA. 02649, USA. Dr. Rowe's opinions on the aether as the source of protons are based on his experiments, as yet unreported in published work, and in reaching this conclusion he is fully cognizant of the prior work of Winchester and Skinner. REFERENCES [1] P. E. Rowe, Private Communications including "Yes, Virginia, There is an Ether! Perhaps.", the latter including a section entitled "Evidence for Gas Production in a Vacuum" (to be published). [2] A. A. Berezin, Private Communication. [3] H. Aspden, 'The Theoretical Nature of the Deuteron and the Neutron', Hadronic Journal, vol. 9, pp. 129-136 (1986). [4] H. Aspden, 'Modern Aether Science', (Sabberton, P.O. Box 35 Southampton, England), Chapter 14: The Nuclear Aether, pp. 139-143, l972. [5] H. Aspden, 'The Theoretical Nature of the Photon in a Lattice Vacuum' in `Quantum Uncertainties: Recent and Future Experiments and Interpretations' Ed. W. M. Honig et al, NATO ASI Series B: Physics Vol. 162, (Plenum Press, New York), pp. 345-359 (l987). [6] H. Aspden, 'The Missing Atoms: Technetium and Promethium', Hadronic Journal, (in press). [7] H. Aspden, 'Atomic Fission', Electronics and Wireless World, vol. 94, p. 332 (l988). [8] P. Graneau and P. N. Graneau, 'Electrodynamic Explosions in Liquids', Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 46, pp. 468-470 (1985). [9] P. Graneau, 'Ampere-Neumann Electrodynamics of Metals', (Hadronic Press, Nonantum, MA.) 1985. [10] P. Graneau, 'Railgun Recoil and Relativity', J. Phys.: Appl. Phys.: vol. 20, pp. 391-393 (1987). [11] J. D. Sethian, D. A. Hammer and C. B. Wharton, 'Anomalous Electron-Ion Energy Transfer in a Relativistically-Beam-Heated Plasma', Physical Review Letters, vol. 40, pp. 451-454 (l978). [12] P. Graneau, 'Harnessing Thunderpower', Breakthrough, Vol. VI, No. 1, January 1 1988. [13] H. E. Puthoff, 'Ground State of Hydrogen as a Zero-point-fluctuation-determined-state',
ES10PAGE42
Physical Review D, vol. 35., pp. 3266-3269 (l987). [14] H. Aspden, 'A Theory of Proton Creation', Physics Essays (to be published). [15] H. Aspden, 'The Theory of the Proton Constants', Hadronic Journal (to be published). [16] H. Aspden, 'The Steady-State Free Electron Population of Free Space', Lett. Nuovo Cimento, vol. 41, pp. 252-256 (l984). [17] G. Winchester, 'On the Continued Appearance of Gases in Vacuum Tubes', Physical Review, Vol. 3, pp. 287-294 (1914). [18] C. A. Skinner, 'The Evolution of Hydrogen from the Cathode and its Absorption by the Anode in Gases', Physical Review, vol. 21, pp. 1-15 (1905). *********** [1997 update concerning the above references: I have no information concerning eventual publication of Rowe's paper [1]. Reference [6] was published at pp. 167-172 of volume 10 of the 1987 Hadronic Journal. Reference [14] appeared at pp. 72-76 of volume 1 of Physics Essays in 1988. Reference [15] appeared at pp. 169-176 of volume 11 in the 1988 Hadronic Journal. All of the 14 author's papers that have appeared in Hadronic Journal and Physics Essays are reproduced in full in the author's book 'Aether Science Papers', ISBN 0 85056 0152, published in July 1996 by the publisher of these Energy Science Reports.] [Concerning the anomalous effects observed in plasma tube discharges and typically those implicit in reference [11] above, it is noted that Energy Science Report No. 8 in this series concerns a Canadian invention which generates electricity using a plasma discharge tube. There is substantial excess energy produced and one can only infer that its source has to be the aether. Hopefully this technology of the Correa invention which is the subject of U.S. Patents Nos. 5,416,391. 5,449,989 and 5,502,354, granted in 1995/1996 to Dr. Paulo N. Correa and Alexandra N. Correa will now be developed commercially. This author (H. Aspden), in deciding to write these 10 Energy Science Reports, realized that only a major breakthrough by which the existence of a real aether medium can be proved by tapping its energy commercially, can arouse the physics community from their slumbers in their relativistic dream world. This Report No. 10 is the last such report, because events on the New Energy front must run their own course at their own pace and there is little more that this author can do to encourage interest in these matters. Our future health and well being depends upon a sustained source of non-polluting energy and an understanding of how the aether contributes as a creative force. Harold Aspden, March 29th, 1997].
ES10PAGE54
APPENDIX VI LIVING CELLS AND SUPERCONDUCTIVITY

Although unrelated to cyclotron resonance as such, there is another kind of resonance that may intrude upon the workings of cells in the human body. It is best described as 'Supergraviton Resonance', there being a physical mechanism by which molecules or small groups of molecules can, owing to a dynamic interaction with the aether, develop a resonant condition which converts heat into electricity. This is at the very heart of the action which accounts for what is known as 'warm superconductivity'. In summary, all matter has a quantum jitter motion connected with the Planck's constant of action and this needs to be balanced dynamically. The balance comes from the transient existence of gravitons and a heavy molecule needs to induce the supergraviton form so as to optimize the action. Gravitons and supergravitons are states where a kind of pseudoparticle is created by borrowing energy from the aether. It is the electromagnetic interaction of these graviton forms that accounts for the force of gravitational attraction between particles of matter. Now, the key point of relevance here is that the supergraviton has a high mass effect, equivalent to 102 atomic mass units and, in performing the dynamic balancing act with a heavy molecule, the spread of the action of several supergravitons can reduce the effective mass value to 101 amu. There is supergraviton resonance when the mass of the molecule is an integer times this 101-102 value. In this state of resonance any collisions between the molecules or between molecules and free electrons, as in electrical conduction though a metal, will result in energy (the random motion we see as heat) being deployed regeneratively into setting up electric fields which can sustain electric current flow without loss. That is the state of superconductivity but the generation of a flow of electricity in organic matter that is nonmetallic is also possible and, if heat can convert into electricity in the human body, that should be of interest to those who read this Report. I do not intend here to present what has not already been published and so the following items may seem disconnected, especially where they are partial exerpts quoted from a longer text. They will, however, serve as a guide to my other work on this subject and be helpful to those wishing to study these ideas further. ******* New Energy News is a monthly newsletter published by the Institute for New Energy, P.O. Box 58639, Salt Lake City, UT 84158-8639, USA. On page 2 of the October 1995 issue there is a note entitled 'Cold Fusion is a Live Issue' (author: H. Aspden) which explains how, in April 1989, I had developed a paper, published later that year, about the technological applications of the supergraviton and had extended it to have bearing upon the 'cold fusion' theme. The latter phenomenon is the anomalous generation of heat in the cathodes of electrolytic cells containing heavy water. The l02 factor was the basic feature of that paper. My note on 'Cold Fusion is a Live Issue' followed a item I had entitled 'Eureka-An Energy Echo
ES10PAGE54
from a Cathode' in which I referenced Professor Alec Broers discovery in IBM in 1965 of using lanthanum hexaboride as a cathode which, for example, could make electron microscopes durable. Tungsten cathodes as used in earlier work burned out after a few hours. The point of my note was that the composition of one lanthanum atom and six boron atoms had a molecular mass of 203.78 amu. This is twice 101.89. Heat was being regenerated as electricity and so the burning process was eliminated. Now, in my note on the live issue, after extending the same argument to show why superconductivity at room temperature accounts for the very powerful permanent magnet properties of samarium cobalt, I reported searching through a commercial listing of chemical compounds based on sodium (for reasons detailed in the note) to find a compound which was recorded as having a molecular mass close to 102 amu. The best one I could find was sodium polyphosphate, recorded as 101.96 amu. Ideally I was hoping to find a compound of which all atoms were of single isotope form. Oxygen was 99.8 per cent pure in this respect and sodium and phophorus both fitted that requirement. That led me to write the following: "Now, what has this to do with cold fusion? The answer, very simply, is that sodium is known to transmute into magnesium in living cells and the action is known to involve as a catalyst ATP and ADP, adenosine triphosphate and adenosine diphosphate, which play a major role in energy conversion in living matter! See the mention of ATP by Gerald Lindley at p.17 in the September 1995 issue of New Energy News. It is apparent that the 102 mass resonance seems to hold the key to this mystery in plant life and within our bodies". Lindley, in that September 1995 issue of New Energy News, drew attention to the biological molecule ATP as having a molecular mass equal to that of 5 supergravitons. He went on to explain how earlier work by Solomon Goldfein in the 1970s had brought the magnesium atom into play as a nucleus about which four ATP molecules were stacked. Lindley argued that the whole complex had a mass that was an integer multiple of 101.846 amu which he said "further supports Aspden's proposal of a supergraviton mass of 101-102." Responding to that I went in search of more facts about the ATP topic or related research and, from a lead in something written by Solomon Goldfein, I came to read a 1976 paper by Alfred A. Wolf and Ernest H. Halpern (Proc. IEEE, pp. 357-359). In referring to it Goldfein had said that, in theory, cholesterol molecules might form locating channels in which they might combine with a sodium ion to form a structure superconductive at 350 Kelvin. That was speculation, and I was getting out of my depth in trying to understand these curious molecular forms that are outside my technical discipline. I was, however, really surprised when I saw in that IEEE paper that six different bile salts were superconductive, sodium doxycholate having the highest transition temperature of 277 Kelvin. As I remarked in my note in New Energy News (November 1995, pp. 5-6) "Here was room temperature superconductivity of record in 1976, ten years before the discovery of the 77 Kelvin warm superconductivity was announced! Moreover, the action was in substances in living matter in which sodium is believed to experience cold fusion by transformation into magnesium, the subject discussed by Goldfein!"
ES10PAGE54
My research during the years 1994 through to date has been on efforts to build an electric motor that can extract energy from the thermal background, including the heat condition latent in the aether. However, my interest in the motor theme, the supergraviton and its role in unifying electromagnetism and gravitation, as well superconductivity, caused me to be alert when I read an article in The Times just two days before writing these words. It caused me to send the following communication to the Editor of New Energy News and I present it as the final item in this Report. THE MOTORS THAT KEEP US ALIVE On the day (March 24th 1997) I was concluding the final pages of my latest Energy Science Report No. 10, 'Cyclotron Resonance in Human Body Cells', the London newspaper, THE TIMES, published an item on page 15 headed `Wheel power: The circle of life'. It was reported, by reference to "the current Nature journal" that each of our body cells houses a tiny motor - "the smallest motor in creation - an enzyme that rotates to do its work and is only five millionths of a millimetre across". "The enzyme consists of seven components - a central axle, and six sub-units wrapped around it to form a collar". "The inner component is free to spin inside the collar". "What is stunning is that it is the very first time rotation has been demonstrated in an enzyme". As the motor turns "the molecules of ATP are produced like sausages from a machine". "Biochemists know how quickly this reaction goes, so it is possible to work out how fast the motors should spin - 20 revolutions per second". Although this is hardly New Energy Technology it touches upon something reported earlier in the pages of New Energy News and seems worthy of further comment. Energy from the food we eat is converted by the enzyme ATP synthase into chemical energy in the form of ATP. Well, we must now wonder how chemical energy manages to set something rotating. In contributing to our internal body heat it would keep any 'loose' ions in the ATP molecules active in their random thermal motion. It then needs no more that the ever-present geomagnetic field to perform, as it should, according to the Larmor formula, as used in cyclotron theory. The ions are deflected into a reacting orbit and the beauty of all this is that the rotation around those orbits occurs at an angular speed which is the same whatever the speed of those ions. To get 20 revolutions per second in the Earth's field, which approximates 0.5 gauss, those ions need a mass of 39 amu, which identifies potassium. The motor speed observed by the Japanese researchers who discovered this phenomenon was lower than this 20 rev/s owing to a drag effect imposed by the technique of measurement. We know, however, that the actual speed of a basic d.c. motor is lower under load than it is under no load conditions, so my guess is that these motors in our bodies are trying to run faster than 20 rev/s. 32 rev/s in a 0.5 gauss field would identify magnesium (mass 24 amu). I then note that on pp. 17-18 of New Energy News, September 1995, Lindley refers to the "stacking" of molecules of ATP around an Mg ion as suggested in the 1970s by Solomon Goldfein who said of biological ATP that it "met the criteria for a microscopic cyclotron".
ES10PAGE57
AUTHOR'S CONCLUDING NOTE I hope that what I have written will prove of interest to those concerned about the physics which govern our lives and, as this Energy Science Report No. 10 is the last such report I shall be writing, I further note that I will now concentrate for a while on publishing my research findings on Internet, where I plan to provide full references and abstract information concerning all my prior published work. My Internet Web page access address is: http://www.energyscience.co.uk
Information about my books and other Energy Science Reports in this series is provided on those Web pages.
This report was first issued on 31st March 1997.
DR. HAROLD ASPDEN SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS P.O. BOX 35, SOUTHAMPTON, SO16 7RB, ENGLAND
TESLA VERSUS EINSTEIN

H. Aspden, 2005 Introduction As we celebrate Einstein in the centenary year since he introduced his Theory of Relativity there are those of us who see little to celebrate because we believe that Einstein blocked the way forward in our quest to tap energy from the aether. The aether is the energy source accounting for the creation of our universe but Einsteins theory caused scientists to replace the aether by abstract mathematical notions. Hence there has been no acceptance of the aether as a possible new energy source, needed as our oil reserves are eroded. It is timely, therefore, to review the claim made by Nikola Tesla that he had devised and constructed an automobile that was powered on aether energy. Some Quotations Whereas the general public, including almost all of the scientific community, accept Einsteins theory without question, essentially because that has become the popular opinion in the light of E = Mc2 having significance connected with the atomic bomb, that formula relating energy E and mass M by the speed of light in vacuum is easily derived without any use of Einsteins doctrines. See my monograph entitled Physics without Einstein: A Centenary Review which is of record on my website www.aspden.org However, I am not the only one who regards Einsteins theory as an obstruction rather than an aid in our understanding of fundamental energy science. The following quotations therefore seem appropriate as an introduction to what follows. Tesla maintained his belief in the aether as the source of all substance. This, he thought, was the fundamental, unifying theory of physical things. He was quite unable to accept Einsteins theory of relativity and curved space. The Secret of the Creative Vacuum by John Davidson [1] There is incontrovertible evidence, for example, from a number of sources, that neither the gravitational constant nor the speed of light in a vacuum are constant after all. Since Einsteins theory of relativity is founded upon these two assumptions, if either one of them is shown to be incorrect, then Einsteins theory is seen to be more relative than he thought! In short, like Newtons observations, it would be wrong, as a fundamental model. The Secret of the Creative Vacuum by John Davidson [2] It may come as a shock, but Einsteins theory of relativity is not part of the design of nuclear weapons! ...... High school science students are conditioned to ridicule the concept of a nineteenth-century luminiferous aether with eye-rolling and giggling. But is this a contemptible idea when
compared with the new and improved terminology of gravitational masses warping the fabric of space-time? A Dissident View of Relativity Theory by W.H.Cantrell [3] Einstein plagiarized the work of several notable scientists in his 1905 papers on special relativity and E = Mc2, yet the physics community has never bothered to set the record straight in the past century. Albert Einstein: Plagiarist of the Century by Richard Moody, Jr. [4] Insofar as the theory is thought to explain the result of the Michelson Morley experiment, I am inclined to agree with Soddy that it is a swindle; and I do not think Rutherford would have regarded it as a joke had he realized how it would retard the rational development of science. Relativity - Joke or Swindle? by L. Essen [5] Einstein: 1902-1909 During these years Einstein was employed by the Swiss Patent Office as a technical expert (third class) until 1906 and then technical expert (second class). So his famous scientific papers of 1905 were written midway during that period of his life before, in 1909, he became an associate professor at the University of Zurich. Bearing in mind that the Swiss Patent Office registered patents without rigorous examination for novelty or merit, except for those concerned with clocks and watches, one must wonder if that was the work which kept Einstein busy in those years. If so, and since he is acclaimed for the scientific achievement of upsetting our understanding of time itself, it is an interesting observation that the 20th century gave birth to one of the greatest inventions ever made concerning clocks. It was that of Dr. Essen, the Director of the Time and Frequency Division of Britains National Physical Laboratory. He invented the atomic clock and so ought to be an authority on the measurement of time. That last quotation was by Dr. Essen. Somehow scientists say they can verify Einsteins theory by conveying atomic clocks around the Earth in aircraft but nowhere in their analysis of their experimental findings do they show in truly physical terms how acceleration affects the rhythm of electron motion in the atom. It is no wonder therefore that Dr. Essen was outspoken concerning his disbelief in Einsteins doctrines. Now, of course, it is not the distortion of our understanding on the nature of time that has obstructed scientific progress. Rather it is the effect Einsteins theory has had on our understanding of how energy is stored in what we see as empty space. Somehow we can inject energy into the vacuum and then recover it on demand, this being the property of electromagnetic inductors. The major question scientists face is whether that energy we feed into space is the same energy that is returned to us on demand. Or could it be that we feed energy into an existing universal pool of energy and are allowed to withdraw only the amount we have put on deposit. Should that universal energy pool exist in reality then it is logical to suppose that somehow it accounts for the creation of matter and so our universe, in which case the challenge is to try to tap energy from that pool. With Tesla in mind that is the subject of this paper, but at this point, merely as an aside remark since I have just mentioned clocks, it is of interest to note that I was, not long ago, asked to contribute some input on my interest in the energy theme as a participant in a television presentation being directed and filmed by an Australian group who, having
travelled around USA and Europe interviewing several others, had arrived in London in U.K. I arranged for my interview to be at the Institution of Electrical Engineers, where, outside the entrance, they could film a statue of Michael Faraday to whom we owe the discovery of energy storage by magnetic induction. However, after that interview, and to my complete surprise, I was asked to accompany the film crew to the archives of the British Museum, where I would be shown a perpetual motion machine that was several centuries old. It was a large clock, some six or seven feet high, that never needed winding up. I had never heard of it but soon got the message that they expected me, on camera, to stand in front of the clock and explain how it worked. At this point I should explain that, whereas Einstein had experience examining patents, my career after my early research years at Cambridge, was spent in the patent profession explaining in detail how inventions worked and defining the legal patent claims that are the basis of protecting and so convincing Patent Office examiners as to the merits of those inventions. I was a Patent Attorney and my employers were the English Electric Company until the end of 1959, followed by IBM thereafter. Even so, with no prior brief from the inventor of that clock or any technical description, having had a glimpse of the clock, I heard myself explaining how it worked. It was a grandfather-type clock having a pendulum and was operated by a weight that, by falling very slowly under gravity, powered the mechanism that operated the hour and minute hands. There were two such weights. As one was discharging its energy over a period of weeks and months, so the other was being lifted by a device that was sensitive to changes in atmospheric pressure. That device comprised an enclosed glass chamber partially filled with mercury and coupled to a vertical displacement tube sealed at one end, there being a vacuum cavity above the mercury in that tube but a vent at the top of the main chamber which exposed the surface of the mercury to atmospheric pressure. With ongoing change of air pressure, barometric pressure, the displacement of the mercury shifted weight from one side of a balance to the other side, thereby exerting force through an arm which, by its motion, effectively wound up the clock in respect of one of its two weights, pending interchange of roles. Had the mercury not been removed by the Museum for preservation reasons, it would be, as it had been, a machine in perpetual motion powered only by the energy of our environment, but hardly a method which offers practical prospect for solving the worlds developing energy problems. A machine before Einsteins time, but a message also that says: Energy is available for exploitation if we probe into the depths of our environment and can visualize that deeper physical underworld of space, the aether. Thanks to Einstein, scientists have lost interest in that aether, but, thanks to Tesla, there are some of us who are still interested! Teslas Pierce-Arrow Car Those who have written about Teslas research have told us about his deep interest in atmospheric electricity, extending even to the possibility of transmitting real electrical power by natural propagation through the atmosphere. He was a genius and an inventor who has left his imprint on the electrical power industry, especially by his invention of the a.c. induction motor. On November 17th, 2004, I was sent a letter by Don Kelly of the Space Energy Association in USA. He tells me there is now hope that there will soon be a final resolution of Nikola Teslas excellent Pierce-Arrow car project of 1931, at Buffalo, N.Y.,
meaning how it worked. This car I, understand, was demonstrated and tested back in 1931 and shown to operate at high speed not with a normal fuel supply, but by power drawn from a mysterious source, which Tesla implied was aethereal atmospheric electricity. Tesla did not reveal its design details and so its secrets. Don Kelly suggests that the clue to its operation may be found in Teslas two 1901 U.S. patents, Nos. 685,957 and 685,958. They portray two radiant energy input sources, one from an X-ray tube as an example of power input to the patented device. Don Kelly notes in his letter: We have now slowly come to the conclusion that Tesla used both of these methods, i.e. the natural antenna method, and the artificial way, via multiple (12) vacuum (X-ray) tubes within the car. At some point Tesla must have decided to use only one 6 foot high antenna, and use the collector radiant energy as the input to his 12 X-ray tubes. Now, from my point of view, it is a very formidable task to try to decipher how Teslas car really did function, based on little or no information other than that outlined above. However, frustrated, as I am, by the seemingly universal dedication to belief in Einsteins theory, notwithstanding its blocking action on the aether energy front, I will try to build a picture of the kind that one sees in a patent specification, even though I have no input from the inventor (Tesla) and no sight of the working embodiment (the Pierce-Arrow car). The focus of attention, as I see it, is (a) a large inductor (what Don Kelly refers to as the 6 foot high antenna which I understand was mounted at the rear of the car), (b) 12 vacuum tubes, though whether they were X-ray tubes is speculation in the light of patents dated 30 years earlier, and (c) a multiple set of large capacitors. Don Kellys letter indicated that a 60 kw level of power output would be needed and that he had information that a substantial large capacitor, or multiple smaller capacitors needed to be in place as well as means for converting d.c. to a.c. to power the engine, which I presume was a three-phase induction motor, this being Teslas brainchild. Speculation by Deduction Take a large inductor and assume a steady d.c. current flow through it. Ignore for the moment the possible energy source. Using capacitors how can one generate threephase a.c. power output? We need to switch the d.c. current to feed current into each of three capacitors sequentially during a complete cycle of the a.c. generated. During periods when a capacitor is not receiving current we need to discharge it through the input winding of one phase of the motor. Each capacitor needs therefore two switches and that suggests a role for the vacuum tubes. So here we see the need for six tubes, not twelve, Why did Tesla need twelve? I will presume that the tubes were of a type commercially available and that their rating may only have been half that needed to power his car at speed. So six tubes would suffice to explain the design principle but twelve were used, six sets of two in parallel, to get the required power output. The alternative interpretation is that Teslas motor was a six-phase machine. That said, where is the source of energy? We can presume, as Tesla may have done, that the inductor, being a large coil having many turns and mounted vertically at the
rear of his car, air-cored or possibly iron-cored to enhance inductance, was somehow tapping electrical power from atmospheric electricity. Note that the Earth has an electric field extending high into our atmosphere and known to be of the order of hundreds of volts per metre. This has not been seen as a source of useful power or harmful. After all we surely would find current flow in lightning conductors even in the absence of thunder and lightning were this the case. One can wonder if, by setting up a vertical field oscillation at 2 or 4 kHz, or so, we might develop a resonance effect owing to oscillations between the Earths surface and the ionosphere, which somehow causes possible energy output to escalate to useful levels, but I am sceptical as to that possibility. So where else can we look for that energy source. Don Kelly suggests it might be those 12 tubes. Might they have really been gas discharge tubes? In that case I am mindful of the research findings of Paulo and Alexandra Correa [6], but here again I am sceptical because the Correas use tubes of special fabrication and had such a property been evident from a tube commercially available back in 1931 then its excess energy property would surely have been discovered long ago. I am then left to consider the capacitors as the seat of the power input and this is something that really arouses my interest. The reason is that, in 2002, with some considerable confidence, I spoke openly at a conference suggesting that I had reason to believe that, by pulsating the energization of a capacitor of concentric electrode design, we could tap energy from the aether [7]. I saw this as replicating a phenomenon involved in the creation of our sun, whereby setting up a radial electric field induces aether spin and taps energy from the aether that is retained in the spin of the sun before much of it is shed in imparting angular momentum to the planets. Unfortunately, tests using a.c. excitation of such a capacitor failed to verify what I had predicted. So I now wonder if Teslas electrical circuit in that car had a feature that makes this capacitor theme viable, a feature I had missed in my own research efforts? Well, further speculation and analysis now points to a possible answer and revives my hopes in the capacitor theme, as I now explain. Induction of Aether Spin There are two essential factors that must apply if I am right in thinking Teslas power source was those capacitors in his Pierce-Arrow car. The first is that the capacitance has to be much higher than seems possible for the air dielectric capacitor that I had in mind and the second is that the there must be a retardation effect involved in setting up the aether spin within the capacitor. The reason for this is that the induction of the spin is not spontaneous in response to the setting up of the radial electric field, as I had assumed, but involves delay and this precludes operation at 100 kHz which was the basis of the tests made. Operation at much lower frequency means the need for much higher capacitance to achieve the required power output. Note that my theory indicated that energy could be tapped from the aether owing to that radial field displacing the quantum orbital motion of aether charge and the need for phase lock as between that charge within the capacitor and the charge in enveloping aether. This meant either a vibratory effect that had to be contained with no spin or the development of aether spin giving a vibration-free and smooth deployment of energy. The spin condition implied import of kinetic energy from the aether to augment the electric energy priming the capacitor, with that kinetic energy being non-recoverable by the aether external to the
capacitor during electric discharge and so being shed by augmenting the output voltage to deliver more energy than was supplied as input. I now suspect, in the light of further theoretical analysis and the inferences I draw from hearing about Teslas Pierce-Arrow car, that the onset of the radial electric field creates a torque action within the capacitor dielectric, which stems from the aether it contains but is restrained by the fixed structural form of the capacitor. This torque, however, could be effective in initiating an aether spin that develops progressively from the spin axis and spreads outwards until it extends throughout the whole concentric form of the dielectric. The reason is that energy is needed to notch the aether particles cell by cell at the slip boundary between the aether in spin and aether within the dielectric but still not spinning. The energy is returned in each notching cycle but to set up spin spontaneously for all the aether contained within the dielectric demands too much energy and so the required result emerges only from a stage-by-stage progression. From such considerations I can see it was a mistake to hope to achieve aether energy output operating at 100 kHz. This whole theory is based on the creation processes and spin induction associated with the creation of stars and planets which is a one-off halfcycle operation as compared with operating at a.c. power frequencies in electrical apparatus. So what frequency is possible with aether energy delivery? I cannot estimate this until I delve into the theory of that notching effect, but for the time being I will assume, with hope, that the 60 Hz frequency that dates from Teslas time is an operable frequency. That may have been the frequency of his car motor corresponding to top speed. This leads now to the problem of capacitance. Whereas capacitance of the order of a nanofarad was what I had in mind with 100 kHz operation, it seems that I now must think in terms of hundreds of microfarads, given also that I doubt if Teslas circuit was operating at the high a.c. voltage of 10 kV. Here there has been revision of my thoughts on the use of a dielectric medium between the capacitor electrodes as opposed to mere air. The electric field that governs aether spin could well be very much higher than is evident from the capacitor voltage because the charge polarization of the dielectric offsets the primary field and what we measure is the difference. This would have a very substantial effect on the amount of energy tapped from the aether and so points to the need to use a capacitor insulator of high dielectric constant. As a further thought I see there is much to be gained by pulsing the capacitor with unidirectional current rather than the normal sinusoidal current we associate with a.c. operation. This would keep the aether spin ongoing in the same direction but oscillating about a mean level. Accordingly, my interpretation of Teslas Pierce-Arrow car has this feature. Finally, and concerning how a capacitor can deliver more output energy on discharge than during the charging stage, given the inherent power source, I can but suggest that, whereas charge input occurs in the normal way, it is desirable for the input voltage to be switched off before discharge begins and also desirable to force the current out in a controlled manner during discharge. Excess energy delivery can only be by virtue of an excess voltage in the output phase. All this points to the need for an inductor of high inductance which keeps the level of current flow constant and can absorb voltage pulsations but, by switching, diverts the current between input periods and output periods as between the several capacitors. What Tesla may have done to produce his three-phase output power, even though thinking he was exploiting aether energy input to his inductor, may, fortuitously and without him knowing it, have been the ideal way of operating those
capacitors in their aether energy-tapping role. I am, of course, assuming that he used large capacitors having concentric electrode construction such as are normally associated with high voltage operation. Maybe they incorporated a special kind of dielectric and here, I recall reading somewhere in connection with more recent over-unity energy claims, about experiments using barium titanate as dielectric, it having a very high dielectric constant. Also one sees, I believe, the use Leyden jars in the circuits used by the Swiss Methernitha community in their over-unity energy activities, an encouraging sign [8]. As to the stress now placed on d.c. operation I can further add that, after publishing my first proposals concerning a concentric capacitor having potential for anomalous energy effects, I heard from a German engineer experienced in d.c. power supply via coaxial cables, as used by underground railways, that he had observed that in servicing such power lines it was not sufficient merely to short-circuit the cable to discharge it once power had been switched off. Experience had shown that the cable could surprise one by recovering its voltage and it took quite a while for the energy stored in the cable capacitance to discharge fully, far longer than one might expect. A coaxial cable operating at high voltage d.c. is, of course, a concentric capacitor and so, if I am right in what I outline above, it should exhibit such an anomaly. Conclusion I have been prompted to write this by Don Kellys communication concerning Tesla and this is my answer. Whether this inspires those with the resources to research the subject further, only time will tell, but, to be sure, there is so much money being spent building high energy particle colliders to probe the secrets of creation on Big Bang theory, that one might hope that a little governmental funding could be spared to explore this free energy theme. It is founded on aether spin which itself already accounts for many features pertaining to the creation of the solar system. Big Bang research can only lead to taking risks that bring about destruction and take us no nearer to the technology that can one day tap aether energy. Tesla, it seems, achieved that objective, but we prefer in this year 2005 to celebrate Einstein, who blocked the way forward on the aether energy front, whereas Tesla is more deserving. Hopefully, by 2031, the centenary anniversary of his PierceArrow car, our scientists will be wiser on this question of the aether and its energy resource. References [1] J.Davidson, The Secret of the Creative Vacuum, C. W. Daniel Co. Ltd., pp. 171-172 (1989). [2] J.Davidson, The Secret of the Creative Vacuum, C. W. Daniel Co. Ltd., p. 177 (1989). [3] W H Cantrell, A Dissident view of the Theory of Relativity, Infinite Energy, 10, Issue 58, pp. 6 & 8 (2005). [4] R M Moody, Jr., The Secret of the Creative Vacuum, Infinite Energy, 10, Issue 58, p. 34 (2005). [5] L. Essen, Relativity - Joke or Swindle? (1988) reprinted in Infinite Energy, 10, Issue 58, p. 23 (2005). [6] P. Correa & A. Correa, The Search for Free Energy, Simon & Schuster, pp. 218-222 (2001).
[7] H. Aspden, The Physics of Perpetual Motion, Infinite Energy, 10, Issue 55, p. 19 (2004). [8] K. Tutt, The Search for free Energy, Simon & Schuster, pp. 92-93 & pp. 285-292 (2001). H. Aspden February 28th, 2005
THE CREATION OF THE PROTON

H. Aspden, 2005 Introduction Although particle physicists think they can probe the mysteries of creation by building mammoth accelerators costing billions of dollars to produce high speed impact of protons they do not have any theory giving insight into how those protons themselves are created. So they proceed in wild attempts to create other forms of matter thinking that will tell them how the universe itself was created. It is just the same for the problem of gravitation, given that cosmologists can justify vast expenditure in probing the depths of remote space based on their unproven notion that gravitation applies without moderation within very dense matter deemed to exist in so-called neutron stars. Yet they still have no theory showing how G, the constant of gravitation, is determined here on Earth in terms of electrical interaction as between particles. This authors insight into the latter problem, his efforts in the past being unheeded, was the subject of the previous paper No. 3 in this series. Here in this paper we shall address once again the former problem, that of proton creation, the authors findings on this theme, now dating back some 30 years. This having also been ignored by the scientific community notwithstanding its vital importance is now restated in a more advanced form in the hope that, in accounting for matter creation, it will serve to provide answers sought by unguided research and so serve to spare unwarranted waste of money on futile and ill-founded experimental effort. The Basic Question Concerning the proton, which, being the heavy nucleus of the hydrogen atom, accounts for 99.95% of its mass, the basic question we face is Why is it stable, whereas other particles are short-lived and decay after only a transient existence? The secondary question is: Why does it have a mass that is slightly greater than 1836 times that of its hydrogen atom partner, the electron? Here I note that the electron, though assumed by physicists to be stable and have no decay lifetime, does contrive to tunnel through obstructing electric potential barriers as if it suffers demise on one side of such a barrier and is reincarnated on the other side 10-13 or so seconds latter. It seems so logical then to accept that protons and electrons are special in the sense that they may, indeed, have a finite lifetime, but there are forces at work which require the energy shed by their decay to recreate them virtually immediately in the same energy form and close to where they decay. This is merely saying that surplus energy that exists in the space environment of our quantum underworld contrives to create matter by appearing as protons and electrons. Physicists, by quantum theory, can picture action in that quantum underworld, much as it is disguised by their mathematical equations, but they still lack the insight to see how energy unable to be absorbed by that underworld has to take material form by creating those electrons and protons. The reason, of course, is that they have been brainwashed into believing the theory advocated by Albert Einstein which makes probing that underworld based on aether theory a taboo subject. So, unless they change their belief, they are not
destined to understand how the proton is actually created and, in particular, why it has a mass some 1836 times that of the electron. They should however realise that there is intermediate ground to be explored that is truly in the realm of quantum theory, namely what determines the actual value of Plancks constant h and what is known as the fine-structure constant which relates h with the speed of light and the charge of the electron. Yes, here we see the importance of the electron, that partner to the proton. Surely the message is: Fathom what it is that determines the value of fine-structure constant and you will be on track in the quest to understand how matter is created. Yet, physicists, in spite of knowing how to spend vast sums of money to fund construction of their high energy particle colliders and space probes, do not know how to go about even looking for the answer to the mystery of the fine-structure constant. The ghost of Einstein stands in their way! The Bottom Line in Particle Physics As you can see I intend to put my case rather firmly and I admit that, as I write this, I am motivated by a rejection, having offered to tell the physics community how protons are created by presenting a poster on the occasion of the Physics 2005' conference to be held in April 2005 under the auspices of the Institute of Physics in U.K. of which I am a member. One must, you see, be seen to conform with the current beliefs of those who act as scrutineers for such occasions. New ideas that may cast doubt on certain theoretical notions that are currently in fashion cannot be entertained. That conference aims to celebrate Einsteins centenary and so concerns cosmology and quantum physics. It is an appropriate occasion to hear new views on matter creation and, in particular, what I refer to as the bottom line in particle physics. This is a reference to the role played by the three particles that feature alongside one another below the quarks in the standard particle grid used by particle physicists. These particles are the electron, the muon and the taon, the fundamental leptons that play a major role in quantum electrodynamics. In the previous paper [1], the subject of which was also offered as a poster session presentation at the above conference but duly rejected, I have shown how G, the constant of gravitation is determined in terms of the role played by the taon. This leaves us to answer the question: What role, if any, is served by the muon? As to the electron, we see it everywhere, so much so that it is appropriate to take it as a reference by which to relate the properties of other particles, but there is still the question of how the electron itself is created. Can that be answered? Well, here I admit that I have no clear answer but I will at the end of this paper float an idea that others may find interest in exploring. Here, my object is to account for the creation of the proton and, indeed, you will see that my answer is clear and precise in deriving a theoretical value for the proton/electron mass ratio that conforms with experiment. The virtual muon population that pervades all space is the agency that performs this creative act. Before proceeding, and in order to gain the readers attention, I will again, as I did in my 1986 paper [2], repeat a quotation from an authoritative scientific source dated 1985. I note with some pride, pride I share with a colleague in advancing this theory, that when the leading experts, R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., F. L. Moore, D. L. Farnham and P. B. Schwinberg, involved in making such measurements reported in 1985 their findings in Int. J. Mass Spectrometry and Ion Processes, 66, p. 327 they stated:
The value that they [Aspden and Eagles] calculate is remarkably close to our experimentally measured value (i.e. within two standard deviations) This is even more curious when one notes that they published this result several years before direct precision measurements of this ratio had begun. They had measured the proton-electron mass ratio to within a precision of 41 parts in a billion and this measurement was reported some 10 years after we had presented the theoretical value derived from aether theory. You see, it was 30 years ago in 1975 that this major step in understanding how matter is created was put on scientific record, but I still face the task of gaining its acceptance. The passage of time has, however, clarified some of the factors involved and so much of this paper is new and original, particularly the focus I shall be placing on the links between protons, taons and dimuons, the dimuon being a charged particle having double the mass of the virtual muon, and the virtual muon being the form the muon takes in its virgin state as part of the quantum electrodynamic underworld of space. A Pre-Einstein Principle The physics governing proton creation is that founded in electron theory dating back to the pre-Einstein years, before 1905. In particular I shall be using a classic formula once used in many student textbooks and one I see in a 1904 book by reference to J. J. Thomson, the scientist who discovered the electron. I have presented the relevant quotation from that book in Chapter 2 of a work I have put on record in January 2005 [3]. It would be best for reader to read that chapter before delving into what follows. The point I there make is that E = Mc2 owes nothing to Einstein for its derivation. Indeed, as I there explain, the simple truth is that this fundamental formula arises from the fact that a charged particle reacts to an accelerating electric field so as to conserve its intrinsic energy and has nothing whatsoever to do with mathematical gymnastics performed in so-called four-space. The principle I refer to in this section concerns the form of the electric charge we symbolize as e, whether this be the charge of the electron, the proton or any other fundamental particle. J. J. Thomsons formula for the energy of this charge is: (1) E = 2e2/3a where a is the radius of a sphere in which the charge is confined and in which the charge is so distributed that a uniform pressure prevails within that sphere and is balanced by the external pressure asserted at its surface by its self-field. One can easily verify that three quarters of this energy sits in the field outside the radius a whereas one sixth lies within the charge sphere. As we now proceed you will see that there is liberal use of this equation and that it applies to separate charge components of a charge pair, comprising opposite polarity charges of magnitude e in surface contact. Thus the sum of two such terms as in (1) offset by a term e2 divided by the sum of their radii would represent the energy of the combination.
A System of Notation We will refer to the proton as P, the virtual muon as , the dimuon as Q, the taon as and the electron as e. The dimuon is a charge confined with a radius of half that of the virtual muon and so the energy of the dimuon is twice that of the muon. Why do I introduce the dimuon? My answer simply is that this is the quantum of energy that my theory tells me exists in each cubic cell unit of the quantum underworld of space. As I noted in my previous paper [1], where I derived G, such cubic cell units have a cube side distance d which is equal to 108 times the electron radius a. We are, you see, going to show how protons are created from energy shed by the quantum underworld, the aether, and the units of energy Q or the units of the energy of a virtual muon are the source of the energy needed to create the proton. As to notation, if I write: (A:B) this represents the energy of two charged particles A and B in surface contact and if I write: (A:B)* this represents the energy applicable if B happens to be the necessary charge form corresponding to the combination having shed energy to adopt an overall minimum energy state subject to the first charge A being of constant form. Thanks to that Thomson formula above it is a simple task to take the sum of the energies of the two particles as offset by their electrostatic interaction energy and by differentiation with respect to a variable radius of the second charge evaluate the minimum energy and that radius and thereby the value of B. One finds that B is equal to (%(3/2) - 1) times A or 0.22474A whereas the energy shed has the value (%(3/2) - 1)2 times A or 0.0505102A and so we are ready to delve into the secrets of proton creation. The Proton Creation Process We begin by supposing that somehow the proton as a single charge form P has been created. Why then is it so stable as to be the primary component of all matter? Can it somehow be associated with another particle form that has led to a minimum energy situation? If so then what is that particle form? It would, from the above analysis, have an energy that is 0.22474 times P which happens to be the combined energy of two virtual muons or the dimuon Q. Surely that is not a coincidence. Our proton must somehow be able to exist, even if only transiently, in the form: (P:Q)* but if so it has shed energy that has itself a particle form, whether as a single particle or particle combination, that has a net charge e. The latter energy is, in fact, the quantity of the expression: (Q:)* So, our empirical enquiry, given that P has been created, tells us that it might exist in an overall stable net energy state given by: (P:Q)* + WP even though it may be switching form, oscillating as it were, between its single form P and a three-particle state. This is consistent with the experimental observation that the proton exhibits a three-quark composition.
Now, though this accounts the stability of the proton or next task is to explain how it is actually created and, a most important consideration, why it is a unique form of stable matter. That link with the dimuon energy quantum may seem a sufficient answer and, indeed, that was the status of my research back in 1975 when the theory of the proton/electron mass ratio was first recorded [4]. However, some 11 years on from there, in 1986, I advanced the theory when I saw how shedding that energy was the clue to proton creation from a virtual muon source [5]. I asked what would happen if n virtual muons were to transfer their energy and a charge e to the particle combination (Q:)* and cause to be separated whilst Q merged with the muon inflow to create the combination (P:Q)*. I realised that n would have to be odd, meaning inflow of one more positively charged virtual muon than the inflow of negatively charged virtual muons. Also, to be sure, one might expect a mismatch of energy and so some further energy shedding than occurs in forming (Q:)*. To my genuine surprise however, and intense satisfaction, it became evident from the mathematics involved that n not only had to be odd but that it could only have a unique value to keep energy in balance with no loss by radiation. To find n, note that: n + (1 - 0.0505102)Q = Q/(0.22474487) (2) and that Q is 2. One can see that n has to equal 7. The result is that the proton must have a mass that is 8.898979486 times the mass of the virtual muon, the mass energy of the latter being half that of a cubic cell of the quantum underworld of space, found by pure theory to be equal to the mass energy of 206.3329 electrons. Therefore the proton/electron mass ratio obtained by this theoretical pursuit is slightly above 1836.152 as recorded in that 1975 paper [4]. In the light of this I cannot see how anyone can doubt the role played by the virtual muon in creating the proton and so creating matter generally. If one seeks to question the derivation of that factor 206.3329 then that requires reference to my book Physics Unified [6] published in 1980. It is fully of record on my website www.aspden.org and on page 112 you will see an equation (160) which is the result of a full derivation of that figure above. The equation actually is: Eo = 412.665816 mec2 where Eo is the energy Q or 2 of the above analysis. Particle Creation and the Electron I said above that I would float an idea concerning the electron whilst on this subject of matter creation. I have, in my research so far, taken the electrons existence for granted and I have, for some 15 years now, been more concerned with energy issues of our real world than the underlying physics theory that preoccupied me as a private interest from 1955 to 1980. So in coming back to the subject of matter creation, I can point to a clue pertaining the electron and positron forms of matter. First note that, in deriving that Eo energy quantum above, the vital step was that of determining the mass and energy of a fundamental particle that pervades all space and accounts for the Heisenberg jitter motion of quantum theory. The energy density of that particle is identical to the energy density of Eo divided by the volume of the cubic cells of the quantum underworld, each of side distance 108 times the charge radius of the electron. The volume of the charge occupied by that fundamental particle was deemed to be an odd
multiple of the volume of the electron. This step was need to refine the calculation of the fine-structure constant determined by my theory, as discussed in reference [7]. The electron came into the act in that context and also in regard to its quantum angular momentum of h/2 as used in formulating the theory of that quantum underworld of space. Now, in regard to the creation of matter in the form of atoms of higher order than hydrogen, my theory of early record did contemplate the proton becoming associated with a meson in a two particle charge combination of the kind noted above with the energy thereby shed being absorbed in the main by creating what I referred to as electron-positron chains. These comprised a line of electrons interposed between positrons in adjacent charge surface contact and I noted that about 166 or so electrons and positrons in a chain might form a discrete link between two adjacent particle sites in the quantum underworld, as one can see by halving that 108 factor. As early as 1974, in reference [8], I recorded my ideas on the subject of heavier atoms and their structure but at that stage I had settled on the belief that the meson linked to the proton component in the atomic nucleus had to be that charge form Q introduced above. Furthermore, since we are here considering atoms of atomic number greater than unity, we confront the neutron as a component in the atomic nucleus. Here I declare quite categorically that the neutron as such has no presence in an atomic nucleus. When created as a free particle form it exists as a combination of electrons and/or positrons with a proton or antiproton and survives for several minutes before decaying. The so-called neutron of the atomic nucleus is an antiproton form that happens to have replaced a charge occupying a lattice site in the space medium. The thought I now float concerns the form that energy might take when shed by the union of the P and Q particle forms and a pointer to the electron-positron pairing. I have stressed in the previous paper [1], No. 3 in this series, that the taon has a role as a graviton in accounting for gravitation and that gravitons provide dynamic balance for an equal mass of matter sharing the quantum jitter motion. Note therefore the approximate energy equality between: e + (P:Q) + (P:Q) and: + (e:e) + (e:e) In terms of electron mass (P:Q) has an energy of [1 - (%(3/2) - 1)2]P or, with P as a little over 1836.152, some 1743.4 electron mass units and so the combined energy of the three components is 3487.8. The (e:e) electron-positron components may be shown to have an energy of 1.25 electron units, this being 2 minus their interaction energy. So if we deduct 2.5 from 3487.8 to get 3485.3 we might expect the taon to have a mass energy equivalent to 3485.3 electron units. The reader may verify by reference to the previous paper [1] that the value of the taon mass in electron units which gave us the precise value of G as measured was 3485 electron units. The suggestion therefore is that the proton creation process has features which indicate electron-positron pair creation forming components that can combine to create links between components in the atomic nucleus, especially as the (P:Q) forms sit at one end of such links. The energy component of the three-state proton form has enough energy to create such links with a little energy to spare. The energy quantum involved has presumably not been detected as a meson owing to the transient quark nature of existence of the form.
A question which then should be raised is that of why I take two (P:Q) combinations as the basis of taon creation. Why not six or seven? The answer has to be that Nature plays a statistical game of trial and error and will create numerous particle forms, as will the high energy particle colliders at CERN and elsewhere. However, the particles that will take control will be those having a higher creation rate at specific energy values and which have energy determined by two factors. We see that in the case of the proton because its energy was determined first without that factor n of 7 being assumed but then we found that only the factor 7 could give the right energy input. So where is that other factor for the taon? Well it is presented on page 156 of reference [9], as published in 1986. There, also taking the energy of the proton as the base reference, I indicated how a series of hyperons developed by processes involving charge-pair annihilation and consolidation of charge with conservation of charge energy and charge volume and all based on the proton, dimuon and taon forms. Indeed, the clear message from that analysis of six hyperons, all of which were found to have theoretical energy values in conformity with observation, was that the energy of the taon was greater than that of the proton by the factor 3 raised to the power 7/12. The latter has the value 1.898107 and, the proton/electron mass ratio being 1836.152, this gives the taon/electron mass ratio as 3485.2 Conclusion One can but conclude that the quest to understand how matter is created is best pursued by such analysis rather that trying to create freak forms of matter using high energy particle colliders. I do stress the need to rethink adherence to Einstein philosophy given what I have said in my four chapters in my recent work Physics without Einstein: A Centenary Review [3]. Until the scientific world recovers its good sense and takes another look at the mysteries of our cosmos with the aether in mind and Einstein ignored we really have no hope of inspiring future science students and gaining a better understanding of the phenomena which dominate, indeed constitute, our very existence. References [1] H. Aspden, Aspden Research Papers, 3 www.aspden.org (2005). [2] R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., F. L. Moore, D. L. Farnham & P. B. Schwinberg, J. Mass Spectrometry and Ion Processes, 66, 327 (1985). [3] H. Aspden, Physics without Einstein: A Centenary Review, www.aspden.org (2005). [4] H. Aspden & D. M. Eagles, Il Nuovo Cimento, 30A, 235 (1975). [5] H. Aspden, Hadronic Journal, 9, 129 (1986). [6] H. Aspden, Physics without Einstein, Sabberton Publications, www.aspden.org (1969). [7] H. Aspden & D. M. Eagles, Physics Letters, 41A, 423 (1972). [8] H. Aspden, The Chain Structure of the Atomic Nucleus, Sabberton Publications, (paper reference 1974a, www.aspden.org ). [9] H. Aspden, Hadronic Journal, 9, 153 (1986). 21 February, 2005
THE FOO FIGHTER MYSTERY

H. Aspden, 2004 Introduction On May 18th 2004 THE TIMES newspaper published in U.K. included in its Weather section an intriguing commentary entitled Weather Eye by Paul Simons. It began by noting: The Mexican Air Force disclosed last week that one of its planes had seen a swarm of bright lights hovering and darting around it. The lights remain a mystery, but UFO enthusiasts claimed that they were extraterrestrial. Paul Simons then explained how this reminded him of strange lights seen towards the end of the Second World War, when many pilots reported seeing balls of light chasing their aircraft during flights in Europe and over the Pacific. He then noted that the lights, which were also reported by German pilots, were nicknamed foo fighters and looked like small balls of fire, usually orange, sometimes translucent. He ended with the words: The foo fighters are a mystery to this day. There is still no technology in the world that can perform their spectacular feats, and if the lights were a natural electrical phenomenon, such as ball lightning, it is difficult to explain why they were seen in all weathers. When I read this I recalled that in 1983 a paper of mine entitled The Thunderball an Electrostatic Phenomenon was published here in U.K. by the Institute of Physics. It appears at pp. 179-184 in their Conference Series No. 66 record of a conference held in Oxford. Until reading that account a few days ago I had never before heard of that foo fighter nickname or understood that the phenomenon was so prevalent. I was aware of an account by Professor R. C. Jennison, himself having been a fighter pilot in the Second World War, who told me that in more recent years as a passenger on a commercial flight homeward bound for England he had an encounter with a thunderball within an aircraft. He said that there were very few passengers in the cabin and he was sitting well back and in an aisle seat. To his surprise a young stewardess looking distressed suddenly came rushing aft towards him. She threw herself over him to get into a window seat and then he saw the reason for her concern. A glowing spherical object was floating along the aisle moving towards the rear of the plane. He did not move and it floated past him and vanished through a closed door at the rear. Professor Jennisons speciality, being electronics and the physics of electromagnetic wave propagation, led him then to say that he wished he had had the foresight to look away from that glowing object to see if he could sense its presence visually, a possibility he thought, if it was emitting radiation other than that of its optical glow.
The Mystery Explained The point I made in my paper concerning the thunderball is that the phenomenon is the result of setting up an electric field directed radially to or from a central axis. Lightning is not the essential trigger that creates the quasi-stable state of spin which consolidates into spherical form and glows until the energy stored in its field spin is dissipated. My paper delves into the quantitative aspects of the physics involved and shows how the theory predicts the energy density levels which have been established from the available observational data. The spheres of field spin created can be portrayed as spheres of uniform electric charge density of one polarity with a compensating electric charge of opposite polarity sitting at the boundary surface of sphere. This accounts for the energy content, it being that of the field of the displaced charge. The theory is then supported by an associated energy state arising from its spin as the sphere rotates about an axis through its centre and such theory involves a coupling with the quantum jitter of the underlying field medium. This is governed by a synchronization factor effective between the spin quanta within the charge sphere and those of the quantum underworld of enveloping space. Such theory is a matter of record elsewhere, not only in the above referenced conference paper but in books and in many published papers. See this authors web site www.aspden.org. However, a point that is rather obvious from what has just been described, is the fact that such a sphere, electrically-neutral overall, but rotating about its axis, will produce a magnetic field directed along that axis. So, you see, we are considering here a phenomenon of energy contained by a spherical form which, as mere electric field displacement, can float in space but yet, owing to its magnetization, be subject to the influence of magnetic fields. Note that mere electric displacement is something we can achieve within the vacuum, as by storing energy in a capacitor formed by two plate electrodes spaced apart in vacuo. As to whether a thunderball may have a magnetic field, just take note that history records that thunderballs floating in the vicinity of gun barrels have been seen to be attracted to them, presumably because the iron gun barrel has itself acquired some magnetism, but otherwise because, as we well know, magnets that come into close proximity with iron are pulled in by the induced field. Why, you may ask, is the thunderball the product of a lightning discharge? Well, we know that lightning arises from atmospheric electricity, clouds acquiring electric charge and then their sudden discharge. This produces ionization of air along the discharge track, meaning that the air molecules shed electrons. The electric current of the lightning discharge is therefore carried by those electrons and, as is well-known in electrical engineering theory, a sudden very high current discharge produces a pinch effect. The electrons are pulled together, being drawn radially towards the axis of the discharge. This, therefore, establishes a radial electric field between the inner electron population and the outer positive ion population. This sets up the field spin state mentioned above, which persists after the lightning discharge has subsided, and what results can be a consolidation into spherical form bearing in mind the magnetic attraction as between the field spins created along the length of the discharge path. Now, concerning the question of the foo fighters and why, if they are the same phenomenon as the thunderball, they appear without the presence of a thunderstorm, just consider a fighter aircraft as it changes altitude at very high speed in its manoeuvres in an atmosphere we know is charged with electricity. The Earth has a vertical electric field, as
if it is negatively charged, that is measured in hundreds of volts per metre. It is not enough for us to harness for electric power generating purposes but it is enough, subject to fluctuations, changing sunlight and cloud movement, to set the stage for a thunderstorm or, should a fighter plane make a sudden change of altitude cause its metal skin to acquire an electric charge of one or other polarity. Then, taking account of the fact that the aircraft fuselage is somewhat cylindrical in shape, one can see that here we have a longitudinal axis with an external electric field directed radially from that axis. This is a recipe for setting up field spin in the underlying vacuum medium, the medium through which the plane is travelling at high speed. This means that a trail of field spin is created behind the aircraft and there is then the possibility of that magnetic field attraction consolidating that field-spin into spherical forms which glow in shedding the energy acquired. Such spheres might then be held captive by the magnetic field set up by the field spin that envelopes the fuselage and so be seen as foo fighters. Such, at least, is my explanation of the foo fighter mystery that puzzles Paul Simons. A Concluding Note As to the thunderball that was witnessed by Professor Jennison inside an aircraft, that could have been produced by a lightning discharge well ahead of the aircraft and flown into so as to enter the body of the fuselage. Just as thunderballs can pass through solid objects, they being aethereal-like objects characterized by energy and a state of field spin, so they could well find their way into a passenger compartment. A more important note on which to conclude is the need for concern as to the attitude of the physics community, given that such a mystery has been left unanswered. There are indeed many mysteries that need to be addressed by todays physicists, mysteries that pertain to the reality of Nature here and now on body Earth. They should take precedence over highly expensive experimental pursuits that supposedly delve into the mysteries such as Is there life on Mars?, How long ago was the Big Bang, assuming there was a Big Bang? and What happens if two protons are caused to collide at an ultrahigh level of energy? At least, there is enormous scope for exploration of alternative ideas concerning basic physics, rather than merely building block by block on an existing framework without a care as to whether or not it might collapse owing to having relied on the wrong assumptions. The aether is pushed aside by Einsteins theory, but yet whatever there is in space devoid of matter can somehow store energy, electric and magnetic field energy. Physicists think that electromagnetic wave energy is conveyed by photons moving like bullets at the speed of light but still use wave theory to explain optical interference phenomena and wave theory demands an aether. When they did believe in the aether in the 19th century, physicists did not know how to escape from their dilemma, that of the aether seeming to be a solid for some reasons but yet a fluid for other reasons. You would think they would re-evaluate their position, once the properties we associate with fluid crystals became better known. Another example is their belief that the Sun owes its energy radiation to a nuclear fusion reaction occurring at its centre where they believe the temperature exceeds 100,000,000 degrees Celsius. Yet any student of physics who has been introduced to Bohrs theory of the hydrogen atom can work out that when hydrogen atoms come as close as they need to to account for the mass
density of the Sun, the electrons of adjacent atoms collide. This produces ionization, meaning that some protons become free, which in turns means that enough protons will be pulled by gravity to set up a positive charge in the body of the Sun of just such an amount as to cancel further compression under gravity. There can then be no inner temperature that can promote nuclear fusion. Ionized atomic hydrogen at about 6,000 degrees Celsius will prevail throughout the body of the Sun. The key factor governing what has just been said is our knowledge that, by the law of gravity, the mutual rate of gravitational acceleration of free protons is 1836 times greater than that which applies between free electrons. In spite of the mixture of positive and negative charges in the Suns ionized plasma, the higher mass of the proton by a factor of 1836 compared with electron mass results in an equilibrium state in which statistically there are more protons within the body and core of the Sun than there are electrons. The electron deficit is made up by an excess of electrons in the Suns surface regions. So, if we rule out nuclear fusion, how does the Sun get its energy input to sustain its radiation? Well, surely, that same physics student might reason that the electrons that are recaptured by the protons will adopt the identical quantized state that they had before their original separation. This is because they are governed by interplay with the quantum underworld, meaning the aether, and that requires inflow of energy from that underworld. So the Sun is kept alive by the aether which physicists say does not exist and, daring to answer the problem of another mystery, that of where energy goes when it is radiated into outer space, I suggest that such energy is eventually absorbed back into that unrecognized aether. In short, my message is that we exist in a state of low temperature energy equilibrium as between us and the aether but the Sun, owing gravity attributable to its massive form, has energy equilibrium with the aether at a level set by ionization of its hydrogen atoms and that is at 6000 degrees Celsius. My further message is that, given that the aether can be induced to shed energy, there is the ever-present challenge of our contriving to tap energy from the aether. Ask yourself what it is that sustains the properties of a permanent magnet. Physicists will tell you that ferromagnetism depends upon the quantized orbital motion and spin states of electrons which happen in some substances to work collectively in an energy condition that favours the magnetized state. Then ask, if it were possible to draw energy from a permanent magnet, whether that magnet might recover that energy from the quantum underworld, the aether. I certainly would be inclined to answer that question in the affirmative, meaning there could well be scope for tapping energy from the aether by a motor using permanent magnets in some way. Such a topic featured in a recent issue of the magazine NEXUS (June-July, 2004) and I saw it contained on pp. 41-44 an account of Kohei Minatos Amazing Magnetic Motor, which proves what has just been suggested. There is indeed much the physicists have yet to learn and my message is that when facing a mystery in the field of physics one should be realistic enough to keep the aether in mind.
THE PHYSICS
OF CREATION
BY
HAROLD ASPDEN
Doctor of Philosophy of Trinity College in the University of Cambridge
SABBERTON PUBLICATIONS
P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England
CONTENTS
Page
Introduction Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Natures Coded Messages Gravitation and the Continuum The Ubiquitous Muon The Creation of the Proton The Law of Gravity The Quantum Underworld Aether Structure Creation: Stars and Planets General Discussion The Epilogue
(i) 1 14 30 46 57 79 96 114 179 221
Appendix I The Exclusion Zone of Interaction Energy 227 2 230 Appendix II Inertia and E = Mc Appendix III The Electrons Anomalous Magnetic Moment 234 Appendix IV Hydrogen as a Star 243 Appendix V The Angular Momentum of the Solar System 245 Appendix VI The Hypothesis of Fechner and Einstein 249 Appendix VII Einstein and 100 years of Wisdom 260 Index 270
Introduction
Whatever your religious beliefs concerning the role of God in the Creation of this our universe, there can but be satisfaction in deciphering the messages coded in what we see around us, and which surely reveal some of the secrets of Creation. The language involved is itself universal, being that of mathematics, the logical foundation of physics, and so, for those who understand algebraic equations and integral calculus, let me now guide you along a path of exploration as we confront those coded messages.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
CHAPTER 1
Natures Coded Messages

Introduction The processes by which Nature creates the fundamental particles which combine to form atomic matter and so our whole universe determine certain numerical factors which are precisely the same whenever and wherever measured. These are known as the fundamental dimensionless constants. They are merely numbers but yet those numbers are encoded expressions which tell us that Mother Nature has, for some special reason, determined a definite relationship between certain physical quantities. There are three such numbers that, collectively, can reveal to us the secrets of Creation, if only we can discover their physical formulation. One is the numerical factor which relates the mass of the proton to that of the electron, an important ratio, given that the partnership of these two fundamental particles constitutes the hydrogen atom. This is the primary atomic element from which all matter evolves. The numerical factor here is 1836.152. Another, equally important numerical factor, is that having the measured value of 137.0359. This relates the speed of light c in vacuo with the electric charge e of the electron and Plancks constant h. Plancks constant is the factor by which the frequency of an electromagnetic wave is determined as a function of the energy quanta involved. That number 137.0359 is Natures message which says:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
Decipher me and you will understand what governs the phenomena of quantum physics as evidenced by matter at the sub-atomic level. Thirdly, there is the numerical quantity that relates the constant of gravitation G and the charge to mass ratio, e/me, of the electron. Unlike the first two numbers, this does not appear in the tables of physical constants. It is not one that is measured directly, but has to be inferred from separate measurements of G as the force of attraction between two bodies of known mass, and e/me as by measurements using a cathode ray tube. One simply cannot hope to fathom the mysteries of Creation without an understanding of the physical processes that govern the value of G. The measurement data applicable to G and e/me depend upon the units physicists have chosen to use. Concerning units, it is intended in this work, to use the system of units that prevailed during the period in history when our knowledge of physics at the fundamental level expanded by the discovery of the electron. This system, the cgs system, regards the force between two unit electric charges separated in vacuo at unit distance as being itself unity, whereas the practical system of units as used in modern physics complicates the force formulation by ascribing properties to the vacuum medium itself, properties which need expression in their own units. To use the practical system of units for the purpose of this work would over-complicate the mathematical equations and add unnecessary complexity to the project at hand, that of understanding the creative forces at work in our universe. So, to summarize, the task ahead is to examine the factors which govern the physical actions that determine the three numerical quantities introduced above. Our object is simply to unravel, so far as we can, the secrets of Creation and, at the very least, decipher the three numbers introduced above, by which is meant the discovery of the mathematical formulae which they signify as relations between the physical quantities involved.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
Historical Foundations An appropriate starting point is provided by Newtons Law of Gravitation as seen in the context of Coulombs Law concerning the force acting between two electric charges. Although Isaac Newton established that gravitation was governed by an inverse-square-ofdistance law of force which implied the constant of gravitation G, it was not until a century later in 1797/8 that Henry Cavendish, using a delicate torsion balance for measuring the attraction of two small bodies, could quantify its value. Joseph Priestley in 1767 proposed that the electric force acting between two charged objects was also subject to an inverse-squareof-distance law. Having been advised by his friend Benjamin Franklin that when a small charged body is placed anywhere inside a hollow charged conducting sphere, no electric force is exerted on that body, Priestley recalled that Newton had shown mathematically that the gravitational force attributable to the mass of a hollow spherical shell is zero everywhere inside that shell. This is only true if the gravitational force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the two interacting bodies. Therefore, Priestley reasoned that the electric interaction force must itself be of the inverse-square-of-distance form. In 1750 an Englishman Michell had devised an instrument in which the known torsion of a thread balances an unknown force acting at the ends of a bar magnet and had used this to show that an inverse square law acts between magnetic poles. Coulomb reinvented the torsion balance and with it, in 1785, verified the law for both magnetic pole interaction and electric charge interaction. So we see that, by the end of the 18th century, physicists were able to formulate the magnitude of the force acting between bodies as a function of their mass, their electric charge and, indeed, their magnetic pole strength, but, still two centuries later, there remains the need to decipher the messages implied by those measured quantities to understand how Nature determines their values.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
In this pursuit we should find inspiration in the account above by which Priestley deduced that the electric force had to be of the inverse square form. The mathematics involved is of the kind we shall be using in this work as we explore the same force laws to probe the mysteries of Creation and this will include an account of the small but very significant modifications affecting the law of gravitation to cater for the planetary perihelion anomaly. This is a question of how energy travels between interacting bodies when their separation distance is changing. Just as Newton was able to prove mathematically that there is no gravitational force acting on a body within a spherical shell of uniform mass density per unit area of the spherical surface, so we shall prove, on the same assumption, that the interaction component of the field energy of two electric charges separated by a distance R sums to zero within a sphere of radius R centred on either charge [See Appendix I]. It is analysis of this kind that can point to the connecting links between electric, magnetic and gravitational laws of force and provide the elements of a unified theory by which to comprehend how Nature regulates the values of those dimensionless constants already mentioned. As to the historical picture, take note that the electron did not present itself as something whose electric charge and mass could be measured until another hundred years or so had passed. J. J. Thomson in 1897 made progress in his cathode ray tube measurements by which the charge to mass ratio of the electron was measured and by 1911 Millikan, by his falling-drop technique of measurement had discovered how we can measure electron charge and so separate it from the mass of the electron. Early in the 20th century, therefore, and especially after the introduction of wave mechanical theory with the advent of the photon, physicists had all that was needed to decipher Natures messages, the subject of this work. Yet, the task has, it seems, been left to this author, whose interest was aroused when engaged on
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
Ph.D. research in 1950-3 on the subject of anomalous energy losses found in electrical steels when reacting to oscillating magnetization. The reaction phenomena associated with magnetization of electrical conductors has an analogy with the reaction which must of necessity exist when a magnetic field acts across space devoid of matter. It was the study of that reaction that opened the door leading to the pathways we are to explore in this work. So how shall we proceed? Well, it seems appropriate to present at the outset a glimpse of what lies on the far horizon, the answers to our deciphering exercise. Hopefully, this will allow the reader to anticipate some on the onward steps as the theory develops and so share some of the excitement which this task arouses. There is, however, one preliminary historical feature that must be presented first. This concerns the Thomson electron. The Thomson Electron There has to be a starting point from which one can build a picture of the electrical structure of the space medium and matter which sits in that medium. The electron is the embodiment of the unit of electric charge in physical theory. It is the appropriate foundation for our exploration of the electrical properties of the medium that pervades all space, it being well established that the vacuum medium has properties by which it can store electrical energy. The reader well versed in modern physics will now wonder how one can possibly justify the need to refer to this space medium in terms which seek to revive what amounts to the old-fashioned notion of the aether. After all, every physicist today is indoctrinated in the belief that space is a four-dimensional medium referred to as space-time and subject to the relativistic principles which Albert Einstein introduced between 1905 and 1916. E=Mc2 is taken as a sufficient testimonial in proof of Einsteins theory and no one can
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
argue with the experimental evidence which gave birth to the atomic bomb. Indeed, quoting from p. 287 of Science since 1500' by H. T. Pledge, a 1939 Ministry of Education publication then available from the U.K. Stationery Office: With Einsteins work, the old substantial aether vanished from higher physics. In spite of the internal difficulties which had dogged it, it was long mourned by the older school of physicists, who found the reasoning of Einstein perilous - and hard to follow. Well, it is this authors submission that it is due time for the younger physicists of today to visit the graveyard where the aether was put to rest and consider its reincarnation. That visit takes us back to the year 1904, one year before Einstein launched his theory. In that year 1904 a book entitled The Recent Development of Physical Science was published in its second edition. Its author was W. C. D. Whetham, a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge and so a close associate of J. J. Thomson, the discoverer of the electron, who had entered Trinity College in 1876 at the age of 20 and who remained there for another sixty-four years, becoming Master of Trinity College from 1919 to his death in 1940. In now quoting a section of text from that 1904 book, one can see that it gives basis for one to wonder why our modern generation is so impressed by Einsteins E=Mc2 contribution. This is a quotation from pages 283-284 of Whethams book, which include the table below: The property of mass, the most fundamental property of matter for dynamical science, is explained by the electron theory as an effect of electricity in motion. Forasmuch as a moving charge carries its lines of electric force with it, it possesses something analogous
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
to inertia in virtue of its motion. The quantitative value of this effect has been calculated by Thomson, Heaviside and Searle. Definite experimental evidence has been given by Kaufmann, who finds that the ratio e/m of the charge to mass of the corpuscles ejected by radium diminishes as their velocity increases. The charge is almost certainly constant, and thus the mass must increase with velocity. Theory shows that, for a slowly moving corpuscle, the electric inertia outside a small sphere of radius a, surrounding the electrified particle, does not depend upon the velocity, and is measured by 2e2/3a where e is the electric charge on the particle. But when the velocity of light is approached, the electric mass grows very rapidly; and, on the assumption that the whole of the mass is electrical, Thomson has calculated the ratio of the mass of the corpuscle moving with different speeds to the mass of a slowly moving corpuscle, and compared with the results of Kaufmanns experiments. In this remarkable manner has it been possible to obtain experimental confirmation of the theory that mass is an electrical phenomenon.
velocity in cm/s 2.36 x 1010 2.48 x 1010 2.59 x 1010 2.72 x 1010 2.85 x 1010 calculated mass ratio 1.65 1.83 2.04 2.43 3.09 observed mass ratio 1.5 1.66 2.0 2.42 3.1
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
That is a commentary on the state of knowledge of the electron in the year 1904 but that knowledge seems not to have been heeded by future generations of physicists. Today, if you refer to the tables of physical constants, you will find that the electron radius is not formulated according to the above formula, but rather as something that is 50% greater, a notional parameter that has no physical meaning as justified by theory that explains why the radius expressed in relation to mass, electric charge and the speed of light should have that particular value. However, that energy quantity 2e2/3a is the true measure of the electric energy of an electron of radius a and students of physics should see it as important and know how to derive this formula themselves. Just assume that the charge e is confined within a sphere of radius a. Take note that the speed of light c is also the ratio of electrostatic to electromagnetic units in the cgs system. Then assume the charge is moving in a straight line at velocity v so that it defines a current circuit element of strength ev/c and formulate the strength of the magnetic field produced by that circuit element at points distant from the charge. From that work out the magnetic field energy density at such a point and then integrate that energy over all space external to that charge sphere. You will obtain the formula (ev/c)2/3a. Now equate that to kinetic energy mv2/2 and the result will be that mc2 is 2e2/3a. This was, no doubt, the manner in which this result was obtained in that 1904 report, but there is another quite simple derivation that has more merit. Take note that the electric energy of a sphere of charge e and radius a, having all of its charge at the surface of that sphere, as if it were of conductive material, is e2/2a, but if we do not make that assumption and simply declare that the charge e is actually distributed within that sphere of radius a so as to have uniform electric energy density or pressure inside that sphere that equals the energy density just outside the boundary radius a, then it is easily proved that the component of electric energy inside
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
the sphere is e2/6a. Add that to the energy outside the radius a and one obtains 2e2/3a. This is surely the energy of the electron that accounts for its inertial property. It is the formula referred to in this work by reference to the Thomson electron. It is equal to the mass of the electron as multiplied by the square of the speed of light, as you have just seen, and yet physicists see E=Mc2 as something we owe to Albert Einsteins theory of relativity that came along after 1904. As to the so-called relativistic mass increase that one also attributes to Einsteins philosophy, was this not explained in that 1904 text in deriving the data for that table presented above? The gain in energy with speed adds inertial mass and, if whoever computed that data did not use the formula E=Mc2, it becomes an interesting exercise to discover how, given the measured electron speeds, the increase of mass factor could have been calculated. The known speed of light in 1904 was much the same as it is today, very nearly 3x1010 cm/s, and using the formula for mass increase that one derives from electron theory, the same as that later obtained by Einsteins methods, one sees, using this speed of light value, that an observed mass increase by the factor 3.1 corresponds to an electron speed of 2.84x1010 cm/s. The difference between this and 2.85x1010 cm/s as listed in the above table is only marginal and probably attributable to approximations in the calculation. In any event, the point made here is that the Thomson electron formula can be relied upon in our onward theoretical investigation. It is, however, noted that the formal derivation of E=Mc2 as an expression relating the electrical energy E of a charge with its inertial mass M is possible, as this author has shown. See discussion in Appendix II. One has merely to accept that the charge, when subjected to acceleration by an electric field, will move in just such a way as to conserve its intrinsic electric field energy from being radiated.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
10
Based on the physics of 1904, with its aether, we can now confront those messages that pertain to Creation and we do so by using the Thomson electron formula in a quite fascinating way, as will emerge in chapter 4 when we show how the proton is created. Concerning a Theorem and the Aether 19th century physicists went adrift by assuming that the aether had certain properties, notably that of providing a universal and absolute frame of reference for the constant speed of light in vacuo. They should, instead, have studied the aether with an open mind, allowing its properties to be revealed by their experiments. First and foremost is the fact that the aether can and does store energy, electrical energy, and so it must have an electrical composition. 19th century physicists were obsessed by its properties as a medium in which electromagnetic waves propagated. They were baffled because it seemed, in one sense, to exhibit the properties of a solid medium and, in another sense, the properties of a fluid. Considered as an electrical system having structure as if it comprises electric particles formed into a kind of crystal pattern, the problem was one of stability, as was pointed out by Samuel Earnshaw, a Cambridge scientist, by presenting his famous mathematical theorem. In 1839 he read a paper before the Cambridge Philosophical Society, which was later published in their Transactions at pp. 97-114 of volume 7 of 1842. That paper was entitled: On the Nature of the Molecular Forces which regulate the Constitution of the Luminiferous Ether. Quoting from that paper one reads: It is therefore certain that the medium in which luminiferous waves are transmitted to our eyes is not constituted of such particles (acted upon by purely inverse-square forces). The coincidence of numerical results, derived from a medium of such particles, with experiment, only shows that numerical results are no
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
11
certain test of a theory, when limited to a few cases only. So, at the very outset of the project undertaken in this work, one has it on the authority of an eminent scientist, speaking some 164 years ago, that an aether constituted by electric particles conforming with the inverse-square-of-distance force law is an impossibility on mathematical grounds, whatever our number deciphering exercise might prove. Earnshaws Theorem was a basis for rejection of early attempts by this author to secure publication in the mainstream science publications and, indeed, this was how the author first came to know that there was such a theorem. Why then are we proceeding with our quest? Well, there was something about this authors perception of the aether that made that theorem helpful rather than obstructive. Earnshaw had overstated his case. If the medium contains electric charges of like polarity governed by the inverse-square law then they can arrange themselves in a stable configuration, provided they are immersed in a uniform continuum of charge of opposite polarity. Conversely, one might say, if the evidence supports an aether having a structured form composed of electric charges governed by the inverse-square law, then, with certainty, that aether must incorporate a background continuum of electric charge which envelops those charges. So, you see, dating from 1839, physicists seeking to understand the aether were wandering in the dark as they confronted problems of this kind and confronted an aether that had to exhibit the properties of both a fluid and a solid. The fluid crystal of modern physics with its state dependent upon electric field excitation had not been discovered and, almost as soon as the electron had been discovered and its charge and mass measured, Einstein came onto the scene and gone was all hope of salvaging the aether from the wreckage.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
12
This author, however, having committed so much effort into the project of understanding the aether, aether of a form that overcame Earnshaws theorem, could but soldier on without support from the physics community. By 1966 the author had published two works based on aether theory, both entitled The Theory of Gravitation, the first, dating from 1960, being only 48 pages in length and the second, dating from 1966, being an enlarged 170 page second edition. Coincidentally, in that year 1966, as the author discovered later, a book by an author named W.T. Scott appeared with the title: The Physics of Electricity and Magnetism, published by Wiley, and this included a commentary on Earnshaws theorem. It is relevant to mention it because Scott had also seen where the theorem fails. A passage in his book reads: In a region of continuous charge distribution, a maximum or minimum could exist, but a continuous distribution is an idealization. We have to consider each electron or proton as an isolated charge, so that pure electrostatic equilibrium is impossible. Earnshaws theorem sought to prove stability by showing how a differential equation could have a maximum or minimum but the analysis denied that possibility for the interaction of discrete electrical charges immersed in a true void. Scott had seen what this author had seen, namely that the presence of a uniformly charged background could provide that stability. However, Scott says that involves an idealization. One may answer that by saying that the aether could well be an idealization, meaning a physical medium of such ideal and simplified form that it has rather special properties not shared by matter. One may also say, given the evidence to be presented in this work, that the aether has to have that uniform background continuum of charge as a kind of sea in which the other
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
13
charged particle forms are immersed and in which a stable array of such charges can exist. This brings us to the stage where we can begin to introduce the formulae which emerge from the deciphering of what is implied by those numerical constants and so we move on to chapter 2 and begin by exploring the factors that determine the force of gravity.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
14
CHAPTER 2
Gravitation and the Continuum

Introduction In chapter 1 our consideration of Earnshaws theorem established that all space must be permeated by a uniform continuum of electric charge. Since space overall is electrically neutral that continuum must contain numerous electrical charges having a charge polarity opposite to that of the continuum. Those charges can, notwithstanding Earnshaws theorem, form into a stable array, a simple cubic structure, which gives the aether certain characteristic properties. One such property arises when there is an intruding presence of something that takes up space in that continuum. That something, if itself electrically neutral overall, may be assumed to be, in effect, the occupant of a hole in that continuum. Consider then two such holes, spaced apart, each of volume V within an electrical continuum of charge density . Given that the continuum charge, being everywhere of the same charge polarity, will repel itself owing to its electrostatic action, this means that those two holes will experience a force of mutual attraction. It is tempting, therefore, to suggest that this may account for the force of gravitation should whatever it is that occupies those holes have the appropriate association with matter. Note that the charges of the structured array, which will be referred to as lattice charges, will not interfere with this force of attraction because they merely attract the charge of the continuum,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
15
which, being of uniform charge density, takes precedence of position in keeping those holes away from these aether lattice charges. By way of illustration two such holes in a background charge continuum are depicted in Fig. 2.1. The arrows indicate a mutual force of attraction and one can imagine that as the holes come together, at the relatively slow speeds we associate with matter moving owing to gravitational attraction, the continuum charge will flow around the holes without there being any significant concentration of the charge density . Fig. 2.2 depicts the presence of the lattice charges. The relative sizes of these compared with the gravitating holes are far from being represented by this figure. In fact, those aether lattice charges each have a volume that is quite enormous compared with the occupants of those holes, but even so, in displacing continuum charge they do not themselves contribute to the overall gravitational attraction between regions of space. The reason for this, as we shall see, is that the lattice charges are moving relative to the charge continuum at a very high speed, so fast in fact that, in being thereby forced by sudden pressure to flow around such a charge, the continuum charge is compacted in the regions denoted X in Fig. 2.3 to increase in those regions enough to ensure that the net continuum charge in the vicinity of the hole the lattice charge occupies compensates the effect of that hole and so does not contribute to the gravitational action. Gravitation is simply a question of the speed of whatever it is that takes up space within the charge continuum, a difficult concept perhaps, but one offering a convincing insight once we see how it leads us to the theoretical derivation of the value of G, the constant of gravitation. More will be said about this later, but meanwhile suffice it to say that we have introduced the theme of gravity as a property dependent upon the aether and our task now is to develop the formulation by which G is determined.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
16
Fig. 2.1
Fig. 2.2
Fig. 2.3
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
17
Introducing the Graviton Suppose that those holes of volume V are each associated with a mass M so that the mutual force of attraction between two such holes is (V)2 at unit distance. The force law will be of inversesquareof-distance form and so it can be said that this force is a gravitational force GM2. If we know the value of and M has some standard value, which we can also evaluate in terms of the mass of the electron, then we can formulate that basic numerical factor involving G. Now, the problem with gravitational mass is that it is not something that comes in specific units. The smallest amount of energy can exhibit the mass property. To cater for this under normal conditions Nature has adapted by creating two types of what we will here refer to as gravitons. These are unit charges e of either polarity that occupy those holes but they have different mass values. Although it may appear to be mere assumption to say that Nature creates charged particles as needed and given the necessary energy, this is a fact evident from the phenomena of quantumelectrodynamics, where pairs of oppositely-charged electrons are produced by energy activity in the vacuum medium. These electron pairs, or rather electron-positron partnerships have a short lifetime, because, after their creation as charges spaced apart from one another, those charges come together by mutual attraction and are annihilated. They vanish to leave the energy quantum from which they were first created. Somehow the aether in its ongoing and well organized activity then contrives to recreate the electron and positron in a spaced relationship and so the cycle of charge pair creation and annihilation is repeated. The electron and positron are members of the lepton family. They are leptons and, indeed, those gravitons just mentioned are also leptons.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
18
We need to know their mass values and the amount of space which their charges occupy if we are to derive a formula for the constant of gravitation G. We also need to know the value of the continuum charge density . The latter quantity will be the unit of charge e as divided by the volume d3 of a cube of side dimension d, where d is the lattice spacing of the cubic array of those aether lattice particles that permeate the aether continuum. Later in this work it will be shown that d is 108a, where a is the radius of the Thomson electron. Therefore we have the following value for : = e/(108a)3 ........................... (2.1) Note that this equation applies without adjustment to cater for the volume of the lattice charges or particles of matter that might be present and sharing the motion of those lattice charges. The reason is that the compaction of in flowing around these intruding objects exactly balances the continuum charge displaced by their presence. Concerning the charge volume to mass ratio of the graviton, this is complicated by the fact that there are two basic types of graviton, each type having a different role. By their creation and existence the gravitons create holes in the charge continuum which their charges fill. The ratio of the volume of those holes to the graviton mass is the primary factor determining G. Now, considering a group of three gravitons, if two have the same mass and so the same charge volume it is possible for them to exchange energy by very slight volume fluctuations where one expands in radius slightly as the other contracts slightly. Keep in mind that formula for the Thomson electron. As charge radius expands, so the energy and mass decreases and vice versa. The existence or non-existence of that group of three gravitons is a quantum transition for which gravitating mass changes in steps of whole units. Yet we need to cater for the smallest element of gravitating mass-energy. The third graviton in the group is deemed therefore to have the property that, if it sheds energy, its gravitational action, as represented by its increase in
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
19
volume, will increase in just the right amount to match that quantity of mass-energy. Now, a little exercise in mathematics will reveal that, if the graviton mass changes slightly, so the graviton charge volume will change in inverse proportion by an amount that is precisely three times the basic volume to mass ratio of that graviton. Let the mass of one graviton form, the one of larger charge volume, be denoted as times that of the electron and the mass of the other graviton form be denoted as g times that of the electron, there being one g-graviton present for every two gravitons. We will justify this ratio presently. What this then means is that, in terms of the charge volume to mass ratio of the electron, the graviton charge volume to mass ratio will be given by: (2/3 + 1/g3)/(2 + g) ....................... (2.2) Then, owing to that third graviton of a group of three, the g-graviton, having that threefold differential property in respect of the charge volume to mass ratio, we know that this ratio must equal: 3(1/g3)/g .................................... (2.3) From which one can write: 3(/g)4 + (/g)3 = 1 ......................... (2.4) and so find that: g = (1.452627) ......................... (2.5) We can now progress in formulating the value of G as: G1/2 = (4)(1/108)3(1/g)4e/me ............... (2.6) which provides the numerical factor concerning gravity that we set out to find. However, we have yet to justify that 108 factor and we confront also the task of deriving the value of g from pure theory. Also there is that question of the two to one ratio of the - and ggraviton population, not to mention the many unanswered questions that can be raised as to how all this relates to the mass of many forms of matter that exist in our universe. We can but proceed in stages, but, by way of reassurance, the reader is invited to take note that the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
20
known varieties of charged leptons in physics are limited to but a few. There is the electron family, the heavy electron family otherwise known as the mu-mesons or muons, and then the even heavier lepton form, the tau lepton. It would seem that the latter is the graviton. As to the g-graviton form this seems rather elusive in the spectrum of particle physics, but we shall point to some evidence later as we refer to the Japanese H quantum in chapter 9 [See section entitled: Numbers Game]. Meanwhile, from the above formulations (2.5) and (2.6), the reader may check the value that must have to satisfy the relationship between G as 6.67259(85)x10-8 dyne.cm2/gm2 and e/me as 0.527281x 1018 cm2 esu/gm. The answer you will find is that is 3485, meaning that the tau-lepton should have a mass energy of 1.781 GeV, some 3485 times 0.511 MeV, the mass-energy of the electron. On this basis g is 5062.3, which corresponds to a massenergy of 2.587 GeV. Now, of course, these values for and g are empirical, having been derived from measured data on the assumption that the theoretical formulation is valid. However, it is our intention to show in chapter 4 that both and g can be derived theoretically and found to have values quite close, indeed very close, to those just presented and this will then mean that we have deciphered Natures message implicit in the value of the constant of gravitation G. The 2:1 Graviton Ratio The two to one ratio of the -graviton to g-graviton population can be justified in the following way. Imagine the -graviton as having the primary existence as a kind of parent from which the ggravitons are born. The isolated -graviton is suddenly confronted with an influx of energy which it has to absorb. It has a unit charge e which can be positive or negative but we will take the case of it being positive. It has a certain charge volume. It can absorb energy by contracting in radius but we need to accept that space in the aether
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
21
charge continuum is at a premium and, in contracting, some space becomes available for occupation by other charge. However, it takes time for the aether to adjust to changes associated with energy deployment. The scenario envisaged therefore is one where the sudden influx of an appropriate quantum of energy absorbed by the graviton will contract it approximately to the g graviton form, whereupon, to take up the volume of continuum vacated, two similar g-graviton forms will be created, one of charge +e and the other of charge -e. This is a process of lepton charge pair creation which must be followed soon thereafter by the onward quantum transitions that occur with a time delay as the movement of continuum charge imports the added space commensurate with the net amount of energy that is absorbed. Since, for the case of the initial -graviton having a positive charge, the transition state has two positively charged pseudo ggravitons and one negatively charged pseudo g-graviton, those quantum transitions, given that added space, will mean a decay back to the -graviton form with charge pair annihilation, except for the one case where the two positively charged g-gravitons decay before the third graviton in the group is affected. The residual three graviton group will comprise two positively charged -gravitons plus one negatively charged g-graviton. This is a combination which resists spontaneous decay by charge pair annihilation and so there is a physical basis for saying that the graviton system that pervades space will have two graviton forms, which exist in this two to one ratio. As to the reference to the pseudo g-graviton form, this arises because, in dividing into three gravitons, the primary graviton will allot one third of its charge volume to each newly created pseudograviton with the result that the latter have a charge radius smaller by a factor of 1.44225 as compared with the -graviton. This means that during the rapid transition in adjusting to the energy fluctuations under consideration, the transient g-graviton form will be about 0.7%
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
22
smaller in mass and so energy as compared with the ultimate ggraviton form. The completion of the transient phase therefore involves the residual g-graviton absorbing that extra energy. It will, of course, be understood that it is the displaced volume of the continuum of charge density that matters in determining G, there being overall as many positively charged gravitons as negatively charged gravitons of either the or g form and graviton charge pairs being close enough together to preclude their actual charge from having any gravitational effect. The Onward Quest The task ahead involves us in an extensive analysis of the aether as that charge continuum permeated by those aether lattice particles. There is relative motion between these charge forms and that motion gives us the insight we need into the physical activity giving foundation for quantum mechanics and leads us to the derivation of equation (2.1) above and so that factor 108. Then there is the challenge of discovering how matter is created from the activity of the aether medium, and we will find that the creation of the proton and of those -gravitons, along with the ggravitons, go hand-in-hand. In this pursuit we find an answer to one of the great mysteries of physics. Physicists have long been puzzled as to why the muon, the mu-meson, the lepton particle form intermediate the electron and the taon, the tau particle, exists at all. It seems to serve no purpose whatsoever. Unlike the electron it is not seen as present in matter but yet it appears transiently in high energy particle physics. It forms the subject of our next chapter but, as our story unfolds, you will see that the energy of a pair of muons is actually present in each unit cell of volume d3 of the aether. The resulting energy density is that pertaining to those aether lattice particles, meaning their charge volume as divided by their electric energy according to the Thomson charge formula.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
23
We shall find, by the analysis from which that 108 factor is derived, that the aether lattice particle, which we name the quon, is of much larger charge volume than the electron, by a factor N, which will be shown to have the integer value 1843. This leads us to the equation: Eo = (3/4)(108)3(1/N)4/3 mec2 ............... (2.7) as the energy contained within each unit cell of the aether. With N as 1843, the factor in this equation has the numerical value 412.6658. Note that the muon that materializes in experiments of high energy particle physics has a mass somewhat greater than 206 times that of the electron. The numerical quantity just calculated represents the energy in electron terms of two virtual muons, meaning the lepton pair of muons that populate the aether. The proton/electron mass ratio, P/me will, as we shall see, be that given by a quantity: P/me = {9 - 2[(3/2) - 1]2 }Eo/2mec2 ....................... (2.8) which has the value 8.8989795 as multiplied by half of the above factor 412.6658, and so is 1836.152, which compares well with the measured value of 1836.152701(37). This rather incredible degree of precision for the measured value of the proton/electron mass ratio is a daunting challenge for anyone who ventures in search of a theoretical explanation of this quantity. Having indicated that this theory, in its basic structure, succeeds to within a few parts in 10 million, it seems best now to await acceptance of the foundations on which the theory is constructed, namely the aether of the form introduced in this work, and leave onward progress for future generations of physicist. One has to assume that the purpose of precision measurements of physical constants is to establish just how constant such quantities are, just in case they vary from place to place and with the passage of time. Also, whereas the constants themselves may not vary, history indicates that variation does occur in the assumed values, especially as new techniques of measurement are developed and more
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
24
measurements are reported. However, it would seem that the proton/electron mass ratio as now measured is likely to survive as an adequate indication of its ultimate value. Having introduced the -graviton and its alternative role as the tau-particle, the taon, it is appropriate here to note that the theory also gives a formula similar to (2.8) that accounts for its mass in terms of the rest mass of the electron. It is: = 2(P/me)(1 - [(3/2) - 1]2).................. (2.9) which is 3487. This corresponds to a mass-energy 1.782 GeV. This is a little higher than the empirical value 3485 derived above from the G formula (2.6) and this raises the fascinating issue of what factors are at work in determining the quasi-stable energy state of the taon, a topic to be mentioned in the discussion chapter 9. Finally, as part of this preliminary glimpse of the power of this theory in revealing how Nature determines the fundamental dimensionless constants of physics, it is noted that the quantity referred to by physicists as the fine-structure constant has also been deciphered as being that of the formulation: hc/2e2 = 108(8/N)1/6 ................... (2.10) where N, as before, has that value 1843. This expression is that of the inverse of the fine-structure constant which physical tables list has having a measured value of 137.0359895(61). In contrast our theoretical value as it applies in the true vacuum environment remote from matter is, as may be verified from (2.10), 137.0359153. In this case there are reasons why some slight upward modification of this quantity can occur for measurements made in laboratories that are moving through enveloping space at the speeds we associate with the cosmic motion of the solar system. At this stage the author yields to temptation by pointing out that Einsteins acclaim owes a great deal to the support he received from the Cambridge scientist Sir Arthur Eddington in the early years when his General Theory of Relativity was under scrutiny.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
25
Eddington is well known also for his attempts to decipher Natures numerical factors, those dimensionless physical constants. However, at the time (1930) the fine structure constant had not been measured to a degree of precision which allowed one to be sure that that 137 figure was other than an integer. Eddington, who was impressed by Einsteins four-dimensional notions of the space medium, evolved a theory by which 137 was seen as being: (162 - 16)/2 + 16 + 1 which theory, in the words of B.W. Petley of the U.K. National Physical Laboratory (p. 161 in his book The Fundamental Physical Constants and the Frontier of Measurement, Adam Hilger Ltd. (1985), declared as coming: from considerations of the number of independent elements in a symmetrical matrix in 16-dimensional space where 16 equals 4 times 4 (4 being the number of dimensions in Minkowskis world). However, Petley then added the comment: The theory lost respectability partly because Eddington at first predicted the number as 136. It is noted that on that same page 161 of Petleys book there appears a table listing theoretical expressions that have been, as the author puts it, derived for the fine structure constant. The last entry in this table, in date sequence, before the experimental review value, is the one dated 1972, being the formulation of this authors theory giving that value 137.035915, the reference being to the paper entitled: Aether Theory and the Fine Structure Constant in Physics Letters 41A at p. 423. This paper was jointly authored, by this author, Dr. H. Aspden, who was with IBM at their Hursley Laboratory in England, and Dr. D. M. Eagles of the National Standards Laboratory, Sydney, Australia, who had contributed to the development of the theory by involving Dr. C. H. Burton who used
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
26
the computer power of that laboratory to verify the authors analysis of the electrical structure of the aether and thereby cooperating in the determination of the 1843 value of that factor N mentioned above. However, reverting to the Eddington theme by reference to his book New Pathways in Science (1935, Cambridge University Press) one surely must agree with a comment he made on p. 234 in introducing his theory: I think that the opinion now widely prevails that the constants (A), (B), (C), (D) are not arbitrary but will ultimately be found to have a theoretical explanation. Here (A), (B), (C) and (D) were, respectively, the proton/electron mass ratio, the fine-structure constant, the ratio of the electrical force between an electron and proton to the gravitational force between them, and a rather curious quantity the ratio of the natural radius of curvature of space-time to the wave-length of a mean Schrodinger wave. Eddington, being Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University, saw this latter quantity as important, its value, as he states, depending upon the observed recession of the spiral nebulae and being about 1.2x1039. Readers will therefore find it of interest, as we proceed, to see that this authors theory can rise to the challenge posed by this fourth constant but we shall derive instead a formulation including the value of the Hubble constant as that is a more familiar quantity. See chapter 8. It is somewhat hilarious to see that Eddington, in explaining his theory for the fine structure constant on p. 237 of that book, says the following: It is a feature of quantum theory that the particles are so much alike that we can never tell which is which; and we shall later see that this indistinguishability is actually the source of the energy that we are studying, so that we must not ignore it here. We have then to make one of 16 possible presents to one particle and one of 16 possibly
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
27
similar presents to the other; but the particles are communists, not believing in private ownership, and it makes no difference which present has gone to which particle. There are 16 ways in which the commune can receive two like presents and 120 in which it can receive two unlike presents, making 136 in all. That is a curious way of saying that for each of 16 components to have two unlike or two like quanta, given that 16 of each variety are available, is, mathematically 16x15 divided by 2 plus 16. However, Eddington was puzzled by the 136, when he really needed a figure of 137. He ends his account on p. 237 by saying: Is it unreasonable to suggest that the fact that (each of those quanta) is one of a gang of 136 may have something to do with it? Apparently the majority of physicists think that it is. But for my own part the clue seems to me good enough to follow up. Clearly, Eddington is on the defensive here, but he struggles even further in seeking to derive a figure of 137. He concludes with the words: But, you may say, the fraction is really 1/137, not 1/136. I think if we can account for 136/137 of the quantum, the remaining 1/137 will not be long in turning up. There is a saying: One spoonful for each person and one for the pot. As to another of the basic constants, Eddington, by an argument based on wave functions, formulated a quadratic equation of the form: 10m2 - 136mmo + mo2 = 0 ............. (2.11) relating two mass quantities and, taking mo as a standard unit, argued that, since the equation had two solutions for the value of m, these
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
28
were, respectively, the electron mass and the proton mass. From this he derived the proton/electron mass ratio as having the value 1847.6, which, albeit in 1935, he declared agrees very well with the observational determination of the mass-ratio. Eddington deemed there to be such a mass unit mo furnished by the universe as a comparison object. It would have a mass which the above equation shows as being 135.926 times the electron mass. Readers should note here that this authors theory in no way supports the notion that a mass unit having this particular value exists and that we shall be using the symbol mo extensively later in this work to signify a different mass quantity, that of the aether lattice charges depicted in Fig. 2.2. As to Eddingtons formulations, it was this kind of physics that caused the physics community to develop a great distaste for any attempts to account for physical phenomena that were guided solely by prior knowledge of the measured numerical factors involved. Where numbers seemed to dominate the argument this outlawed the theory and caused physicists to find more appeal in factors such as symmetry in mathematical formulations purporting to describe physical phenomena. Yet those numbers, as they evolved from high precision measurement, do convey Natures message, whereas the notional pictures of symmetry in an imaginary mathematical picture of space are merely the product of wishful thinking. This author hopes, however, that with the passage of time since Eddingtons days and with the failure of existing techniques in physics to bridge the gaps which link gravitation with quantum theory and particle physics, physicists of this 21st century era will take note of what this author is offering in this work. In our next chapter, we will come to the introduction of our overall theme, an account of the physics governing the creation of our universe, and this brings on stage the principal player, the virtual muon that was mentioned above as the primary energy form in our aether. In a sense, one could say that Eddington led the way in
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
29
trying to decipher those numbers and he was headed in the right direction in postulating something in the universe having a standard mass intermediate the proton mass and the electron mass. However, it was too fanciful an argument to attribute those masses to the two solutions of a quadratic equation. The logical approach was to heed what J. J. Thomson had already presented as the mass-energy defined by the electron as a charge confined within a spherical volume of space and apply the general formula to other charges, including our unit mass form, the virtual muon, and combine these in an energy equation which seeks a minimum value.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
30
CHAPTER 3
The Ubiquitous Muon

Introduction The mu-meson, or muon, is the ghost particle that inhabits all space. It is ubiquitous, which, according to dictionary definition, means it is omnipresent; being everywhere or in an indefinite number of places at the same time. Yet it has no recognized role in the structure of matter. When it does appear, as in cosmic radiation or as a decay product of the pi-meson, the pion, it has a fleeting existence, but it has been found to have properties of the kind we associate with electrons. Indeed, as mentioned earlier, it is sometimes referred to as the heavy electron and it can, though only transiently, drive an electron out of its orbit around the nucleus of an atom and itself move around that nucleus, though in an orbit of much smaller radius. So why do I refer to it as the the ghost particle that inhabits all space? Well, although it is there, everywhere in space, we cannot sense any resistance to our motion that we can attribute to such a presence. Why is that? I can but suggest that it is because that is characteristic of its ghostly behaviour. You might, of course, be tempted to suggest much the same by assuming that I am merely imagining ghosts that do not exist at all, but do, please, stay with me as I show you how muons cooperate in the creation of the proton, the primary particle constituent of all matter. Muons exist in pairs of electrical charges that can simply dissolve by annihilating one another and shedding energy which can
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
31
meld into a uniformly dense background which allows those charges to reappear once an intruder has moved on. Indeed, we should not expect what is hidden from us in the quantum underworld of space to exhibit the same properties that are revealed to us by the atoms and molecules of our material world. If we meet resistance to our motion and press forward then we exert force and energy is dissipated as heat, but that heat energy is merely energy we have transferred to the obstructing object and that object is normally an atom, meaning a unit of matter and not a member of the lepton family that exists in the aether in a state of equilibrium consistent with uniform energy. If the medium that fills all space is already in a state of uniform equilibrium with pairs of muons conserving their energy in spite of material bodies moving amongst them and has already shed any surplus energy to create matter (protons and electrons), it will surely contrive to stay that way. At best, therefore, with the exception of a phenomenon to be referred to as vacuum spin or aether spin as we proceed, we can expect that ghost world of the aether to cooperate in making it possible for matter in motion to suffer events in which that matter transforms itself into some other form of matter. In this respect, since electrons and positrons exist as matter and not as a constituent of the aether, we can look to the participation of the electron-positron lepton family when contemplating energy transfer processes that involve photons and deployment of kinetic energy as in electrodynamic actions. It would be foolish, indeed, to reject the picture of space as populated by the ubiquitous muon, solely on the ground that it offers no resistance to our passage through it. So, you may say, If it is there and we cannot feel its presence, then why should we concern ourselves with its existence? Also, why use the word muon, given that is already the name of a particle that has materialised and has been seen as part of the particle spectrum in physics? The answer to this first question is that we can feel its presence indirectly, but not in the way one might expect. We do sense those
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
32
muons by the existence of their reaction to our presence as a function of our mass, because they regroup in a stronger ghostly form (the tauparticle, the -graviton of chapter 2) in which they assume a role that we sense as the phenomenon of gravitation. In other words, they react to ensure that we mortals, for example, stay put on body Earth and do not drift off into outer space. The answer to the second question is, to be frank with you, simply that I did not want to invent a new name for what I found was a pristine, newly born, version of an electrically charged energy quantum it is naked state, before it added just a little weight by consuming, as it were, an electron-positron pair, which then gave it a momentary presence as matter on the stage where we also perform. I have tried referring to it as the virtual muon to distinguish it from the real muon, but, in the end, I have chosen to call it the muon and, before leaving this chapter, I will enlighten you on the details of what I have just introduced. Reverting to the first question and that link with gravitation, it is this gravitational connection that is the reason why we should not ignore the ubiquitous muon. The story of Creation is based on the muon as the building block from which the edifice of our universe has been constructed and the muon is also the agent giving birth to the action accounting for the force of gravity, without which the stars and planets could not have formed. So please accept as our starting point that space is primarily a densely populated ocean of muons in which we, as intruding matter, have very little relevance. As we, with awe and due reverence, worship God, the Creator, those physicists amongst us might find a measure of satisfaction that can strengthen ones faith concerning the Creation of the universe by studying what now follows from this introductory insight into the creative workings of Nature. A snapshot overview of what lies ahead in later chapters is evident from Fig. 3.1.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
33
Fig. 3.1 In view of the audacity of this attempt to explain Creation, it seems not inappropriate to use the following words to summarize, just briefly and only by this intervention, what is illustrated, in a biblical style of wording. The justification for this is that we now have 21st century knowledge and the terminology of physics at our disposal but the sterile tone of modern scientific writings cannot convey the message of Creation with the same meaning as that of biblical times. And in the beginning there was Energy and that Energy packaged itself into units of electrical charge, in pairs of opposite polarity, that bear the name of Muons and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
34
which form a uniformly dense electrically-neutral plenum that fills all space. As this plenum evolved, the Muons gave birth to a system of Quons immersed in a uniform Continuum of electrical charge of opposite polarity to the charge of the Quons and there evolved from the chaos a state of order amongst those Quons as they acquired a rhythmic motion which was duly balanced dynamically by an accompaniment of Gravitons, specially created for that purpose. Then, with the passage of time, as some residual Energy needed accommodation, matter appeared in the form of Protons and Electrons which joined the Quons in the rhythm of their dance and which also had a Graviton counterpart. And those Gravitons, by their presence in the Continuum amongst those electrically charged Muons, gave rise to a force that acted over vast domains of space and between all matter in each such domain, thereby drawing that matter together to form a star or pair of stars in each of those domains. And so it was that the universe was created and those Protons and Electrons combined to form atoms some of which developed into the more complex forms from which Mankind and other life forms duly evolved. With this introduction the reader now has a choice. That muon form we see in experiments on particle physics is found to have a mass-energy by which a pair of muons would have a combined energy of 211 MeV. The reader can move on immediately to Chapter 4, to be introduced to the creation of the proton from those muons and, hopefully duly impressed by what has been discovered. Natures coded message there resolved is the one encoded in the number 1836.152, the proton/electron mass ratio.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
35
However, if the reader is reluctant to be led along a path where numbers may seem to be more important than the underlying physics, then such a reader may prefer to plough through the remainder of this chapter, where we will delve into some of the intricacies that distinguish the muon in its primeval, bare or virtual, form from its real form in its transient presence as matter. Numbers will still play a major part in this pursuit, simply because the measure of muon lifetime in seconds is a mere number, as is its mass ratio relative to the electron, but at least you will see that number derived from a rigorous theoretical exercise in physics. The reader needs to keep in mind that so much of what one reads in advanced theoretical physics is dominated by complex notions and even more complex equations which really have no clear meaning and, if given numerical form, seldom conform in precision with what is actually measured. It is very different from the realm of the engineer where one can design machines and structures that, in operation, match up well with theoretical prediction. I will give one example of this that pertains to the muon at the outset as we now proceed, but do realise that, in addressing this muon issue in detail, I am departing along a kind of side-track from the line of argument that I would otherwise follow, given a reader interested to learn something new by following a new theoretical route without being handicapped, in a sense, by prior indoctrination, as, for example, on the subject of time-dilation. You see, the muon and its lifetime variation as a function of speed is deemed to be a test verifying Einsteins Theory of Relativity and certain aspects of that theory are not in keeping with the process of Creation that I have introduced above. I hope these words of introduction will justify the diversion now offered by the remainder of this chapter. The Muon Lifetime The muon, as reported in Review of Modern Physics, (v. 48, 2, Part II, April, 1976), has an observed mean lifetime of:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
36
2.197134 +/- 0.000077 microsconds and it is an interesting task in physics to discover what it is that determines this particular lifetime period. Physicists have seen a way in which to progress in this quest by using the techniques of what is termed Electroweak Theory. Under a chapter heading Feynman Rules for Electroweak Theory on p. 236, Bailin and Love in their book Introduction to Gauge Field Theory (Adam Hilger Ltd, 1986) derive a theoretical value for the muon lifetime, namely: 2.90 +/- 2.61 microseconds Of this result they say: Thus, while our result is consistent with the data, the large errors on this theoretical value of muon lifetime mean that this is hardly a rigorous test of the theory. So if one is really interested in delving into the theoretical foundations which govern much of particle physics and particularly physics pertaining to leptons, the realm of quantum electrodynamics, one presumably should not be concerned with the kind of aether advocated in this work. However, do note that the theoretical derivation of numerical quantities that arise in basic physics is seen as a test of the theory involved. So let us put our alternative theory to the test by trying to derive the lifetime of the muon. First of all, we ask, What is a muon, meaning the one that appears in the matter frame of high energy particle physics? It will, according to the theory already presented, comply with the formulation used by J. J. Thomson for the electron, though having its charge radius reduced by a factor equal to the muon/electron mass ratio. Yet, given that electrons and positrons are prevalent in the quantum electrodynamic arena, one can wonder if a simple positive muon charge might attract two electrons and form a three-charge entity having the character we recognize as a negative muon.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
37
With this in mind, the author has surmised that such muon entities might well comprise a core charge that, of itself, has a mass that is an odd integer multiple of the electron mass, that multiple being 207. The reason is that those two electrons, in repelling one another, take up positions in near-contact with the muon charge but at diametrically opposite locations and, by adding two units of electron mass as offset by the negative mass-energy of their electrostatic interaction, the net result is that the muon entity would have a mass of approximately 206.75 electron mass units. The measured muon/electron mass ratio is 206.76835(11) (Physical Review D, 25, 652; 1982) but onward analysis which involved a resonant wave interaction governing the actual spacing of the core muon body and the satellite electrons (or positrons) led to the authors theory giving the mass ratio as: 207 + 2 - 9[207/(208+2/9)]/4 which is 206.7683078. The full theory for this is of published record in the Italian Institute of Physics publication Lettere al Nuovo Cimento (38, 342; 1983). So, this result being precisely in accord with the measured value, you see why the author is confident that this model of the muon is the proper basis from which to seek to explain the lifetime and so test the theory further. Indeed, what is now to be described supercedes the theory for that lifetime that features at p. 146 of the authors book Physics Unified, published in 1980. Concerning muon lifetime, physicists well know that Einsteins theory requires the lifetime of a particle to increase with speed according to a relativistic formula, just as the same theory requires the energy of a particle to increase according to the same formula. Already in this work, in discussing electron energy theory as advocated by J. J. Thomson, we have seen why the mass of a particle moving at high speed is increased in accordance with what is observed, as in the Kaufmanns experiments of the 19th century. There is no particular merit in Einsteins derivation of the mass-increase formula. Concerning muon lifetime, however, the lifetime
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
38
enhancement with speed is best explained once one has an acceptable theory for the muon lifetime with the muon virtually at rest. Otherwise, it makes no sense at all to theorize about the lifetime changing with speed when it would seem that all one needs to do is to argue that lifetime is proportional to mass-energy and, as Einstein does, then argue that time itself is perceived to change in its rhythm as a function of speed. We will confine our concerns here with deriving that muon lifetime for the rest condition, but if readers wish to see how this same aether theory does give account of muon lifetime dilation with speed then the appropriate reference is this authors paper entitled: Meson Lifetime Dilation as a Test of Special Relativity, (Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 206; 1983). Einsteins theory is not involved in this exercise, but one can point to a section of that paper where one may read: A primary publication on this subject is that of Bailey and Picasso (Progress in Nuclear Physics, 12, 62; 1970) who measured muon lifetime at very high speed for which the theoretical relativistic value was 26.69 microseconds compared with a rest lifetime of 2.198 microseconds. Thus ... (this authors theory) .... tells us that the observed lifetime at this value (of energy at the high speed compared with rest-mass energy) should be 0.56% low compared with the relativistic value. This is quite small, but it is also significant because Bailey and Picasso reported measurements to an experimental accuracy of 0.2% and did in fact find that the observed value was lower than the relativistic value by 1.2%. Though they regard this as adequate agreement the difference was sufficiently concerning for them to speculate at some length about the possible reasons for the difference. Only further research can verify the speculation, but it can be said that the question remains
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
39
open and the indications are that the relativistic expectation is up to 1% above the measured value of the muon lifetime at these energy levels. Concerning the muon and this authors theory, one further point of interest before we come to the derivation of that lifetime property is that the very same model which the author used for deriving the mass of the muon gave a full account of the muon g-factor, again without involving Einsteins theory or, indeed, the standard arguments based on Feynman diagrams. The principles involved are much the same as those this author has applied in deriving the anomalous magnetic moment (g-factor) of the electron, the latter being presented in this work as Appendix III. The periodical reference is this authors paper: The Muon gfactor by Cavity Resonance Theory, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 271; 1984. The theoretical value for the muon g-factor was found to be 2(1.001165918), a result in quite remarkable agreement with the then measured value of 2(1.0011659230), given the simplicity of the theory used. One can see, therefore, in this digression from the main topic of this work, that concerning the physics of Creation, we need not lose sight of the reality of what is observed concerning the muon in our laboratory experiments. This point is made particularly because, in introducing the ubiquitous muon of the aether medium as something different but active in the quantum underworld of space, it may seem that we are invoking arbitrary assumptions, whereas the analysis, once we reach the realm of quantum theory, will be seen to lead us to a mass-energy for that ubiquitous muon which is indeed very close to that of the real muon which reveals itself in our experiments. Now we come to the question of the muon lifetime. The aether we are considering in this work has a unit cell volume that is (108)3 times the cube of the radius of the electron charge and it will emerge as we proceed that the aether has a rhythmic cycle at the Compton
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
40
electron frequency, the photon frequency corresponding to the electron mass-energy quantum. In every such cycle there is a quantum-electrodynamic event associated with the energy quantum of a pair of virtual muons but such events occur at random positions in space. The proposition now advanced is that if those two electron charges associated with the core muon form sustain a hit simultaneously in the same rhythmic period, then the muon will be conditioned for decay. By hit it is meant that the virtual muon of opposite charge polarity is created within the space occupied by the electron charge. By conditioned for decay is meant the transient creation of a system which statistically has the prospect of decaying in the manner now explained. Given one unit of muon energy plus two similar units owing to the impact of the two virtual muons, there are three units of muon energy. Given also the fact, as we shall see later in this work, that the space occupied by material charge forms is conserved in particle reactions, the muon, when subjected to such a hit is converted to a higher energy level, pending decay or reversion to the normal state. Some muons so affected are transiently elevated to an energy level that is less than three times their normal rest-mass energy, whereas others are elevated to an energy level that is greater than three times their normal rest-mass energy. The latter are the ones that experience decay. The energy deployment determines the ratio of the two states as being 17:8, meaning that the chance of decay for each hit is 8 in 25. This immediately leads us to the formula for muon lifetime as being: (25/8)(3/4)2(108)6(8.093)10-21 s which is: 2.199 microseconds a value that is within one part per thousand of the experimental value.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
41
If a muon core charge +e is suddenly forced to shed its two electron (or positron) associates and is driven to an energy level some three times greater then one could contemplate the space occupied by its basic charge form being shared equally by three charges, +e, -e and +e. Each such new charge form will have a charge radius that decreases by a factor equal to the cube root of 3. Conversely, each such charge will have a mass-energy enhanced by the same factor 1.44225, according to the Thomson formula already introduced. Now, depending upon how these three charges arrange themselves in a group, the overall mass-energy can be greater or less than that of three basic muons.
Fig. 3.2 One possible configuration of the three charges is depicted in Fig. 3.2 and such a charge group has an electric energy that, in the basic muon units, is 3 as offset by the sum of three components of electrostatic interaction energy. This leads to the following quantity: 3 - 0.75 - 0.75 + 0.375 = 1.875 and, upon multiplication by 1.44225, this becomes 2.7042. We could then expect that, since muons are involved and are subject to pair creation and pair annihilation, the number of such configurations that might be created as a group would require an energy threshold that is an appropriate integer multiple of the basic
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
42
muon energy quantum. If now one multiplies 2.7042 by successive integers until one comes to a value that is itself well within one part in 1,000 of being an integer value, then it is found that the necessary multiple is 17. As such a group forms by deploying a total of three muon units of energy at each step there will be a surplus of energy of 0.2958 units, some of which is likely to be deployed in helping to create a more energetic version of that three-charge system, as shown in Fig. 3.3.
Fig. 3.3 Here one of the charges is separated from the other two and the energy at separation to a distance far in excess of the charge radius may then be as high as: 3 - 0.75 = 2.25 times 1.44225, which is 3.2451. It seems then possible that, as each of the Fig. 3.2 charge combinations forms by shedding that energy of 0.2958 units, there is the possibility that the two such quanta of energy shed by the nearby activity of creating two similar charge combinations will converge on the primary combination and act to separate the charges and so form the Fig. 3.3 charge system. This is because 2(0.2958) exceeds (0.2958 + 0.2451), meaning that 0.0507 units of energy disperse at this second stage of action to leave three charge combinations, two of the Fig. 3.2
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
43
form and one of the Fig. 3.3 form. Therefore, in progressing to the threshold stage at which 17 of the Fig. 3.2 combinations have been created one has by then also created 8 of the Fig. 3.3 form. This is very satisfactory because 8 times 3.2451 is 25.96, which is itself within one part in 650 of being an integer. As to the muon decay process, the Fig. 3.2 charge combination will revert to the basic muon state because two adjacent charges will annihilate one another and, being close to the remaining charge, their charge volume will be conserved for use by that residual charge as it sheds surplus energy. However, for the Fig. 3.3 charge system, the decay by charge pair annihilation occurs at a distance from the residual charge and that charge, in shedding energy, cannot capture the space vacated by the charge pair and so revert to its basic muon form. It stands in isolation and lacks the stability assured by the close presence of other charges having the same properties. The latter is important because a group of three or more like charges conforming with the J. J. Thomson formula for energy in terms of charge volume can preserve equilibrium by exchanging energy and still conserve their overall energy and charge volume. Hence, owing to that isolation, the Fig. 3.3 charge combinations must decay at the end of the rhythmic quantum cycle. For this reason there is the statistical probability that in every group of 25 muons that happen to be excited to the potentiallyunstable condition, there are 8 that will decay and 17 that survive decay, thereby substantiating the above formula for the muon lifetime. Now, the author will be the first to concede that the above account is somewhat complicated in the derivation of that 8 to 17 ratio and there may be a better alternative yet to be discovered, but it does give what seems to be the right answer. Accordingly, it is included here for the record and also to make the case that, in comparing this aether theory with Einsteins theory or what is referred to as Electroweak theory, there is really no contest, given that Einsteins theory does not even offer any estimate of the muon lifetime that one
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
44
can define in numerical terms, whereas the other standard theory gives, as stated above, a figure well off target and is anyway subject to an uncertainty having a standard deviation amounting to 90% of the estimated value. Concerning other particle lifetimes we shall not, elsewhere in this work, be seeking to derive further theoretical values as evidence supporting this theory. Our primary concern in this work is the problem of Creation on the universal scale. However, by way of reference, readers interested in particle lifetime theory may find it of interest to look up the following papers by this author. A Theory of Pion Lifetime, Lettere Nuovo Cimento, 33, 237 (1982). A Theory of Neutron Lifetime, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 31, 383 (1981). The Finite Lifetime of the Electron, Speculations in Science and Technology, 7, 3 (1984). The latter paper discusses the reason why the electron has a finite lifetime evident from its electron tunnelling properties. It must have a lifetime if the above theory for muon lifetime is correct, because it is the dual hit of two electrons (or positrons) as a target that gives basis for muon decay. That electron lifetime, based of course on a single hit, is of the order of 0.75x10-13 seconds and may be derived from what has been presented above by using the formula: (3/4)(108)3(8.093)10-21 s One of the most fascinating questions one can then consider is whether the proton has a finite lifetime. As for the electron, standard physics offers no suggestion that these two most fundamental of all particles of matter may be subject to eventual decay. However, may not the reason for this be that decay sheds energy which our aether has to take under its wing and look after pending finding a new home for that energy in the system of matter? It is simply a question of equilibrium as between the energy the aether can store to meet its own structural needs and surplus energy it may possess transiently pending
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
45
shedding it to create matter. Given then that the basic forms of matter in the local space domain of our experience consist in negative electric charges assuming the form of the electron and positive electric charges forming as protons, need we be surprised if we were to find that both an electron and a proton may have finite lifetimes but, upon decay, they are recreated almost at the point where they suffered their demise? As to the proton, though we shall see in the next chapter how it is created, we will later in this work discuss an aspect of this process that explores the broader picture of proton creation even in outer space, or rather the aethers attempts at proton creation that fail owing to lack of surplus energy. That ongoing scenario of an aether subject to quantum fluctuations involving those ubiquitous muons in trying to create protons is one from which we can derive the theoretical value of the Hubble constant as a feature of a non-expanding universe necessarily set in that aether. Such is the scale and scope of the subject of this book concerning Creation.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
46
CHAPTER 4
The Creation of the Proton

Introduction In this chapter we will address the problem of proton creation. The proton is the most fundamental particle in the composition of matter. Our task here is to explain how it is created and how similar creation processes attempt to create other particles that we only glimpse by their transient existence. The proton is indeed very special as there is something unique about the conditions under which it is created, something which assures its stable existence. However, contrary to general belief, even a proton must have a finite lifetime, but in view of its creation propensity its decay is followed by its immediate re-creation and so it appears to be immune from decay. It is the same for the electron, but we can infer a measure of its lifetime from its ability to tunnel across potential barriers. The starting point in this account is the activity of the virtual muon system that populates all space. The muon is a lepton form intermediate the taon and the electron. It decays to form the electron but it can also, in its game play with other muons, build the particle forms that include both the taon and the proton and, once created, those protons are survivors for the reason now to be explained. The Proton Creation Formula Earlier in this work there has been extensive use of the formula ascribed to J. J. Thomson for the mass-energy of a charge e
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
47
confined within a sphere of a radius we here denote by the symbol x. The energy E is simply: E = 2e2/3x ....................................... (4.1) If we now imagine that two such charges of opposite charge polarity but different radii x and y exist in surface contact, we see that their centres are separated by a distance (x+y). This means that the combination has an energy amounting to that of the two components as offset by the Coulomb interaction energy e2/(x+y). Suppose now, given such a combination, that one charge, that of radius x is not susceptible to x changing in value but that the other charge can adapt by adjusting the radius y to suit some optimum energy condition. This is an electrostatic system and we are familiar with the energy of such systems seeking to minimize. Therefore, now let y change until the total energy of the combination is a minimum. This will mean that: - 2e2/3x2 + e2/(x+y)2 = 0 ............................. (4.2) and so we find that y is equal to x times the square root of 3/2 minus 1 or 0.2247x. The energy of the charge combination in this minimal energy state is then found to be even less than that of the stable charge of radius x by the small factor of 0.2247 squared or 0.0505, meaning that the overall combination has an energy slightly less than 95% of that stable charge. The two-charge unit just described is electrically neutral and, with the dominant component having a mass-energy A and the dependant component having a mass-energy B, we now adopt the following expression to symbolize its energy: (A:B)MIN that energy being 0.9495A. Now suppose that a proton of energy P and charge +e has been created from the turmoil of excess energy in the aether that is seeking a state of equilibrium by deploying that energy into a
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
48
standard particle form. Remember that in discussing the graviton in chapter 2 it was evident that the volume of the charge continuum displaced by the existence of the graviton bore a crucial relationship with the energy of that graviton. If that volume expands slightly, signifying a loss of some of that energy, there had to be other gravitons that absorbed that energy by contracting in equal measure. Such a scenario implies greater particle stability where all those particles have identical form. In the aether the taon is one such particle form and in matter the proton is such a particle form. Then there is that ubiquitous virtual particle form, the muon of chapter 3, and its double, the dimuon now introduced, the mystery particles of the vacuum medium. Once created the proton will be stable by virtue of its association with so many other protons of identical form, but the proton, along with other particles, can engage in a violent encounter if one of those muons or dimuons gets too close. The result is that an amount of energy z will be shed in a form nucleated by a charge +e but the muon or dimuon will escape unscathed to leave a neutral entity: (P:k)MIN where k is 1 or 2 and signifies the energy of the muon. The existence of the dimuon is explained by considering the combination of two muons, one of charge +e and one of charge -e, with the energy being retained without loss in a neutral combination represented by: (2:) To understand this simply put y equal to 2x in the system described at the beginning of this section to signify that one charge has twice the radius and half the mass-energy of the other and you will see that the Coulomb interaction energy exactly cancels the energy of the second charge. The dimuon is a latent component in the neutral system transiently formed by muon pair combination.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
49
It seems possible therefore that k could be 2 and, keeping this in mind, we now write the equation: (P:k)MIN + z = P ................................ (4.3) Given that the proton is somehow created and is a survivor, this equation is presumably one that is reversible in the sense that it says something about the creation of a positively charged particle z when P does get embroiled in a decay incident but it is equally a statement that has bearing upon how P is created. Somehow that particle of energy z has an independent origin and, if we can discover what that origin is, then we will discover the secret of proton creation. Well, one can now utter the word Eureka, because the answer is so obvious. In that (A:B) expression put A as 2 as if we are considering that transiently neutral combination of a muon charge pair, but suppose the muon component B sheds energy to become z as that combination adopts its minimum energy state. One then has a neutral particle form of energy: (2:z)MIN This then becomes the target for attack by an odd number n of muons which drive out the z component and combine as a charge of energy P within the new neutral entity. The formulation of this is: n + (2:z)MIN = (P:k)MIN + z ..................... (4.4) We know the value of z from this latter step. It is 0.2247(2) and we also know from the earlier equation (4.3) that z is 0.0505(P), all of which merely tells us that: P = 8.899() ...................................... (4.5) which was evident anyway once k was seen to be 2 but the theory has relied on the assumption that P rather than the dimuon is the dominant partner in the neutral combination yielding this result. That assumption has to be justified and it is here that the factor n comes into the picture. It sits in that two-stage equation (4.4) indicating that the major energy input needed for proton creation is a muon source but, absent verification, we have no assurance that its
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
50
integer value n will give the now-expected answer, nor whether it will prove to be an odd integer. Also there is so much scope in particle physics for energy discrepancies owing to Nature not complying with ones ideal theoretical portrayal that one would surely expect to find that some adjustment in regard to charge spacing or whatever will become necessary to satisfy the odd integer n requirement. Now take note that the value of: (2:z)MIN is simply 0.9495 times 2 or 1.899() which tells us that precisely 7 muons have to be added to create the proton. It just so happens that the mathematics of all this works with such perfection in requiring n to be an odd integer that can only have the value 7 given the dimuon foundation. It is an almost miraculous feature of the underworld activity of the aether medium that it has this truly amazing unique energy resonance property which causes a particle to form which locks its energy level at a unique value so precisely related to that of the prevalent lepton of the aether, the virtual muon. In saying this I can but emphasize the fact that we have here the secret of the feature of Creation by which one, and only one, high mass-energy particle form has a dominating presence in matter. It is the proton family, by which I include the antiproton. The electron is equally prevalent but its existence is linked to the unique value of the universal rhythm of time, owing to its relatively low rest-massenergy being that given by the frequency of the aether as multiplied by Plancks constant h, as will be discussed in chapters 6 and 7. Although physicists may argue that the neutron can claim also to be very prevalent in matter, I deny that claim, because the neutron has only been detected as a short-lived particle form, which decays into a proton and an electron. Its imagined existence in atomic nuclei is based solely on theory which pretends there is no aether and tries to balance the books accounting for mass and charge. An atomic
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
51
nucleus having n units of charge and N units of mass is deemed to comprise n protons and N-n neutrons, but given the role played by the aether, with atomic nuclei having charges which meld into the aether particle lattice by adopting its structural form, one can imagine that atomic nucleus having n protons and N-n antiprotons, but with those antiprotons each having displaced a quon from its seat in the aether lattice. So, by understanding how protons are created in terms of aether activity, we are opening the way forward for a better understanding of the structure and composition of atomic nuclei. However, that is digressing from our main theme and we must get back on track. Once we have derived from first principles the precise energy quantum of the aethers virtual muon we shall know the precise mass-energy of the proton. Our progress so far assures us that it is 8.899 times that of the virtual muon or, as may be shown by the very simple mathematics involved, to be far more precise as 8.898979486 times that quantity. Note that, the equivalent algebraic formulation for this quantity is: 9 - 2[(3/2) - 1]2 which is the expression used in equation (2.8) in chapter 2. The Mass-Energy of the Taon In the effort to understand the myriad of particles that have revealed themselves in high energy experiments by particle physicists, one has sought to build patterns of their relationship and classification. This seems not to be aimed at understanding how these particles are created but rather more directed at spotting gaps in the pattern and looking for evidence that might fill those gaps. All that is a rather futile exercise, bearing in mind that those particles are all so short lived that one wonders whether they are Natures creation or man-made resonance effects arising from the high energies used in their manufacture.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
52
Nevertheless, there has to be a natural process by which those gravitons discussed in chapter 2 are created and, given the argument that the activity of the muons in the aether creates the proton, it is logical that we should try to build on that theme in considering graviton creation. I would expect that, since the creation of protons can mean that matter is being added to the E frame of the aether and this implies the need for gravitons to be created to provide dynamic balance by settling in the G-frame, the creation of protons and gravitons could well occur as if from the same manufacturing process. One needs to imagine that the aether is ever trying to deploy its energy to create protons but failing to keep them alive if the energy surplus to its equilibrium requirements is insufficient. Also, and with equal vigour, it will surely seek to create gravitons as well, given the necessary energy and vacancy in the graviton frame that provides dynamic balance for the quantum jitter of matter, such as those protons that are created amongst the quons in their reference frame. So proton creation and graviton creation go hand in hand. Note, however, that what you will see emerge from this exercise is the creation of the more prevalent graviton, the taon form already discussed in chapter 2, where it was shown how the taon and the more massive g-graviton form were related. The latter, as we have seen, has a mass that is 1.452627 times that of the taon. If taons are created with protons, why not just consider the possibility that they can emerge from the very same process as that represented for proton creation in equations (4.4) and (4.5)? All we need to do is to imagine that two proton creation events occur side by side, meaning a proton and an antiproton, so that, in energy terms, the overall equation is: 2(P:k)MIN + 2z = 2P .......................... (4.6) Then suppose that, before the emerging proton-antiproton pair 2P are created, only to decay by mutual annihilation, the two z particles,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
53
being of opposite charge e, as otherwise they would not come together, merely combine first and so decay to dissipate their energy. That would leave the energy of those two neutral combinations of charge which might find a way of combining with a similar neutral energy entity to then divide as two particles of opposite polarity charge e. If the product were a pair of taons then, by the following equation: 4(P:k)MIN = + + - ........................... (4.7) The mass of each of those taons would be 2(0.9495)P or 1.899(P). Now, since the proton P has the mass-energy 938.3 MeV, this means that the taon has the mass-energy value close to 1.782 GeV. This corresponds with the algebraic formulation of equation (2.9) in chapter 2. So here we have the taon that assumes the role of a graviton emerging from the very same process that accounts for proton creation. This mass-energy quantum is that found from measurements of the taons that appear transiently in the matter state. Moreover, there is something we can even add in connection with this process that is a kind of additional check of our analysis. It is the fact that: (P:k)MIN = 891 MeV ........................... (4.8) and that there is a meson in the experimental particle spectrum that is denoted K*(892) to signify that its measured mass-energy is approximately 892 MeV and this meson is the only one intermediate the proton mass-energy of 938.3 MeV and the mass-energy 783 MeV of the (783) meson. This, therefore, endorses both the above derivation of proton mass and this more direct route of accounting for the taon creation process. Now, at this stage, it is interesting to explore this subject of taon creation just a little further and ask ourselves what happens if Nature tries to create more massive particles by bombarding the taon with pairs of muons. Well, once the energy involved is high enough
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
54
then it would seem that the onward decay could bring those heavier gravitons into their transient existence. However, other particle forms having a much shorter lifetime will surely be created as well and it is of interest to consider this, as we now see. Hyperon Creation Taons are leptons. They decay by mutual annihilation and such decay can be triggered by muons. Consider then their combination with a pair of muons of opposite charge. Might the taon be converted into a charged particle of higher mass-energy? If it were and this new particle, lacking the company of an abundance of similar particle forms, found it was unstable, then how might it stage that decay? Well, since space in the continuum cannot be created by a spontaneous demand, it seems likely that it would share its own charge volume with that of two of its brethren of opposite charge e, so that, by decay of an opposite charge pair, the single charge could take up residence in a space having three times the volume as the original charge form. This would mean that the particle so formed would have a charge radius larger by the cube root of 3 than the original particle and so smaller in mass-energy in inverse proportion. What this means is that, if N muon pairs merge their energy with the taon to create a single particle of charge e and energy plus 2N, then three such particles could come together and shed much of their pooled energy in a high energy environment to leave a new residual particle having a mass given by: 0.693( + 2N) Note that 0.693 is the inverse of the cube root of 3. With as 1.782 GeV and 2 as 211 MeV this suggests that, depending upon N, a series of particle by-products might be generated in high energy particle experiments, their mass-energies being:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
55
1.235 GeV for N = 0 : (1235) 1.381 GeV for N = 1 : *(1385) 1.527 GeV for N = 2 : *(1530) 1.674 GeV for N = 3 : -(1675) These mass-energy values can be seen to correspond to hyperons that feature in the high energy particle spectrum, as indicated by their standard symbols. The data listings from which these are quoted evidently rounds-off energy values to multiples of 5 MeV, no doubt owing to the approximate nature of the measurements. It is submitted that on this basis we can be quite confident about the physics underlying the particle creation processes here discussed. The taon is clearly a major player on the aether scene and it is very reassuring to find that its creation stems from activity which also produces the proton. It is not intended here in this discussion of the physics of creation that we should try to delve into the creation of the many other particles that are found in high energy experiments. All I seek is to give account of the creation of the primary matter particles and the particles hidden but ever at work in its governing agency, the aether. The task, as we have already seen, has taken us into the realm of unified field theory and there is much more to discuss concerning cosmic issues. This has to be after we have really delved deeper into the mathematics of the aether to show how its structure and form give basis for wave mechanical phenomena and determine the finestructure constant. The latter is a key factor in any pursuit to understand the foundation for the creation of our universe. Also much has to be said to reinforce the case for the aether already presented, given the strength of conviction of theoretical physicists on the relativistic front, the group hostile to aether theory with its three-space dimensions, and those of the quantumelectrodynamic front, the group hostile to attempts at deriving the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
56
dimensionless constants of physics by methods they see as unorthodox. This effort, which may seem a little tedious, will include the theoretical derivation of the virtual muon mass, thereby allowing full theoretical evaluation of the proton-electron mass ratio, but, for those who have skipped over the latter part of the previous chapter, one can see by referring back that we have not ignored the slightly different mass of the muon in evidence in the matter frame. Happily, once through the detail of the next three chapters, we shall arrive at the more exciting prospect of seeing how stars are created and the spin-off from that pursuit which brings us down to Earth as we explore the scope for using the knowledge so gained to tap into the energy resource of the aether itself.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
57
CHAPTER 5
The Law of Gravity

Introduction Here in this chapter we will revert to a consideration of the phenomenon of gravitation as it is seen from the perspective of orthodox physicists. They do not have insight into the processes by which Mother Nature develops the force of gravity and have no way of regulating its action, which means that there is little they can do, apart from measuring the laboratory value of G and observing gravitys action in the astronomical arena. Having, as this work shows, spent many years developing and publishing accounts of the theory which forms the subject of this work, this author can but be a little depressed upon reading something concerning gravity and published in the British press during the days when this chapter is written. The TIMES newspaper dated January 9, 2003 highlighted a feature as News under the heading: Einstein vindicated at Newtons expense. It would seem that at the annual meeting of the American Astronomical Association the results will be announced which show that Einstein was right. The speed of gravity has been measured at 1.06 times the speed of light, with a margin of error of plus or minus 0.21 and since the speed of light is the only possibility for the speed of gravity that falls within that range, so gravity complies with Einsteins prediction. Newton suffers defeat! His theory has failed because Newton deemed the force of gravity to be an instantaneous action-at-a-distance.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
58
On such a basis those involved in this research justify the following statement as quoted at the end of this newspaper article. We also hope that over the next decade Russia, Japan and the United States will succeed in extending the largest radio telescope arrays beyond the diameter of Earth by putting radio telescopes in orbit, and that this will confirm and greatly increase the accuracy of our result. One can but wonder why it is that scientists believe they can justify vast expenditure on future research enabling them to look deeper and deeper into outer space in search of inspiration by which to find solutions to the problems they confront here and now on body Earth. Accordingly, in this chapter the author will indulge in a critical survey of the state-of-the-art pertaining to gravity and ask the reader to weigh the case for and against the opinions expressed. The issue is not whether Einstein was right and Newton was wrong. The issue is simply that of understanding how fast gravitational action does assert itself and here, in this chapter, one can open the debate by reference to an assertion often made concerning quantum theory that electrostatic action is an instantaneous action-at-distance. Having, in chapter 2, introduced the notion that gravitation might well be rooted in electrostatic action, readers will then see why, in the light of the above newspaper article, this debate is needed. I will in this chapter discuss the theme generally but nevertheless show how the evidence of record deemed to support Einsteins gravitational theory is better explained by analysis based on the role played by the aether. The debate which follows is merely an introduction. Quotations The TIMES article was authored by Mark Henderson, Science Correspondent. It included as aside remarks the following statements:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
59
General theory of relativity: Einsteins most famous work, which accounts for the nature of the cosmos, was proved in 1919 by the British astronomer Sir Arthur Eddington, who showed that light from distant stars was bent by the Sun during a solar eclipse. Quantum theory: Einsteins other great work remains the best model that physicists have for understanding the forces that govern the interior of atoms, matters building blocks. But it does not incorporate gravity, and scientists are still seeking a grand theory of everything that unites relativity and quantum mechanics, knitting together every aspect of physics. So, there you are, Einsteins theory is proved and to move forward to achieve the ultimate target of all physicists one must seek a way of uniting relativity and quantum mechanics. Well, the aether theory on offer in this work does unite quantum mechanics with gravity but ignores Einsteins doctrinaire distortions of a four-dimensional space medium that physicists refer to as spacetime. Those scientists who follow the Einstein track can never, ever, reach their Holy Grail, that grand theory, without getting off that track and setting off on ground first trod by Sir Arthur Eddington and confronting with an open mind the task of deciphering the significance of Natures physical constants. The TIMES article tells us that the speed of gravity being equal to the speed of light has: never been anything more than an assumption and has always been impossible to test. .............. The experiment to measure gravitys speed was conceived by Ed Fomalont, of the National Radio astronomy Observatory in Charlottesville, Virginia, and Sergei Kopeikin,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
60
Professor of Theoretical Physics of the University of Missouri-Columbia. That experiment involved the use of radio telescopes to measure the effect of planet Jupiter in traversing across the path of the radio waves we receive from a very bright quasar named JO842-1835 and, owing to Jupiters gravitational field, thereby deflecting the path of those signals so that the quasars position appeared displaced. The Debate The reference to the speed of gravity is itself something that needs definition. If one considers the speed of light, at least one can interrupt the light beam at a distance from the point of measurement and so relate time and distance as needed to make the measurement. Gravity as a force exists given the existence of a source body and we really have no way of turning that force on and off. All we can do is to move the body itself and then the question arises as to whether the gravitational field shares that motion as if rigid (instantaneous action) or adjusts to the motion with a time delay. Keep in mind that there is a world of difference in physics as between the notional retardation of the action of a force such as gravity and the delay involved in gravitational potential energy redeploying in the field system which envelops the mass involved. The reader, in yielding to theoretical notions, has to decide whether to think in terms of force or in terms of energy, whereas Mother Nature does not think but simply acts by a process of adjusting the distribution of the energy in the system to optimise action leading to a minimum energy potential state. If the motion of a planet around the sun were truly a circular motion with the planets orbit having a constant radius, then the mutual gravitational energy potential between sun and planet would surely be constant as no energy is being transferred to cater for changes of kinetic energy by the two interacting bodies. If, however,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
61
there were to be a cyclical change of that radius, as applies for elliptical orbital motion of the planet, then there would be energy transfer to and from the planet drawing on, or replenishing, that gravitational potential resource. Now, in the context of this situation, what is meant by speed of gravity? Gravity does not move, so are we referring to the speed of energy that is traversing between planet and the gravitational field system? Then one must ask where that potential energy is seated as it can hardly be that it sits at the Suns centre and to apply the proposition that the energy we associate with gravity travels at the speed of light we need to know where it sets out from in its journey in order to reach the planet and resettle as it adds to the kinetic energy of that planet. As to the basic orbital component of circular motion, the radius is determined by a balance of centrifugal force and the force of gravity. The balance is an unchanging quantity and if gravity has a speed is this something that was only a factor when the solar system was first created or is it somehow something that affects the planets motion on an ongoing basis? The history of this subject tells us that, if we assume the circular component of orbital motion is not affected by the speed of gravity but the radial component of motion is so affected, then the radial period of the oscillations will be slightly retarded in relation to the orbital period. This explains why the orbit is subject to a slow progressive advance of its perihelion, something observed and particularly noticeable in the case of planet Mercury. Indeed, to get the theory to fit what is observed, namely the 43 seconds of arc anomalous advance of perihelion per century, the speed of that radial gravitational retardation effect has to be deemed to involve the speed of light. Gerber in 1898 (Zeitschrift f. Math. u, Phys., 43, 93), in explaining this 43 second of arc advance per century, assumed the gravitational action to have that speed of light limitation. Readers who regard Einstein as the genius who discovered why the planet Mercury has such an anomalous motion should take note
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
62
that Gerbers paper was published 18 years before that of Einstein. Gerbers formula for the anomaly was exactly that which later appeared in Einsteins paper. Gerbers paper was entitled: The Space and Time Propagation of Gravitation and, though not published until after Gerbers decease, a second paper repeating and expanding on Gerbers analysis appeared in January 1917 in Gerbers name in the same German scientific periodical: Ann. d. Phys. in which Einsteins 1916 paper had appeared. It was obvious that there was concern that Gerbers contribution had been ignored and there was then onward debate as Seelinger drew attention to a mathematical flaw in Gerbers analysis. Oppenheim responded, stressing that the issue of finite speed was still open, but Seelinger reasserted his position to ensure that his arguments were not eroded by Oppenheims views. (See: Ann. d. Phys., 52, 415; 1917: 53, 31 & 163; 1917 and 54, 38; 1917). That debate revealed the difficulties of picturing how gravitational action asserts a retarded effect, given that one can hardly expect the flow of energy to be along a pencil thin line drawn between Sun and planet and given that point above that one is not even sure where the energy that is fed to the planet is seated before it sets off on that journey. However, one can be certain that somehow the speed of light is a governing factor and that what was needed was the proper interpretation of that observed 43 arc-second value to gain insight into the physical action. Since physics involves matching assumptions with observations to verify those assumptions we then have a kind of chicken and egg argument. If the measurement is made before the assumption is recorded then that is not regarded as proving the theory, but if the assumption is made and duly found to be consistent with later measurement that is said to prove the theory. Such is the illogical arena in which the contests between theoreticians are staged. One must, it seems, predict what is later verified by experiment in order to be applauded by acceptance of ones theory. To explain by theory what is already known is not a respectable pursuit.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
63
In the case of the anomalous perihelion motion of Mercury the measurement antedated the theory, but in the case of gravitational bending of light Einsteins theory predated the measurement by the eclipse expedition in which Eddington was involved. Thus one may wonder how one can ever explain why gravitation deflects a ray of light, except by Einsteins argument, given Eddingtons assertion that this latter phenomenon is proof of Einsteins theory. Well, light-energy quanta, photons, supposedly travel at the speed of light and energy E has mass E/c2, in accordance with classical electron theory, so those light-quanta, in moving past an astronomical body, are subject to the pull of gravity. Since, as light from a distant star, they do not travel around that body in a circular orbit, their distance from the body is changing constantly and so energy transfer should be occurring. Now here there is a real problem. How can those photons change their energy, energy surely gained by them as they approach the deflecting body and lost later on receding from it? Does the light frequency change during passage? Do they travel faster in their close transit past that body? If so then their deflection would be away from the body rather that towards it. Alternatively, maybe we should be thinking in terms of electromagnetic wave theory, rather than photon theory. Maybe we should be wondering how the gravitational action of that body affects the refractive index of the aether and thereby the speed of light through that aether which becomes a function of that refractive index. That TIMES article, in telling us about the speed of gravity does not provide any answers. I believe that photons, the product of quantum theory, do not in fact travel at the speed of light. Photons are events at localities in the aether where energy shed by matter is absorbed into the aether or energy shed by aether is absorbed by matter. A photon is deemed to travel between two such localities but in reality all that travels is an electromagnetic signal which is a mere ripple of energy already present in the aether, a ripple characterised by
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
64
direction and frequency. Such hypothesis is not tested by the quasar radio wave deflection observations. However, if you think of photons as energy quanta travelling at the speed of light as part of a ray in close transit past the Sun, then, since energy has mass, but yet photons seem to have no mass, you confront a conflicting situation, one made all the worse by the fact that, owing to the gravity, a mass quantum, as just indicated, should go faster in its transit past the Sun and that means that, as a part of a ray of light, that ray will surely be deflected away from the Sun rather than towards it, contrary to what is found by observation. Do be assured, therefore, that a ray of light cannot be the flow of a train of photons and so seek instead to understand how gravity affects the refractive index of the medium that pervades all space. To base ones arguments on vague terminology, the expression speed of gravity, is only a way of raising more unanswerable questions rather than explaining unanswered questions! The Way Forward To reach a position on common ground with that of physicists familiar with Einsteins theory I will proceed by making an assumption and I will show how this leads directly to the formulation of Einsteins law of gravitation. This should be seen as verification of that assumption. Then I will show by separate aether-based theory that the formulation governing light ray deflection arises from the effect of gravity upon the refractive index of the aether. The inference is that, whereas Einsteins theory explains the perihelion anomaly and light ray deflection by the same modification of the Newtons law of gravitation, the physics of gravitation requires two separate theoretical foundations for these two phenomena, because there is no analogy between planetary mass and the electromagnetic wave. I note, however, that before leaving this chapter I will discuss the fascinating topic of whether gravity is an electrodynamic
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
65
phenomenon, as assumed so far by those who seek a unified field theory, or an electrostatic phenomenon as implied earlier in this work. The assumption is that the gravitational potential energy GMm/R that arises between two bodies of rest-mass M and m, respectively, having their mass centres spaced at a distance R is enhanced by the factor: (v/c)2 ............................................... (5.1) if there is relative motion at velocity v between the two bodies, c being the speed of light. For Sun and planet v will, in the main, comprise a component of motion tangential to the orbit of the planet as supplemented by a radial lesser component of motion in that orbit. Such motion is, by standard physical principles rooted in Newtonian mechanics, subject to conservation of angular momentum and v being very small in relation to c. One can therefore, by close approximation, write h as vR, assuming the mass m to be constant. However, though I know that this latter assumption is made in developing Einsteins General Theory as applied to gravitation, I appeal to the relativistically-minded reader familiar with Einsteins Special Theory and say that one could designate m as given by: m = mo [1 - (v/c)2]- .................................. (5.2) I then argue that retardation of the force of gravity GMm/R2 at the speed c will be equivalent to its value having to be enhanced by a factor sufficient to account for the work done by m in moving a distance fT2/2 against such a force, f being the acceleration v2/R and T being R/c, the time taken to traverse distance R at speed c. That factor then becomes: [1 + (v/c)2/2] ......................................... (5.3) Taken collectively, the effect of (5.2) and (5.3) is, to a close approximation, equivalent to requiring the gravitational potential to increase by the factor (5.1) as a result of that planetary motion at velocity v, which then means that our assumption has been derived
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
66
by analysis based on standard physical logic founded on classical electron theory that recognizes increase of mass with speed . As an aside remark I now stress here that, in quoting the relativistic mass increase formula, I am in no way accepting Einsteins doctrines. My reason is that that formula, as already noted in chapter 1, in no way requires use of Einsteins theory, as I well know from textbook data of my student years. Now, provided our expression for the gravitational potential is based on the rest-mass mo of the planet, we derive Einsteins law of gravitation on the presumption that h, meaning vR, is constant by writing it as: (GMmo /R)[1 + (v/c)2] .............................. (5.4) Replacing v by h/R, differentiate with respect to R to obtain, after reintroducing v by eliminating h as vR, the result that the gravitational force acting on the planet is: (GMmo /R2)[1 + 3(v/c)2] .......................... (5.5) Note here that gravitational potential is a negative quantity, which explains why we avoided introducing a minus sign in deriving this force. Note also that energy is shed by the gravitational potential as R increases, which is consistent with the force being one of mutual attraction. I now point out the fact that, by writing u as 1/R, and introducing polar coordinates based on an angle , the force can be equated to the dynamic pull of the planet in orbit to lead to an equation for that orbital motion: d2u/d2 + u = (GM)[1/h2 + 3(u/c)2] .................... (5.6) The corresponding Newtonian equation for planetary motion does not include that quantity 3(u/c)2. Equation (5.6) is the law of gravitation derived from the General Theory of Relativity. That additional term which distinguishes it from Newtons law corresponds to the progressive advance of the perihelion of the elliptical orbit of the planet.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
67
It takes about 20 textbook pages of mathematical analysis that is beyond the comprehension of most students to progress to the above equation through the jungle of relativistic dogma. Here I refer to a book entitled Modern Physics by H. A. Wilson that I purchased in 1946 when I was a university student. This is also the student textbook just mentioned above by reference to electron theory. Starting from the doctrine of equivalence, one encounters geodesics and world lines as one enters the realm of curvilinear co-ordinates. Then one comes to the curved Minkowski world and encounters tensors, where one is introduced to a covariant form of tensor called the fundamental tensor, of which there are three. Next come the Christoffel symbols, one of which has particular importance, the three-index symbol. After that the next hurdle is covariant differentiation which, once mastered, brings one to a second covariant derivative, developed in two forms, the difference of which has a special name: the Riemann tensor. This brings us in sight of Einsteins Law of Gravitation, but only after we have digressed to calculate the values of a whole series of three index symbols that apply to space surrounding a single heavy particle. To conclude the exercise we then have to introduce and formulate the path of an infinitesimal particle to represent the planet that is to move in orbit around that heavy mass and finally, Lo and Behold, we arrive, after another page and a half, at that equation (5.6) above. I cannot now resist the temptation of quoting a few words from the front page of a Newsletter that I have just received from the U.K. Institute of Physics South Central Branch (January, 2003). The Chairman, Howard Watson, tells us about his preparations to give a public talk on the subject of Physics Nobel Prize Winners and his perception that Einstein is usually about the only Nobel Laureate whose name is recognised by the so-called man-in-the-street. He goes on to say:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
68
The deliberations of the committees in Stockholm are not released for 50 years after the awards. They show, for example, that Einstein was vetoed many times before he finally received the award in 1921. One committee member resolved: Einstein must never receive a Nobel Prize even if the entire world demands it. Part of the problem was that the physicists there could not get their head around the new relativity physics, regarding it as something almost evil and reflecting the undesirable changes that were taking place in the world generally at the time. So, with the slogan in mind: Einstein is right; Newton is wrong, but with that 20 pages of relativity physics still there to mystify the student, are we to accept that the paths of planets are determined and starlight is deflected thanks to Einsteins relativistic doctrines or are we to come to terms with the simple fact that a little commonsense physics that the student can understand will suffice for our onward perception of the universe and its Creation? That equation (5.6) does hold valid, but surely it must be derived in a different way, as by starting from that formulation of (5.4) and understanding its physical basis. The Bending of Light by the Sun Given Newtons law of gravitation as a starting point, equation (5.6) without that term 3(u/c)2, the solution for u is: u = (GM/h2)(1 + e cos) ........................... (5.7) where e, being less than 1, signifies the eccentricity of an ellipse. Since the additional term added by the Einstein formulation is very small it may then be shown, by a process of successive approximation based on the approximate solution of equation (5.7), that the result corresponds to a slow rotation of the major axis of the ellipse. We shall not work through that analysis here but one will find
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
69
that the result, as applied to planet Mercury, gives the answer that the major axis of its orbit turns at the rate of 43 seconds of arc every 100 years. Note that we are not involved in four-dimensional space once equation (5.6) is formulated. The answer applies to motion in space of three dimensions. It is, indeed, a trick of relativity to take one into a notional space of four dimensions to justify the distortion of Newtons equation before converting the result back into the threedimensional world of reality. It is surely so much better to stay in the world of reality and, by understanding the physics which accounts for the gravitational potential expression of (5.4), progress without reliance on the General Theory of Relativity. Now, so far as the effect of gravitational potential on a ray of light is concerned, Einsteins theory proceeds from the law of gravitation (5.6) and regards h as infinite, which is quite an assumption, one which I prefer to avoid. However, for the record, this leaves us with the equation: d2u/d2 + u = (GM)[3(u/c)2] ........................ (5.8) compared with the corresponding expression based on Newtons law of gravity: d2u/d2 + u = 0 .................................... (5.9) The latter has a solution: u = (1/p)cos ................................... (5.10) which is the equation of a straight line, p being the perpendicular from the origin. This solution represents a first approximation that we can now substitute in (5.8) to obtain the equation: d2u/d2 + u = (3GM/p2c2)[1 + cos2]/2 ........... (5.11) a solution of which is: u = (1/p)cos + (3GM/p2c2)[1 - (1/3) cos2]/2 ......... (5.12) where the angle is measured from the point where u is a maximum, the point of closest transit.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
70
The value of u has to be zero at a far distance and so, putting u as 0 in equation (5.12), with as /2+ or as -/2-, being small, we obtain: 0 = (1/p)(-) + (3GM/p2c2)[1 + 1/3]/2 ................ (5.13) which gives: = (2GM /pc2) ................................. (5.14) This parameter is the amount of deviation of a ray of light in transit from a far distance to the point of closest approach to the mass M. Therefore, since a similar further deviation occurs as the light ray continues on its way, the total deviation is 4GM/pc2. With the mass of the Sun as 2x1033 gm, G as 6.67x10-8 dynecm2 per gm squared, p as 7x1010 cm, the Suns radius, and c as 3x1010 cm per second, the total deflection is therefore indicated by the theory as being 8.47 micro-radians or 1.75 seconds of arc. Since this is consistent with the observation of the deflection of light from stars that grazes past the Sun during a total eclipse of the sun, it has been taken as verification of Einsteins theory. The reader will, however, have noticed that the mass mo has somehow dropped out of the equation, but, though its value does not affect the numerical result just obtained, its presence is essential to the formulation of the theory. Clearly, Einsteins theory requires light, as a stream of photons, to be a ballistic phenomenon or, alternatively, requires energy that gravitates to be transported by the electromagnetic light wave. But here I stress that one must keep in mind that the ray of light cannot be deflected in the manner observed unless its components closer to the Sun travel more slowly than its components further removed from the Sun so we have to believe that the speed of light in vacuo need not be constant, given the presence of a nearby body. Furthermore, I again make the point that the energy or mass quanta that are conveyed by the light ray must somehow be slowed down, retarded, as they approach that body, whereas gravitation is supposed to attract and so accelerate such quanta
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
71
because the gravitational potential is shedding energy and augmenting their kinetic energy. This poses a dilemma, but relativists are not daunted by this, because it is assumed that such problems can be answered by looking into the fabric of four-dimensional space and, accepting that a constant speed in four-space means a variable speed in three-space, so that the resulting formulations override the normal physics encountered in the three-dimensional world of reality. We reach then a position where the formula for derived above is seemingly valid but its derivation is questionable, whereas the law of gravitation according to equation (5.6) holds valid, because it does account for the anomalous advance of planet Mercurys perihelion. To add further confusion one can refer to authoritative works aimed at helping the student to better understand Einsteins theory. Here I will quote two contrasting statements, one by Einstein himself in his final and fifteenth edition of his book Relativity (Crown Publishers Inc, New York), where, in his Appendix III concerning experimental confirmation of his theory, he arrives at the 1.7/ arcsecond value for light deflection by the Sun at a distance of solar radii from its centre: It may be added that, according to the theory, half of this deflection is produced by the Newtonian field of attraction of the sun and the other half by the geometrical modification (curvature) of space caused by the Sun. The other statement is quoted from a book by V. Fock (1964) entitled: The Theory of Space Time and Gravitation, (2nd. Ed., Pergamon Press, London), where, on p. 222, one reads: The fictitious medium of refractive index n is optically more dense in the vicinity of the Sun than it is far away from it. Therefore, light waves will bend around the sun.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
72
This is said in relation to a formula for refractive index: n = 1 + 2GM/Rc2 ................................ (5.15) where M is the mass of the Sun, and R here is distance from the centre of the Sun. So, you see, Fock does not agree with Einstein on this aspect of Einsteins own theory. Einstein thinks that the deflection of light by the Sun is half due to the pull of gravity acting on mass-energy of the light itself and half due to refraction by the space medium, whereas Fock finds that all of the deflection arises from that refraction. Also, the space medium has become fictitious rather than curved. I ask the reader what he or she, as a student, would learn from such enlightenment and note that the caption on the front cover of that book by Einstein (printed in 1961) reads: A CLEAR EXPLANATION OF THE FAMOUS THEORY THAT BROUGHT ABOUT THE ATOMIC AGE. With Only a High School Education The Reader Can Understand Albert Einsteins Explanation of His Epoch-Making Theory. I submit, therefore, that since equation (5.15) gives the appropriate measure of the light deflection observed by starlight grazing past the Sun, we should seek to derive it without thinking it represents the action of gravity on mass moving at the speed of light, but rather as the action of gravity on the aether itself. The aether should not be regarded as a fictitious medium but rather as a real medium, the properties of which are rather subtle and somewhat elusive until we probe to discover the answers we seek. Introducing the E and G Frames of the Aether The aether itself must be the seat of something in motion, something having a mass density and an energy density and so a characteristic that provides the relationship between energy and mass, which accounts for its light-speed determining property.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
73
The aether must have a rhythmic motion, a frequency, by which it acts as a kind of clock which determines what we call time. With this cursory introduction I will now present a formula for its kinetic energy density that appears on p. 82 of my book Physics without Einstein, published in 1969: (2)(c/2)2/2 ..................................... (5.16) This formula represents the kinetic energy density of the aether, on the assumption that it has two systems, each of mass-density , moving at speed c/2, but having a relative velocity c. Because that motion is an orbital motion that is strictly harmonious, having a fixed frequency, does not depend upon speed and so is not subject to relativistic mass increase owing to the way in which energy is deployed in such a system. It is therefore correct to use the Newtonian expression for kinetic energy even though the speeds involved are c/2. The reader may have already guessed that one of those systems is provided by the gravitons introduced in chapter 2, whereas the other system is that of mass for which those gravitons provide gravitational interaction. So, even with no matter present, the aether intrinsically does have a state regulated by gravitation. Now, since cannot exhibit the inertia of translational motion owing to the preservation of equilibrium within the aether, its selfgravitational interactions are merged with the electrostatic interactions of its electric charge properties and so the gravitational feature only reveals itself when matter is present. Suppose that a material object of mass M exists and interacts gravitationally with the mass-density . Then at a distance R from M, one can expect the gravitational potential energy density to be GM/R, which we denote as . This will deplete the kinetic energy density of the aether, because gravitational potential is a negative quantity and its increase in magnitude sheds energy. So we expect the expression in (5.16) to be reduced, but with remaining constant. Therefore c must itself be reduced in proportion to . One then finds that: = c(c)/2 .................................... (5.17)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
74
This means that the aether itself has a refractive index n, a quantity we formulate as: n = c/(c - c) ................................... (5.18) which can be written as: n = 1 + 2/c2 ................................... (5.19) or: n = 1 + 2GM/Rc2 ............................ (5.20) which is the above formula (5.15) said by Fock to be a result derived from Einsteins General Theory of Relativity. However, we have derived it from aether theory. So, you see, the slowing down of light in its close passage past the Sun and its deviation as a result of the Suns mass and also, for radio waves, that deflection by the planet Jupiter in the recent observations reported at the start of this chapter, are aether-based phenomena. It is the energy deployment that governs what is observed and, just to show that the aether interpretation can add further insight into this energy deployment process, we can go one step further by asking and answering the question: If energy is shed by that mass M acting on at a point distant R from the centre of that mass M, where does that energy go? All you have done is to tell us that the kinetic energy density of the aether has been depleted, but surely energy cannot just vanish. Well, the answer is that it does not vanish. It merely transfers into another kind of motion and is still held at that point. It has been shed by its ordered motion state in those rhythmic orbital cycles and has become kinetic energy associated with what we can regard as thermal vibrations, as if the aether lattice system that provides the mass density has a temperature T. Owing to the fixed rhythm of time the motion involved has only two degrees of freedom, one radial to that orbital motion and one lateral to the plane of that motion. Thus we may well ask if the space here in cosmic regions close to Earth exhibits a temperature.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
75
If so, what would that temperature tell us about ? The message would be that consists of units of mass mo for which kT is equal to GMmo /R, where the gravitational potential here is that of the combined effect of the sun and body Earth, k being Boltzmanns constant. Before we embark on the detailed analysis of the aether we already know therefore that the 2.7 K cosmic background temperature of local space can indicate the mass value of that lattice particle, the quon, depicted earlier in Fig. 3.1. Furthermore, once we have derived that mass value independently by theoretical analysis, then we can deduce the very important fact that gravitation has a limited range of action, because distant stars do not contribute much to the gravitational potential matching that mass value. An astute reader will have noticed that in deriving equation (5.3) I assumed that the energy transit time T was R/c, which is tantamount to saying that the gravitational action travels the distance between the two interacting masses at the speed of light. Here there is an interesting analogy evident from analysis of the deployment of electrostatic interaction energy in the case of two interacting charges. It may be proved (H. Aspden, The Spatial Energy Distribution for the Coulomb Interaction, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 25, 456; 1979) that if the distance between those charges is R, there is no net interaction energy within a sphere of space centred on either charge and of radius equal to R [See Appendix I]. It may also be shown that the interaction field energy in a spherical shell of radius greater than R does not change as R changes. This means that the field energy associated with that interaction, if it has to be deployed by transfer to or from the kinetic energy of either charge, must traverse exactly that distance R. In other words, if this analogy applies equally to the gravitational interaction, as seems to be the case, then the designation of that transit time T as R/c is fully justified if the energy involved travels at the speed of light. I further point out that, because we are considering an aether that has an underlying energy density, energy can be deployed at what may seem to be the speed of light but without actually moving
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
76
at the speed of light, just as a tidal wave can travel across the ocean without the water it conveys actually moving at the speed of that wave. As to the so-called E and G frames mentioned in the heading of this section, the G frame is that defined by the graviton system, whereas the E frame is that defined by the system of aether lattice particles. The onward discussion and analysis pertaining to these aether frames in the next chapter takes us into the world of quantum physics and so we now enter the more serious phase of this quest to probe the secrets of Creation. A final word on the subject of gravitation is, however, needed before concluding this chapter. Gravity: An Electrostatic or Electrodynamic Phenomenon? When we come to discuss the Neumann potential in chapter 9 it will be seen why the answer to this question favours electrostatic action. As just shown, since electrostatic action and gravitational action, both involving direct inverse-square of distance forces, this puts the emphasis on electrostatic action as the seat of gravitation. One finds from analysis based on the electrodynamic interaction that the distribution of interaction energy in the field does not conform with that we relied on above to derive the factor (5.3). One then confronts the need for special assumptions in seeking to accommodate to the retardation time factors involved. Also, as we shall see in deriving the Neumann potential from Coulombs Law in chapter 9, I can no longer hold to a position I took in my earlier accounts of the theory of gravitation. This was that the gravitons, in moving with the G-frame at a speed c relative to that of the E-frame, were, in effect, interacting current elements (V/c) moving mutually parallel at the same speed c relative to the electromagnetic frame of reference. To apply the Neumann potential to their mutual interaction can then be argued as giving an attractive force of (V)2 at unit distance, which admittedly implied this was a gravitational action, but this argument is now thwarted by the proof in chapter 9 that the basis of the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
77
Neumann potential is the relative velocity of the interacting charges and this is zero. This means that to sustain the argument that gravitation is an electrodynamic phenomenon, one loses the theoretical foundation for the Neumann potential or one has to wander into unacceptable territory by saying that the gravitons, in their motion with the G-frame, exist themselves as leptons by ongoing charge pair creation and annihilation at an enormously fast rate, far greater than that of the rhythmic G-frame motion at the Compton electron. These factors militate against gravity being an electromagnetic phenomenon and favour the electrostatic interpretation. Fortunately the quantitative aspects of the theory affecting the determination of G remain the same as that of the authors earlier theory. Here, then, is the lesson that in developing theoretical accounts of physical phenomena one must persist in probing deeper to understand more and more and must be ready to change direction if Mother Nature guides one along a different path. I therefore now hold firm to the position I took in chapter 2; gravitation is an electrostatic phenomenon or rather a negative electrostatic phenomenon in the sense that holes in the G-frame continuum charge of density mutually attract according to the inverse-square law. Those holes are filled by pairs of oppositely charged gravitons, the motion of which provides the dynamic balance for matter sharing the motion of the E-frame. [End of Chapter Footnote] Concerning that TIMES article mentioned in the opening section of this chapter, it is noted that, in the News and Analysis section of the February, 2003 issue of Physics World, (page 7), the members monthly journal of the Institute of Physics in U.K., under the title: Have we measured the speed of gravity?, it was reported that the claim by Kopeikin and Formalont had been challenged. Clifford Will of Washington University is said to have calculated that any effects of the speed of gravity cancel out in the experiment
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
78
performed. However, this merely leaves the issue open. All I say is that the speed of gravity, meaning energy in transit owing to change of relative position of Sun and planet does travel at speed c, but, as to the effect Jupiter has on the deflection of the signals we receive from a quasar, this concerns energy deployment as between Jupiter and the aether through which those signals travel and, whatever the answer, I cannot see how Einsteins theory could thereby be proved.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
79
CHAPTER 6
The Quantum Underworld

Introduction The underworld of space, that invisible medium which pervades what we call the vacuum, but which we are here bold enough to refer to by its proper name, the aether, is the seat of quantum activity, the physical forum in which energy is packaged into quanta which have interplay with matter at the atomic level. The best known energy quantum in physics is that denoted ho, where h is Plancks constant of action and o is the Compton electron frequency. Tables of physical data usually list the measured value of the Compton electron wavelength as 2.42631058(22)x10-10 cm, along with the speed of light 2.99792458x1010 cm/sec, from which one calculates that o is 1.2356x1020 per second. That energy quantum ho is equal to the rest-mass energy mec2 of the electron and so the aether is the stage on which the electron and its partner the positron are created, perform and then may die by mutual annihilation. The aether is a world seething with energy, but energy that is, in the main, held in a state of equilibrium, with a very small proportion of it involved in fluctuations as it searches for a stable home in the vastness of space. Now, much of this chapter will merely repeat what I have disclosed in chapters 6 and 7 of my book Physics Unified published in 1980, where I began by explaining that in 1932 Dirac delivered his Nobel prize lecture under the title: The Theory of Electrons and Positrons in which he said:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
80
It is found that an electron which seems to us to be moving slowly, must actually have a very high frequency oscillatory motion of small amplitude superimposed on the regular motion which appears to us. As a result of this oscillatory motion, the velocity of the electron at any time equals the velocity of light. This is a prediction which cannot be directly verified by experiment, since the frequency is so high and the amplitude so small. I then noted in that work, on p.87, that: Similar proposals had been made earlier by both Einstein and Schroedinger. Einstein imagined the electron as belonging to a Galilean reference frame oscillating at a frequency determined from the electron rest mass energy and the Planck relationship, and being everywhere synchronous. Now, for my part, I cannot accept that electrons can share such a concerted rhythmic motion unless there is something that makes it energetically desirable for them to keep in step, as it were. That something has to be electrical in character but electrically neutral overall and it must be omnipresent, all-pervading and uniform through space. It is, of course, the presence in the aether of that lattice system of charges referred to in chapter 3 as quons and our task now is to explore the form of that aether and discuss the part it plays in governing wave mechanical processes. Our Aether Remembering what was said about Earnshaws theorem in chapter 1, our aether must comprise a uniform continuum of electric charge density which is populated by a uniform cubic-structured array of aether lattice particles of unitary charge, here denoted q, and of charge polarity opposite to that of the continuum.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
81
We can set up an electric field in a vacuum, so how might the presence of such a field of uniform strength V affect the aether? It will displace those charges q through a distance D relative to the continuum charge . Each charge will move through that distance D as from a point on one side of a planar slice of the continuum to a point on the other side of this planar slice. Since the relative spacing between those charges q will be unchanged by this collective displacement there will be no change in the Coulomb force on any particle due to the action of its neighbours. They move in register with one another locally and remote actions balance anyway owing to the large scale distortions of the lattice structure governed by the charge producing V and boundary conditions. By Gauss theorem a planar slice of charge density and thickness D has a total normal electric field density of 4D of which half is directed one way and the other half the opposite way. Hence 4D is the change in field density experienced by a lattice particle in going from O to P owing to the action of the field V. The restoring force on q is therefore: 4qD ........................................... (6.1) This is equal to Vq. The energy stored by this displacement per charge q is: (4q)D2/2 ...................................... (6.2) because the restoring force rate is linear with displacement. The energy density represented by (6.2) is then found by multiplying by /q since the space medium is electrically neutral and there are just as many particles of charge q in unit volume as are needed to balance . Thus the energy density is given by: 42D2/2 ........................................ (6.3) But, since Vq equals (6.1), we know that D is V/4. Putting this in (6.2) gives the energy density: V2/8 ............................................ (6.4)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
82
This is the formula for energy stored by the electric field of intensity V. Its derivation in this way means that the aether as the medium subjected to the action of a system of charge is able to deploy energy from the field of that charge and store that energy by the displacement of those charges q, the quons which form the structured lattice system set in that background continuum of charge density . Here then is the basis for the displacement currents we associate with Maxwells theory. As to the magnetic field properties of the aether, which Maxwell attributes as the accompaniment of the field energy of propagating electromagnetic waves, one should really think instead in terms of the kinetic energy associated with oscillations of the quon lattice system represented by those waves. Now consider the aether with no externally applied electric field presence and ask yourself whether our basic aether devoid of matter has an energy density. Consider first the energy we associate with electrostatic interaction between and the lattice charges q and also that between the q charges themselves and that of the self-interaction of the continuum charge . Without engaging in this analytical exercise, which is deferred for the moment, it can be reasoned that each q charge sits in its own cubic cell of charge density and that it will be attracted electrostatically towards the centre of that cell. Each such cell together with its q charge forms an electrically neutral unit and so there should be very little electrostatic energy owing to mutual interaction between such cells. What this means is that the net electrostatic energy density of the aether would be negative if such a condition prevailed. Since it does not seem feasible for the space medium itself to have a state of negative energy density, especially as that state is one where each of those charges q sits rigidly at the centre of each space cell, meaning no motion and no time rhythm, we must, if we are to make any sense of involving the aether in this account of physics, accept that Mother Nature will not allow a negative interaction energy condition to prevail. The fact that we can tolerate negative energy
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
83
conditions, as exemplified by the force of gravity and electrodynamic potential where matter is involved, does not affect this argument because these actions are set in what must be a slightly positive energy density background of the aether itself. The positive energy density condition must prevail overall. A crucial example of this emerges from our later derivation of that factor N as the odd integer 1843 as we come to formulate the theoretical value of the fine structure constant. What all this means is that those aether lattice charges q are all displaced in unison from the centres of those cubic cells of continuum charge, displaced just enough to assure a positive, rather than a negative overall interaction energy density state. The restoring force involved in this can be set in balance with the centrifugal forces of the q charges, given that they each have mass mo. This gives us the link between frequency, the timing of their orbital motion around those centres and the radius r of those orbits. We are then well on the way to establishing the role the aether plays in quantum theory. The aether has become a charge system sustaining the cyclical motion of the system of the aether charges q in circular orbits with the continuum charge and its associated graviton population moving in dynamic balance also in circular orbits. Since the mass density of both the graviton system and the aether lattice charge system is the same, for space devoid of matter, we know that both systems describe circular orbits of the same radius, the radius being designated by the symbol r. In my book Physics Unified at page 91, and also in what follows below, I prove this equality of mass density on the basis that the combined kinetic energy of these two systems in their orbital motion is a maximum, consistent with electrostatic interaction energy being a minimum. The displacement distance between the q lattice system, which we define as the E-frame, and the system of the continuum charge ,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
84
which we define as the G-frame, is 2r and, from the restoring force expression (6.1), this allows us to write: 4q(2r) = mo2r ................................ (6.5) by equating that force to the centrifugal force. Here is the angular velocity 2o. So we have two frames moving as if they are diametrically opposed to each other in circular orbit of radius r and, by accepting that matter, if present, such as an electron, shares the motion of the Eframe, we can see that all matter has an intrinsic state of jitter at that frequency o. In his 1929 book The Nature of the Physical World, Eddington wrote on p. 220: A particle may have position or it may have velocity but it cannot in any exact sense have both. This was his way of saying that, when probing in the physical underworld to locate an electron, say, we cannot pinpoint its exact position because it has a high frequency jitter, but here Eddington was referring to the Heisenberg Principle of Uncertainty of quantum mechanics. The experimental support for quantum theory indicated that, for the electron, the product of uncertainty of momentum and uncertainty of position is h/2, h being Plancks constant. So an electron moving in those circular orbits with the E-frame will have an uncertainty of position by as much as 2r and an uncertainty of momentum of 2mer, the product of which should be h/2. This gives us insight into how the aether determines Plancks constant. If we now ask how the aether determines a characteristic speed c it is fairly evident that a likely candidate is the relative velocity between the E-frame and the G-frame, meaning the quantity (2r) and so we derive the relationship: r = h/4mec ....................................... (6.6)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
85
This is an important step which gives physical foundation for Diracs surmise concerning the oscillatory jitter motion of the electron, but we now have the quantum underworld of the aether in our sights and the stage is set for detailed analysis of its electrical form. The Aether: Solid or Fluid? Historically at the time when the aether was accepted without question, physicists nevertheless pondered on whether it had a kind of solid form or fluid form. Although we cannot sense any resistance to motion through the aether, its property in determining the speed of light was seen in the context of an analogy with the way in which the speed of light through glass or water is a function of the physical structure of those media. There was a property of the electromagnetic wave that required a feature characteristic of propagation through a crystalline solid and yet our freedom of motion through the aether implied it could only be a fluid, a fluid of extremely low mass density. Now, instead of trying to force the aether into the mould which we see applies to our material world, we should piece together the clues and accept the aether for what it is. It is a sea of energy with nowhere to go because that energy fills all space, almost all of it having found equilibrium and settled in a state of order, but, thankfully, as mankind would not otherwise exist, there being the ripples and fluctuations occasioned by creation and decay of certain electrical charge components of that aether which keep the aether alive with activity. It is logical in physical terms for the aether to develop its own crystalline form because that is an optimum energy condition and, as already indicated, it must avoid a negative energy density state and so sustain a state of motion confined to that Heisenberg jitter activity. It must therefore exhibit in some measure the properties we associate with a solid. This does not preclude motion of material objects
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
86
present in the aether because those objects may nucleate their own crystalline aether territory, meaning that the aether picture before us is one of a solid moving through a solid. Is that really possible? The answer is surely Yes because we are not here suggesting that energy can move through energy. The energy density of the aether devoid of matter is uniform and we can have two regions of a liquid medium of uniform mass density incorporating a crystal formation, with those crystal formations having relative motion. A laboratory analogy, were we to build it, would be a liquid crystal substance in which the liquid is crystallized by two extraneous electric fields (signifying the presence of matter) moving towards one another. It is not the liquid which moves but rather the factors which determine whether or not it is optimum in energy terms for it to adopt the crystal form. At the collision boundaries the energy would redeploy into other form but its density would remain constant. There is nothing to be gained by speculating as to the details of such a process. All we need concern ourselves with is the evidence that emerges from the theory. Undoubtedly, at collision boundaries the ubiquitous muons have a way of absorbing energy resulting from mutual annihilation of a corresponding amount of continuum charge and the quons involved in the collision, whereas the ubiquitous muons at the separation boundaries can create new quons and add continuum charge as needed. That assumes that the continuum charge shares any translational motion of the quon lattice. If that assumption does not hold and the continuum charge is truly at rest in an absolute frame of reference, then the muons themselves have to share in the charge balance at those boundaries. The only consideration of relevance here is the fact that energy density of the aether medium remains uniform, whereas the aether lattice inertia is balanced by the inertia of the muons that provide a balance by migrating slowly in the opposite direction. We will come back to this latter topic of aether lattice particle motion in chapter 9 in the context of the Michelson-Morley
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
87
experiment and merely mention here that a reader interested in the formulating the speed of light in terms of aether lattice structure could refer to pp. 102-104 of the authors book Physics without Einstein, published in 1969. Electron theory as applied to solids gives a formulation of the refractive index of a substance in terms of its atomic structure, the number of atoms per unit volume and the natural oscillation frequencies involved. A version of the formula is: (c/v)2 = 1 + .................................... (6.7) where is an expression involving parameters specific to that substance. Here v is the speed of light through the solid, which is of course smaller than c. However, if we ignore the presence of that solid material substance by writing as zero, then that unity term in equation (6.7) can be said to be the corresponding formulation of aether parameters. There is no escape from the fact that the aether must have structure, which is why our insight into the exception to Earnshaws theorem, as discussed in chapter 1, meaning the need for that uniform background charge continuum is so important. Plancks Law Whereas, in deriving (6.4), we were concerned with the effects of the field V set up by an intruding presence of charge disturbing the aether, we now need to consider the dynamics and energy properties of the undisturbed aether. The charges q move in synchronism circular orbits of radius r governed by a balance of centrifugal force and the restoring force attributable to their displacement relative to the continuum charge of density . This gives: 4qx = mo2r ................................. (6.8) from (6.1). Here x is the separation distance between the continuum and the q charge, mo is the mass of the quon and is the angular frequency of the aethers rhythmic activity. Thus the expression (x-r) is the orbital radius of the cyclic motion of the graviton and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
88
continuum system. The continuum and the gravitons are best regarded as an integral system statistically smeared into a uniform whole as far as interaction with the q system is concerned. Since the gravitons are deemed to be relatively massive, they need only have a sparse population compared with the lattice particles, the quons. Let mg denote the mass of the continuum-graviton system per lattice particle. Then: mo2r = mg 2(x-r) ............................. (6.9) The kinetic energy density of these E and G frame constituents of the aether is proportional to: mor2 + mg (x-r)2 .............................. (6.10) because the aether frequency is constant. We may then expect the electrical potential energy of such a system to have minimized, so determining x, and the rest mass energy to have been deployed between mo and mg to maximize (6.10), inasmuch as kinetic energy is drawn from a source of potential energy and, with energy conservation, minimization of the latter means maximization of the former. Write M as mo+ mg to obtain from (6.9): x - r = (mo/M)x and r = (mg/M)x ..................... (6.11) Put these in (6.10) to obtain: mo(1 - mo/M)x2 .................................. (6.12) Since M and x are constant, we may now differentiate this energy expression with respect to mo to find its maximum value by equating the differential to zero. This gives: 1 - 2mo/M = 0 ................................. (6.13) from which we deduce that mo and mg are equal and, from (6.11) that x equals 2r. The E frame and the G frame describe orbits of equal radius r. As their relative velocity is c, they move at speed c/2 in orbit. As the aether frequency is, by assumption, deemed to be the Compton electron frequency at which quantum theory tells us that electrons and positrons are created, namely mec2/h, the value of is given by:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
89
= 2mec2/h ................................. (6.14) The radius r is then known, because r is c/2. Thus, again, as for equation (6.6) we find that: r = h/4mec ..................................... (6.15) What has been said above about the electron in the context of Heisenbergs Principle of Uncertainty does imply that the electron has an intrinsic motion when at rest in the E frame. Its own angular momentum is mecr/2 but there is a connected angular momentum due to the dynamic balance afforded by the G frame. Thus the total angular momentum intrinsic to the electron and due to the underlying jitter motion of the aether is mecr, which, from (6.15), if h/4. This is the well known quantity associated with so-called electron spin. Curiously, this is not the quantum of angular momentum that is paramount in governing the orbital motion of an electron in an atom, Bohrs quantum unit, which is double the spin quantum. To understand this we need to address the problem of the photon, as it is this, rather than the electron, which is the regulator of action between aether and matter. The photon is not an elemental form of matter intruding into the aether. It is a feature of the aether itself which arises from a disturbance, albeit by the intrusion of an electrical charge, typically that of the electron, and we need next to examine the theory of the photon. Photon Theory Apart from deciphering Natures coded messages and providing what surely is a comprehensive unified field theory, we will in this work come to see how a electric field can induce what I refer to as a state of aether spin. If there is to be a spin-off of practical, technological importance, from this theoretical study, I feel sure it will be the cyclical induction of aether spin aimed at inducing the inflow of aether energy which we can utilize in our efforts to secure a sustainable pollution-free environment while meeting our escalating energy needs.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
90
Aether spin exists, both on a grand scale, within our stars and planets, and on a microscopic scale as the photon. The universal rhythmic motion of the aether at the angular frequency defines a fixed direction in space. A direction anisotropy in the properties of space is not in evidence so far, though one wonders if researchers have really been looking for such a phenomenon. When we come to study the large-scale rotation of the aether medium, as with body Earth, it will then be seen that the Earths magnetic field indicates that the axes appropriate to are approximately normal to the plane in which the planets move around the Sun. It is probable from this that the circular motion of the E frame and G frame of the aether, though has the same magnitude throughout all space, may be directed in different, possibly opposite, directions in the environment of different and widely spaced stellar bodies. There may be space domains measured in dimensions of many light years and within which is unidirectional . Yet its direction may vary from one domain to the next. I did, in my earlier pursuit of this theory, think that this, being linked to an electrodynamic action, might account for the force of gravity not being effective across the boundaries separating adjacent space domains, thereby limiting the range of gravity to action between matter in a common space domain. As we proceed, however, it will be seen when we come to discuss space domains and evaluate their size along with the creation of stars, that the essential difference between two adjacent space domains is the fact that in one the proton has a positive charge and the electron a negative charge, with the continuum charge positive and the quon charge negative, whereas these charge polarities are all reversed in the other space domain. In a sense, we can say that we have here the picture of space and antispace together with matter and antimatter. This would also mean that gravity, as an electrostatic force phenomenon, could not be deemed to act across space domain boundaries.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
91
Possibly, for interaction between matter in adjacent domains, there could be a repulsive gravitational interaction, the long range effect of which, as scaled over many space domains would mean that gravitational potential within a particular domain arises, in effect, solely from the presence of matter located within that domain. This proposition is supported by the explanation of the cosmic background temperature already introduced. A further point of very special relevance concerns a theme we shall discuss in chapter 9 by reference to the Neumann potential. There are strong reasons which confine what we regard as electrodynamic forces to action as between leptonic currents in the sense that electric current flow in the circuits we use to produce magnetic fields or to detect such fields involves electrons active in a quantum-electrodynamic pair creation and decay process. Such electrons may be those active in atoms, where their apparent orbital motion about an atomic nucleus is really a quantum relocation as a newly created electron-positron pair in the path ahead of an electron involves the positron in annihilating that electron to leave the newlycreated electron in a forward position. In any event, the point at issue is that the aether itself devoid of the presence of matter is not subject to electrodynamic activity. In spite of Clerk Maxwells interpretation of electromagnetic waves as comprising components of electric field energy and magnetic field energy, one can just as easily argue that the electric field energy which is seated in oscillating charge displacement has an associated kinetic energy and that accounts for what Maxwell regarded as magnetic field energy. Accordingly, our onward analysis will address the aether and its properties as if magnetic properties do not exist and so confine the energy analysis to its electric field and kinetic energies. Concerning Earths magnetic field, this is a clue to the most important feature of the aether, which is that a state of spin, as of a large spherical bulk of the aether, will induce electric charge displacement radial from the axis of spin. So if Earth sits in a coextensive aether that spins, there will be an electric charge density
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
92
belonging to the aether that is neutralized by a compensating displacement of electron charge in body Earth. We cannot sense the presence of that charge by its electric action but we can sense it by the geomagnetic field it produces. In determining the geomagnetic moment much then depends upon the angle subtended by the Earths spin axis in relation to the aether spin axis and the vector direction of that underlying quantum jitter motion at angular frequency . We will come back to this topic in chapter 8 but keep in mind that aether spin implies electric charge induction and vice versa and also the point that the vector direction of is of no significance to the analysis in this and the next chapter. The aether behaves as an isotropic medium in its quantum mechanical interactions with the atom. A n electromagnetic wave is a propagated disturbance of the aether particle lattice formed by those charges q, the quons. The lattice can be disturbed if a discrete non-spherical unit of it rotates and so sets up radial pulsations. This will rotate if an intruding electric charge is present along with a quantum of energy activity that is being shed or absorbed by that charge. The aether spin thus suggested will be the smallest possible symmetrical cubic unit of aether that has the ability to disturb surrounding aether lattice and that has to be a unit of 3x3x3 lattice particles. Referring to this cubic unit as a photon, seen as an event when such a group of 24 quons spins about a central axis defined by 3 quons, our task now is to relate this spin to the frequency of the propagating disturbance which it causes. We will defer the detailed explanation of why it spins until chapter 8 but note here that a radial electric field acting from its centre or near-centre will so displace the superimposed E-frame orbits of the quons as to cause them to lose synchronism with unless their centres of those orbits are slightly displaced and they move transversely in a rotational sense about the charge inducing that radial field. It is a simple exercise in mathematics to show that the moment of inertia of such a 3x3x3 unit is independent of the axis about which
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
93
it spins [see page 94 of my book Physics Unified] and one can see that the pulsating disturbance of surrounding lattice will be at four times the frequency of that state of spin. The point of interest then arises if one wonders about the effects of a high spin speed which is such that the frequency of the pulsating disturbance is at or close to the frequency /2. In a sense one can imagine that the latter is a more likely circumstance, given the quantum rhythmic motion of the aether lattice at that high frequency. Then one might consider a circumstance where a slight modification in the photon spin frequency can set up electromagnetic wave propagation at the difference frequency . In the context of electrons in atomic orbit I have explored this notion on the assumption that a pair of such photon units, one seated with the nucleus, spin in opposite sense but cooperate in propagating electromagnetic wave radiation. That, however, goes beyond the scope of this work on Creation and I can but give reference to this theme as pp. 70-73 of my book Physics without Einstein. We will proceed by terming a photon unit spinning at /4 as a standard photon unit. Now when an energy quantum E is added to the dynamic state of the aether it will, as with any linear oscillator, be shared equally between the potential energy and the kinetic energy. With the constant angular frequency , this means that E/2 is added to the kinetic energy. That is: E/2 = H/2 ................................... (6.16) where H is the corresponding quantum of angular momentum. Thus even though the energy E may become dispersed throughout the aether medium it introduces a related angular momentum given by: H = E/ ..................................... (6.17) We believe that angular momentum is conserved, which means that this event cannot occur without there being a reaction, and so our photon must be characterized by such a relationship linking an energy quantum and angular momentum. The space medium, whether one refers to it as the vacuum or the aether, is known to react critically to certain energy quanta related to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
94
the mass of the electron or positron at rest. It somehow permits the creation of electrons and positrons at these exact energy levels, as if there is some kind of resonance at the characteristic frequency of the space medium. It seems essential to connect this phenomenon with the standard photon unit, especially so in view of the clear connection evident from equation (6.14). The standard photon unit must be associated with this energy quantum mec2. Thus, from (6.17), H is mec2/, which, from (6.14), is: H = h/2 ...................................... (6.18) Denoting I as the moment of inertia of the standard photon unit, H is given by: H = I(/4) ................................... (6.19) which, from (6.18), gives: I = 2h/ ................................... (6.20) Taking now a photon unit rotating at a much lower angular speed , this is related to the frequency radiated by: 4 = 2 ...................................... (6.21) and since the angular momentum H of this photon unit is I, which (6.20) plus (6.21) show to be: I = h/ ................................... (6.22) we find, from (6.17) that: E = h ....................................... (6.23) which is Plancks radiation law. At the outset of this work we set our sights on decoding three basic messages from Mother Nature. One of these was that hidden by the numerical quantity referred to as the fine-structure constant, this being 2e2/hc, the reciprocal of which is 137.0359. It is self-evident that we cannot decipher the meaning of this quantity without first understanding the physical basis for the existence of the photon and so that has been our task in this chapter. The problem ahead is to exploit this insight into the 3x3x3 quon structure of the photon and its relationship with by moving on to the real numbers that factor into the relationships between the various
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
95
components of the aether, the continuum charge density, the muons, the quons and their charges and masses, as well as that angular frequency and c, the relative speed of the G and E frames. The electron is not present in the basic make-up of the aether but its properties provide a basis of reference in our material world. Our analysis in the next chapter has to be rigorous, as we seek to decipher the primary numerical quantities, the proton-electron mass ratio and the fine-structure constant to part per million degree of accuracy.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
96
CHAPTER 7
Aether Structure
Introduction In this chapter we delve into the theoretical foundations of the aether itself, guided by our knowledge (a) that it comprises a uniform continuum of charge density permeated by charges q arrayed in a simple cubic structure owing to their mutual repulsion subject to the constraint that the electrostatic interaction energy density cannot be negative and (b) that the continuum and q charge systems, the G and E frames, respectively, are displaced 2r one from the other owing to their relative motion at speed c in circular orbits of radius r given by: r = h/4mec ...................................... (7.1) The task ahead is mathematical in that we have to compute the lattice dimension d in terms of r, where d is the side of a cube of space housing each charge q. The photon will emerge as the largest symmetrical unit of that lattice structure which can spin about an axis of that structure without crashing into adjacent structure. It is also the smallest cubic unit of that lattice that has a lattice charge q at its centre. That spin involves energy and sets up pulsations which disturb surrounding lattice structure at a frequency characteristic of the energy quantum involved. Thus, in terms of the ratio of r/d, we will arrive at a formula for Plancks constant in terms of two physical quantities pertaining to the aether, the charge q and the speed c. That dimensionless formula is known as the fine structure constant. In the process we will have established the mass-energy of the lattice charge q, that of the quon, as well as the energy density of the aether, which will thereby indicate the mass-energy of the pair of virtual muons that exists for each cubic aether cell of side dimension
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
97
d. Additionally, our analysis, by bringing the electron into the picture, will derive the odd integer value N that was introduced in chapter 2 as having the value 1843. Such is the scope of this chapter. It is the essential foundation on which the whole of this authors theory is founded. The analysis to be presented was developed in the latter part of the 1950s and was first published privately in printed form in 1960 in the authors 48 page booklet entitled: The Theory of Gravitation, when the author, owing to a change in employment upon being appointed to a Senior Manager position with IBM, was obliged to arrest his private research pursuit to concentrate upon his career in the patent profession. This explains why the advancement of the theory became so protracted in development over time and lacked the endorsement which a career in academia can offer. It is a curious coincidence that Einsteins theory was conceived during his early years as a Patent Examiner in Zurich, given perhaps the stimulus of dealing with the field of invention on a daily basis, and no doubt Einstein was lucky in finding the favour of Max Planck, who supported publication of his papers. However, in moving ahead now to publish this account of my theory, which is probably my final contribution on the subject, it is for future generations to judge the merits of my work relative to that of Einstein. Hopefully, what I have to say will have some impact, but as to this chapter 7, for my part it is more a reminiscence on past work dating back some 50 years, from when I concluded my years of Ph.D. research and entered the patent profession. Do keep in mind, however, that I have presented something of vital importance in earlier chapters, something wholly new, by changing my account of gravitation from the interpretation of gravity as an electrodynamic force consistent with the expectations of those in search of a unified field theory to the recognition that gravity is, in a sense, an inverted electrostatic force. The theoretical derivation of G, the constant of gravity, in terms of gravitons is unchanged, but I will explain more fully in chapter 9 the reason why I was obliged to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
98
alter course. The contest against Einsteins theory is nevertheless as strong as ever and I hold my ground firmly in now reproducing here in this chapter 7 an edited and slightly extended version of pages 103115 of my 1980 book: Physics Unified. The Mass of the Quon We first consider the aether particles, the quons, that form the E frame lattice system. As with the gravitons and electrons, the Thomson formula is used to relate energy E, mass and charge radius of the quon, its charge q being the same magnitude as that of the electron: E = 2q2/3b ....................................... (7.2) where b denotes quon charge radius. Quons have the lowest energy quantum of all charged particles, owing to their radius b being larger. The least energy state is justified by the fact that the lattice structure of the undisturbed aether must be the ultimate in stability, a feature which demands also that the quons must be in a state of equilibrium in their interaction with the rest of the aether system. This is assured if the energy E, as a property of a charge sphere of volume 4b3/3, implies an energy density which is common to the aether as a whole and so shared by the surrounding medium. Thus, with d as the lattice dimension, the cube side length or spacing of the cubic array of quons, we can say that the total energy per unit cell of volume d3 is: Eo = (1/2)q2d3/b4 ................................. (7.3) This is the energy density of the aether, on average, attributable to the notional rest-mass energy, and is deemed to be that of a pair of virtual muons as if there is one such pair in each cubic cell of aether. Such muons are active by creation and decay by mutual annihilation followed by recreation as on ever-ongoing process. This needs a little clarification concerning the interplay between the muons and the quons and so is subject to later commentary near the end of this chapter.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
99
The effective mass of the quon is not found by using the formula E = Mc2, because, when the quon moves in that uniformly dense background sea of energy, it behaves as if its mass is halved. This is akin to a known property of the motion of a spherical body through a liquid. We know from the study of hydrodynamics that, if that body has a mass density equal to that of the liquid, it seems weightless owing to buoyancy, but there is an apparent increase in mass when a sphere is accelerated as if that mass is half of the true mass of the body. We proceed by accepting that this analogy applies to the problem of the aether and so our lattice particles will exhibit an effective mass in their orbits of radius r of: mo = q2/3bc2 .................................... (7.4) The lattice particles, the quons, mutually repel by their Coulomb interaction. As in the formation of crystal structure within matter, we may then expect some kind of cubic or hexagonal lattice to form. This is the minimum energy structure that applies in the circumstances, but those circumstances as they exist in matter are quite different from the situation in the aether, because the minimum energy criterion in matter usually results in what is an overall negative energy density. This is because the omnipresent aether has a slightly positive energy density and so it can permit matter to exist in a crystal structure that the aether is denied owing to the fact that its minimum energy density attributable to electrical interaction has to be positive. I then found, from my analysis of the aether, that if minimum energy conditions were applied to the space medium and negative energy density were to be permitted, then the aether lattice particles would all be at rest at neutral positions in that charge continuum, each quon sitting in its own cell and in a structure that was body-centred cubic, as in iron. There would be no motion. Our universe would be dead and lifeless. The aether would have no character relating to time and the exercise of exploring its properties would be meaningless.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
100
However, by assuming that the lattice particles of the aether would form in a structure which involves the least possible electrical interaction energy consistent with it being everywhere positive, then, Eureka, everything fell into place. The aether lattice structure had to be simple cubic in form. There had to be displacement of the particles from the centres to which they were drawn by electrostatic action and, to keep that displacement, they had to move in orbit in synchronism with one another and so the aether became a clock which keeps perfect time, even though it ticks at the very high frequency we associate with electron creation. It has been shown in chapter 6 that the charge displacement distance is 2r, where r is the radius of the orbits involved, and that the angular speed in orbit is c/2r. Presenting again the electrostatic force expression (6.1) of that chapter and equating it to mo()2r, we have: mo()2r = (4q)D .............................. (7.5) where D is 2r, which gives us an energy term: moc2 = 32qr2................................ (7.6) Since the space medium is electrically neutral: q = d3 ...................................... (7.7) This brings us very close to obtaining a value of the quon mass in terms of r/d and the unitary charge e of the electron, presuming that q is equal to e, and so the onward task now is to determine the value of r/d. The Aethers r/d Factor This ratio r/d, as the orbital radius r of the rhythmic quantum jitter motion of the aether in terms of the aether lattice cell dimension d, is determined as being very slightly greater than the r/d value at which the charge q interacts with the continuum charge density to have zero electric interaction potential. Accordingly, the governing equation is:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
101
E =
( q2/2x) - ( q/x)dV + ( 2/2x)dVdV
.............. (7.8) The factors 2 in the denominators are introduced because each interaction if counted twice in the double summation and double integration. The summations and integrations extend over the whole volume of space but as we shall see it suffices to limit the range to just a few lattice spacings d. To simplify the presentation we regard d as unity in the stages of integration and summation. Boundary conditions are of little consequence. Electric interaction energies, when reduced to local energy density terms, can in no way depend upon remote boundary conditions. The lattice condition assumed need not hold as a rigid perfect lattice throughout space. It can be distorted, but we do not expect the synchronous character of the lattice particle motion to hold beyond the range of the boundaries of vast space domains of the aether, domain size being a matter of analysis in chapter 8. The next step in our analysis is to differentiate E of this equation (7.8) with respect to , after recognizing that incorporates an offset term 2q(2r)2 to allow for the 2r displacement. The object of this is to eliminate the - interaction by determining the minimal energy condition by equating the result to zero. Then we shall know that distance 2r. Differentiating (7.8) with respect to , equating to zero and then multiplying by , we obtain:
( q/x)dV
( q/x)dV = ( 2/x)dVdV
From (7.8) and (7.9) we then find that: E =
................ (7.9)
( q2/2x) - ( q/2x)dV ........... (7.10)
Since E is zero the factor 2 is not important as we now evaluate the relevant terms in five stages and consolidate the results in a sixth stage.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
102
Stage 1: ( q2/x) between one quon and surrounding quons Still regarding d as unit distance, the coordinates of all surrounding quons in a cubic lattice are given by l, m, n, where l, m, n may have any value in the series 0, and plus or minus 1, 2, 3, etc. with the co-ordinate 0,0,0 excluded. Consider concentric cubic shells of surrounding quons. The first shell has 33-1 particles, the second 5333, the third 73- 53, etc. Any shell is formed by a combination of quons such that, if z is the order of one shell, at least one of the co-ordinates l, m, n is equal to z and this value is equal to or greater than either of the other two co-ordinates. On this basis it is straightforward arithmetic to verify the following evaluations of this sequence of summations. Sz denotes the summation as applied to the z shell. S1 = 19.10408 S2 = 38.08313 S3 = 57.12236 S4 = 76.16268 S5 = 95.20320 By way of example, S2 is the sum of the six terms: 6%4 + 24/%5 + 24/%6 + 12/%8 + 24/%9 + 8/%12 and here 6+24+24+12+24+8 is equal to 53- 33. Stage 2: The evaluation of
( q/x)dV in relation to Sz
The limits of a range of integration corresponding with the z shell lie between plus or minus coordinates (z -1/2) and plus or minus coordinates (z+1/2). An integral of q/x over these limits is denoted qd2Iz where: Iz = 24z ( sinh-1[1+y2]-1/2 )dy
0 1
which, upon integration, is: Iz = 24z(cosh-12 - /6)

HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
103
and which, upon evaluation, is: Iz = 19.040619058z ............................ ...... (7.11) Note that within I1 there is a component I0 for which z in this latter expression is effectively 1/8 so that: I0 = 2.380077382 ...................................... (7.12) Stage 3:
( q/x)dV for quon 2r displacement
As already indicated this component of the integral is given by: 2q(2r)2 and this expression, in units of q2/d, with as q/d3 is, simply: 8(r/d)2 ............................................. (7.13) and so, once we merge the results of stage 1 and stage 2, we are close to determining the value of r/d from their difference. Stage 4: Correction for quon charge volume The stage 2 calculation did not allow for the physical displacement of charge owing to the finite size of the quon, which has a charge radius b. This correction term is the integral from 0 to b of q/x as it applies within a spherical shell of area 4x2 and thickness x. This is: 2(b/d)2(q2/d) ...................................... (7.14) and, from (7.4) and (7.6), we know that: b/d = (d/r)2/96 .................................. (7.15) so that, in units of q2/d, the correction found by combining (7.14) and (7.15), is: (d/r)4/4608 ......................................... (7.16) Stage 5: Combination of terms. One very minor term is still needed to complete the analysis. This is because the quons, along with any particles of matter that sits in the E frame, will be moving relative to the charge continuum at the relative speed c and this must drive the charge out of their way
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
104
and so compress to a moderate extent. It would seem appropriate to accept that the mutual repulsion within the charge owing to this compression will spread the effect over a relatively large region so as to minimize the energy needed, energy which will add in some measure to the - interaction. Because the volume of continuum charge displaced by the presence of a quon is very much greater than that displaced by protons and electrons, this consideration is a factor needing consideration only in respect of the quons. We proceed by estimating its significance in relative terms as referenced on the quantity defined by (7.16) as just derived. The charge displaced by the quon is 4b3/3 and its displacement is to a mean distance kb, where kb can have a value approaching d/2 if the displaced charge is spread over much of the aether cell, would imply an energy term given by: 4qb3/3kb which is: (4/3k)(b/d)2(q2/d) .................................. (7.17) This is 2/3k times (7.14) and so, since (7.16) was derived from (7.14), the result we seek is the factor 2/3k which must be small owing to the self-repulsion of but yet must not be less than 4b/3d. Stage 6: Consolidation of results We now need to find the difference between the summation of the S terms and the summation of the I terms. Their convergence is self-evident. Ignoring Io for the moment, the successive terms differ by a summation of the terms: 0.06346 + 0.00189 + 0.00050 + 0.00020 + 0.00010 .... and, to sum the series, we match it to: 0.01350[1/33 + 1/43 + 1/53 + 1/63 .......] or: 0.00050 + 0.00021 + 0.00011 +0.00006 .....
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
105
for terms from z = 3 onwards. This yields the summation 0.00105, which upon adding 0.06346 and 0.00189, gives 0.0664 to subtract from the I0 quantity of (7.12) to obtain 2.31368. This value is the number of units of energy q2/d that we derive per quon from the first two stages of this analysis. The third, fourth and fifth stage components are now combined to give the net zero energy quantity and leave us with the equation: 8(r/d)2 = 2.31368 - (1 - 2/3k)(d/r)4/4608 ......... (7.18) This is the equation we seek, because it allows us to obtain a very close estimate of the value of r/d. Ignoring the term involving k, r/d is found to be 0.302873. Now, before considering that k term, it is appropriate here to mention that I am indebted to certain independent initiatives taken by three individuals, including one in particular, who have put in a great deal of effort to verify the analysis I have presented here. The first such initiative was that of Peter N. McNeall, an Englishman living in USA, who drew my attention to a small numerical error in a version of this analysis presented in the 1966 edition of my book: The Theory of Gravitation. The second and most important contribution was that of another Englishman, Dr. D. M. Eagles, who, having seen my 1969 book: Physics without Einstein, met me to discuss what it claimed, whilst in U.K. between a relocation of his research employment in USA to the National Standards Laboratory in Australia. I mentioned him in chapter 2, when I referred to a table in a book by B. W. Petley where Petley had drawn attention to a paper which Dr. Eagles and I had jointly authored. This paper was the result of Dr. Eagles checking my manual efforts at analysis to compute r/d in the days when powerful computers were available only to scientists in major research facilities. With Dr. C. H. Burtons assistance at that Australian laboratory he produced the definitive result of such a calculation by using such facilities and duly advised me that r/d obtained by such analysis was 0.302874.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
106
Precision here was very important owing to the implications this had for determining, with a high degree of confidence, a numerical quantity which seemed, by coincidence, to be close to the protonelectron mass ratio but yet was somewhat higher. I refer here to the number N that was introduced earlier. As to the third independent initiative, which has greatly impressed me, it is that of Bill Buick, of an address in Scotland, who went to the trouble of providing a computer program which anyone can run on a home computer to give the results of the calculations involved in deriving r/d. In summary, therefore, since the whole of this aether theory hinges on the calculation of this quantity, I am able to assure readers that the analysis is sound and meaningful. We can, therefore, now proceed to the more interesting features of this work by deriving that quantity N that is key to the three constants of Mother Nature that we are decoding. Evaluating N We define N as the ratio of the charge volume of the quon to that of the electron. We shall examine the proposition that N must be an odd integer, simply because the quon is not only the ultimate decay product of an electron but is, as we have seen in chapter 4, the seat of birth of the proton, which implies input of sufficient energy to create a number of electrons and positrons that can coalesce to form the proton by shedding a little energy. We can, therefore, expect N to be of the same order as, but higher than, the proton-electron mass ratio. If we focus attention now on the photon unit we described in chapter 6 and take note of a topic discussed separately in Appendix II, the picture before us is that of a 3x3x3 cubic section of aether lattice being able to spin within enveloping aether lattice. Here we have a kind of spinning crystal formed by 27 quons of which 24 account for the quantum of angular momentum.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
107
Referring now to Fig. 7.1 it will be seen that a circle is drawn to depict a sphere which encloses those 27 quons seated at the lattice sites in the cubic array there depicted. The radius of that circle is 2r. Why is this? Well, we have just seen that r/d has a value of 0.302874, so 2 times r will be 1.903d, which is the basis on which the figure is drawn.
Fig. 7.1 From chapter 6, reproducing equation (6.20): I = 2h/ ........................................ (7.19) we know, because is c/2r, that this term I, now representing a moment of inertia, is: I = 4hr/c ......................................... (7.20) The moment of inertia of the 3x3x3 lattice, as we see from inspection for spin about a 3-quon axis, is 36mod2, because there are twelve quons distant d from the spin axis and 12 quons whose square of distance from that axis is 2d2. Equating this result to I then gives: 36mod2 = 4hr/c ................................. (7.21)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
108
Now, having regard to equations (7.6) and (7.7), we see that these combine to give: moc2 = 32(q2/d)(r/d)2........................... (7.22) and we can here once again restate equation (6.15): r = h/4mec ..................................... (7.23) to give us three equations which, in combination, can, by a little algebra be seen to yield two further equations: hc/2e2 = 144(r/d) ................................ (7.24) and: mo/me = (4/9)(r/d)2................................ (7.25) Note that e, the unitary charge of the electron, now replaces q, as the two are identical. We are now ready to determine N because the ratio of the two masses in (7.25), as multiplied by 2, is the inverse ratio of the charge radii of the electron and quon. This factor 2 arises because the effective mass of the muon in its aether E frame orbits is half that determined from the Thomson energy equation. We then establish that N, as the ratio of the quon charge volume to that of the electron, is given, from (7.25), by: N = (9/8)3(d/r)6 .................................. (7.26) which, with r/d as 0.302874, gives N as approximately 1844.53. This, however, is not allowing for that stage 6 correction mentioned above, nor are we taking into account that requirement that N is an odd integer, integer because the quon has to be able to transform by energy addition into a group of electrons and positrons and odd because charge parity has to be conserved. From equation (7.18) we see that the effect of that term involving k is to increase r/d slightly. This will decrease N. We seem therefore to be looking at a definitive value of N that is 1843, but let us just explore this by working (7.18) backwards to see how large k must be to ensure that we do not slip below this 1843 threshold as an integer value. This is when r/d has the value 0.302916 and k is 8.34.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
109
We can now proceed by first noting that equation (7.24) represents one of the numbers we set out to decipher, namely the fine structure constant. You can then check that an approximate value of r/d of 0.302916 will give the constant as quite close to the measured value of 137.0359895(61). Then note that the value of b/d is known from equation (7.15) as: b/d = (d/r)2/96 which allows us to estimate the significance of that factor k. We find from the above value of r/d that b/d is 0.035 and so the distance kb, with k as large as 8.34, tells us that the charge displaced by the quon must move away from the quon centre by a mean distance of more than 0.29d in order for the energy conditions to be consistent with the 1843 value of N rather than a lower value of 1841. This seems an ideal requirement, given that the charge displaced in the continuum will try to spread itself owing to its self-repulsion, but yet must be confined within the boundaries of a cubic cell of side dimension d. Accordingly, we have now arrived at the conclusion that N is 1843 and, this being a key factor in this theory by which we decipher Natures coded messages, we have accomplished the main task of this work. The fine-structure constant, as expressed in reciprocal form by equation (2.10) in chapter 2, has been derived, as can be seen by combining equations (7.24) and (7.26) to eliminate the ratio r/d. One remaining task, before we embark on the quest to explain how stars are created, is to justify the value of the energy Eo of a unit cell of space, this being the energy quantum we have assigned to the two virtual muons which live within each such cell. The Unit Energy Quantum of the Aether The relevant equation is that presented in the early paragraphs of this chapter, namely equation (7.3), which is: Eo = (1/2)q2d3/b4 This, plus the equation (7.15) just quoted above, combine to give: Eo = (1/2)(96)3(r/d)6q2/b .......................... (7.27)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
110
From (7.26) this becomes: Eo = (3/4)(108)3(1/N)(2q2/3b) ................. (7.28) which presents this energy quantum in units of the quon mass-energy according to the Thomson formula. The latter is the electron rest-mass energy divided by the cube root of N and so we obtain: Eo = (3/4)(108)3(1/N)4/3 mec2......................... (7.29) from which we find, with N as 1843, that this energy quantum becomes: 412.6658 electron rest-mass energy units. Here, then, is the energy quantum that is regarded as the virtual muon pair, the occupants of each cubic cell of aether. A Supplementary Note My object in this chapter 7 has been to present the analysis by which I did, during a period in the latter part of the 1950s, work out what had to be the necessary structure of the space medium, the aether, in order for it to determine the processes we refer to as quantum theory and gravitation. I did not in those early years have an adequate insight into the details underlying the creation of the proton or the graviton, but their basis of existence was clear and the picture came fully into focus with the passage of time, the g-graviton emerging first, in the mid 1960s and the proton by the mid 1970s. Admittedly, however, there remain unanswered questions, questions that may elude us for many generations to come, some forever. There is scope for others to address these problems and add to our enlightenment. A typical question is: How can it be that a fundamental particle having an electric charge e confined within a sphere does not expand indefinitely owing to the self-repulsion of its electrostatic charge? Can the answer lie in the rhetorical question: Well, owing to its spherical symmetry, it has a centre and, since that is also its centre of mass, if it were to expand and shed energy, meaning what can only be
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
111
kinetic energy, then what would determine the direction in which that centre of mass would move? Should we beg the question, as it were, by arguing that the charge is stable because it cannot move of its own accord and allow its energy to become kinetic energy? Another such question is: What is it in Nature that tells an electric charge it is positive or negative? Here, the answer could be in our awareness that electric charge forms tend to be created in pairs and with two fundamental particles of opposite charge one can visualise one expanding as the other contracts so that energy is exchanged between them without having to convert into kinetic energy. This is a picture of mutual stability enhancing particle lifetime, and suggesting a well-known saying that there is safety in numbers. The idea thus seeded is the notion that all electric charged particles are oscillating in their charge radius at a common very high frequency, probably that of the quantum motion of the E and G frames of the aether, and that whether a charge is positive or negative really depends solely on its phase of oscillation. To accept that you must accept that time, as set by the rhythm of the quantum underworld, is universal and governed by motion that is synchronized as if there is no retardation in the action. That may seem a debatable proposition, but it makes sense for conditions where there is no need for long range energy transfer. Before concluding this supplementary note to chapter 7, I will now raise and seek to answer three questions which mayalready have occurred to astute readers. Why is it that it is so important for the electrostatic interaction energy of the aether not to fall below zero, given that when two electric charges of opposite polarity do interact there has to be a negative energy component offsetting the self-energy of each charge? The answer lies, I believe, in the lack of reciprocity in the charge interaction combined with the fact that no vector direction is defined that can give scope for kinetic energy. If two charges of different electrical polarity but identical form interact then energy exchange can occur and even if of different form there is a line
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
112
between their charge centres along which the charges can move apart as any surplus energy is shed to become kinetic energy. This is not the case for those quons sitting in a charge continuum . It is just as well, because if the quons were to move to sites of minimum electrostatic interaction energy, meaning a negative energy density as offset by the self-energy of the quons, then the aether would be a solid devoid of any motion and we would not exist. The second question arises when we note how precise the aether analysis has been in defining numerical relationships but see an approximation in taking Eo as the total energy of a cubic cell of the aether, as if the quon is part of the virtual muon pair when it comes to using Eo as in the calculation of the proton-electron mass ratio in chapter 4. I answer this by saying, or rather hoping, that the ongoing creation and decay of those muons as they deploy from position to position in the aether will occur as if they have just such a spacing as to account for a negative interaction energy that exactly matches the positive energy of the quon and its equal measure of associated graviton energy. However, there may well be another answer, one bearing upon the inseparability of the quon charge from its counterpart continuum charge of opposite polarity. The quon with its matching unit of continuum charge is the most degenerate state that electric charge can adopt. Hence the quon, unlike the electron, may find that its electric field energy is somehow merged with and perhaps accounts for energy that represents the presence of that continuum. Note that the theory assumes the continuum proper has zero energy. We should not therefore expect the inertial properties of the quon to be the same as those of the electron, as implied by use of the Thomson mass-energy formulation E = 2e2/3a. Now here I have in mind what I wrote at pages 104-105 of my 1969 book: Physics Unified. I argued by reference to Appendix I of that book that the pressure in the medium enveloping the quons would be equal to that set up within the body of charge e, which I calculated as being given by the formula e2/4a4. From this, by
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
113
multiplying by the volume of a sphere of radius a, one can obtain a measure of the energy as e2/3a, which is half that given by the Thomson formula. A little intuition then leads to the appealing suggestion that the continuum counterpart to such a quantity as applied to the quon might then account for an equal amount of energy, so bringing their combination to the energy quantum that would apply to the quon by use of the Thomson formula. The latter concern may point to a weakness in the theory but only in the sense that one surely cannot expect the universe to yield all its secrets and be self-explanatory in every detail to fit within the pattern of this one sweeping account of Creation. One can but probe the aether step by step and I must admit that I have no idea how to explain or justify the existence of the continuum of charge density , nor can I say what electric charge actually is other than by describing its action and effect on other charge. This gives rise to the third question. What happens if, instead of the charge continuum yielding to compression owing to the motion through it of quons and matter at a relative speed c, it resists compression and stays uniform, but the quons are compressed to match exactly the volume of space taken up locally by the particles of matter? This would eliminate the need for that factor k in stage 5 above and ensure that the presence of matter does not distort the continuum charge distribution as a function of the volume of matter particles involved, meaning that gravitational interaction is exclusively that of the related graviton presence. The results of our analysis speak for themselves, but I do not have the slightest notion of how electric charge can spread itself to fill space in a uniform way, short of imagining that in its microcosmic form it is like a gas which somehow disperses uniformly in its pressure balance. We can, however, build on what has been discovered concerning the aether and this takes us into chapter 8 where we will see how stars are created.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
114
CHAPTER 8
Creation: Stars and Planets

Introduction There is something that cosmologists who theorize about what we see in outer space have yet to learn. There are two very basic errors in the scientific foundations on which they build their understanding of stars. Firstly, they ignore completely the fact that hydrogen as the gas from which stars are formed will, upon compression to a mass density of the order of 1.4 gm/cc as shown in Appendix IV, experience overlap of the electron shells, the K-shells of the atomic structure of hydrogen. This means that the star will be partially ionized, which means that many protons and electrons will roam free. In turn this means that, since the mutual rate of gravitational acceleration by two interacting protons is 1836 times that of two interacting electrons, the star must adopt a uniform mass density throughout its core and have a positive electric core charge density enclosed in a surface shell of negative charge density. The electrostatic repulsion of the core charge will balance exactly the internal gravitational attraction of the star as a whole. That electrical core charge density will be G1/2 times that mass density 1.4 gm/cc. This happens to be the mass density of our Sun but this fact is surely not a matter of coincidence! Secondly, there is the quite ludicrous assumption that starlight in its passage through the aether for billions of years as it traverses vast distances is not subject to frequency attenuation. Because cosmologists know that light waves of different frequency travel at different speeds through a material medium they see dispersion as the telltale property of a medium in space and assume, incorrectly, that
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
115
no frequency dispersion in the vacuum means no frequency attenuation and so no aether medium. One can but deplore the cosmological blunder that has ensued and bequeathed us with the nightmare syndrome of the Big Bang, an expanding universe and, in respect of that first error, Black Holes. Moreover, by ignoring that positive electric core charge possessed by a star one has not seen how Mother Nature, in interacting with a quantum aether, will develop a state of spin importing energy from that aether and so cosmologists have missed something of vital importance to our understanding of Creation. It does not need a genius to see the obvious and one can but wonder if the cosmological fraternity is composed of the blind leading the blind, which means that I address what I now have to say to the general reader rather than seeking to enlighten those who see themselves as specialists in cosmology. Such is my strength of feeling on this matter, especially as my earlier published work on this theme has not been heeded. This is my introduction to this chapter 8. Apart from the discussion concerning space domains, a subject addressed in my books Modern Aether Science (1972) and Physics Unified (1980) I base much of this chapter on a lecture I delivered to the Physics Department of Cardiff University in Wales in 1977 and an extended revision of the subject of a peer-reviewed paper of mine published by the Italian Institute of Physics in 1984. The latter paper was entitled: The Steady-State Free Electron Population of Free Space, Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252-256 (1984). The Cardiff lecture was the subject of a paper entitled Space, Energy and Creation. Also, added to this chapter since the first draft edition of this work was published on my website, is a very important development pertaining to what are referred to as neutron stars. The recent announcement of the firstever measurement of the magnetic field of such a star has provided data allowing my theory to be tested in a quite remarkable way.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
116
Deriving the Hubble Constant I believe that what astronomers see as the basis of the Hubble constant, the shift of the frequency of starlight towards the red end of the spectrum as a function of distance from a star, is a phenomenon associated with proton creation. Natures ongoing attempts to create protons everywhere in space must fail if there is inadequate energy available for a proton to materialize in a permanent form. In lending energy momentarily to test the water, as it were, and see if proton creation is possible, the aether is constantly experiencing failure, given that almost all of its surplus energy has already been deployed in the creation of matter. The aether is vast and those attempts at proton creation are occurring in a very small proportion of its unit cells at any instant and so its overall transparency is only slightly blemished by this activity. So, you see, in now mentioning those blemishes that arise from proton creation, we are holding firm to the theme of this work The Physics of Creation. In summary, the proton creation activity already discussed in chapter 4 is ongoing everywhere in its failure mode on a universal scale where there is no energy surplus feeding the creation of protons that can survive, but yet is effective in a way that does reveal itself by determining the value of what we refer to as the Hubble constant. In physics one has the choice of believing that the vacuum is a true void or that it is a real aether medium. There is no halfway house in which one can shelter, as by inventing a geometrical multidimensional fabric and dressing accordingly as one plays a part on an imaginary stage and so pretends that the universe is a mere illusion. The sensible approach is to say that the aether exists and functions as a kind of workshop that accepts energy shed by matter and recycles it by fabricating protons and electrons which can be drawn back by gravity into the real world. This is the vision of an everlasting universe, a steady-state universe in the overall energy sense, but one which evolves by creation and decay of its component parts.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
117
At the very least, however reluctant one might be to accept this proposition, one should explore its implications theoretically before accepting the alternative, a universe in which protons and electrons were created at time zero and which then ceased their manufacture in favour of a slow death. Indeed, ask yourself why would our universe start creating protons and electrons and then stop suddenly or is one to believe that God operated a switch called Creation and, alarmed by hearing the Big Bang, immediately opened the switch and adopted a low profile just to watch events from then on? So I have envisaged an aether which is ongoing and trying all the time to create protons and electrons, succeeding only by using any surplus energy that finds its way into its system. Then, supposing there are vast regions of space where there is no such surplus energy, that aether in those regions would at all times exhibit a kind of haze as it tries, using its own latent energy resource, to create protons and electrons, only to find that they promptly decay, but yet their transient existence provides a permanent but very faint haze throughout space which can obstruct the passage of electromagnetic waves. We have, in chapter 4, seen how the muon activity of the aether can create a proton. This is, I believe, a process in which nine muons act in concert by attacking a quon in the time interval of one oscillation at the Compton electron frequency or in an immediate succession of such time intervals. The chance of such an event occurring is found as follows. Quoting from the above-referenced paper in Lettere al Nuovo Cimento: We look to the event when four muon pairs plus one muon of charge opposite to q all combine within the volume of q in the same cycle of migration. The muon pairs have a random chance of movement and are not confined to a particular cell. The chance of one muon entering the q volume is (1/N)1/3(me/2m). Therefore the chance of nine muons entering this same volume is this
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
118
factor raised to the power 9. The logic of this supposes that each muon arrives independently and simultaneously and that the chance of four negative muons appearing is the factor raised to the power 4, whereas the chance of five positive muons appearing is the factor raised to the power 5, the total chance being the product of the two. We find that the overall effect is that at any time the chance of a q element converting according to the equation: q = N(e+, e-) is (1/N)3(me/2m)9. It is supposed that the reverse transition occurs at the end of each cycle when the muons migrate to new positions. In effect, however, the condition just described is ever present and is a steadystate condition. Here, I interject a comment that qualifies what is said above. Arising from the discovery claimed by Dr. Paul Rowe (see chapter 9), I now believe that the transient state left even by one muon impact upon q, the quon, will hold the energy just long enough to carry the action into the next muon cycle. This means that the numerical factor still applies but to a sequence of successive impacts on the same quon target. The odds of a quon being hit by nine muons in the unit time interval are the same as that of a sequence of single muon hits on the same quon target in a succession of unit time intervals. This reverts the aether model to that for which a muon pair is confined to each unit cell of the aether, given that their combined energy is the mass-energy of a unit cell of the charge continuum. Note that N, as 1843, the number derived theoretically in our earlier analysis of photon theory in chapter 7, is the charge volume of the quon in terms of the charge volume of the electron. To complete the quotation from that 1984 paper:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
119
The formula for d, the lattice dimension of the cubic cell of aether, as 72e2/mec2, can be used to evaluate d as 6.37x10-11 cm, meaning that there are 3.87x1036 cells per cubic metre of space. With N as 1843 and m/me as 207 it is evident that one cell in 2.2x1033 is subject to the transition just discussed. There are, therefore, approximately 1,760 excited electron cells in each cubic metre of space. The state of excitation involves a q charge becoming an electron and the nine muons shedding energy and creating 921 electron-positron pairs to leave the residual energy nucleated in a positive charge of larger energy content, but physically very much smaller in size than the electron. The question then is whether 1760 such systems in each cubic metre of free space might be detected owing to the disorder they represent in what is otherwise a transparent and wholly ordered medium. The electron-positron pairs will not obstruct the passage of electromagnetic waves because they have a mutual inertial balance and are collectively neutral in their response to electric fields. This leaves the electrons, 1760 per cubic metre, as the dominant factor presenting a scattering cross-section to radiation. Here is the cause of that haze mentioned above. The approach I now take is to assume that the wave must shed some of its energy in passing through this haze. As a self-propagating oscillating wave it will shed energy during both the up and down parts of its lateral displacement cycle. During its ups it will move the distance required to match the amplitude of its electric field, not travelling quite as far as it would were there no loss of energy. However, during its down periods it must traverse the same displacement distance before
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
120
beginning the next up and down cycle, albeit in the opposite direction, but, ask yourself: How can it then reveal that it has lost energy? The answer, given that we are considering a system in which electric field energy is being exchanged by oscillation into kinetic energy, which Clerk Maxwell would say is magnetic energy, is that we must look to a reduction in speed, given the same distance of travel, and so a frequency reduction. By speed is meant the speed of the quon charge oscillations in a direction lateral to the wave propagation direction. In summary, to the extent that the electron haze absorbs energy from the wave, half of the energy loss will mean amplitude attenuation, even for a plane wave, with the other half of the energy loss producing frequency attenuation. This is why light from distant stars suffers a loss of frequency. Upon encountering an electron as an obstruction in the path of an electromagnetic wave, the wave sheds some of its energy density W and also suffers a related loss of frequency f. Since, for a given oscillation amplitude of electric field intensity in a medium where charge displacement is subjected to a linear restoring force, W is proportional to frequency squared, the relationship between these two quantities, expressed as a function of distance s travelled, can be formulated thus: (1/f)df/ds = (1/2W)dW/ds ............................ (8.1) However, since the attenuation of frequency occurs only during half of the wave cycle, this equation needs to be further modified to become: (1/f)df/ds = (1/4W)dW/ds ............................. (8.2) Now, when I wrote the 1984 paper from which the above quotations are taken, I proceeded upon deriving this equation (8.2) to show that this implied a value for the Hubble constant determined by estimating the energy dissipation in the aether as if each of those 1760 transiently-created electrons per cubic metre presented the electron scattering cross-section according to the standard Thomson formula.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
121
Unfortunately, I misquoted the value of this quantity by a factor of and so derived a Hubble time factor of 11,400 million years, whereas the theory based on such assumption indicates a lower value of the order of 4 billion years. I am now somewhat hesitant about relying on such a formula and would rather simply make the point that an electromagnetic wave travelling through such an field of electrons must suffer a loss of energy and a reduction of frequency. That frequency attenuation is scaled as a function of frequency exactly as it would be if it were due to the Doppler effect. Inevitably therefore, the notion of an expanding universe is unsound and it becomes of interest here to denote the empirical value of the Hubble constant as N billion years, this being the relevant exponential decay time constant, and deduce from this the scattering cross section of those electrons. 4% energy absorption corresponds to a 1% frequency reduction over 1% of the distance travelled at the speed of light and so 1% of the Hubble time constant. Suppose the scattering cross section of each electron to be times 10-25 sq. cm. To achieve 4% energy absorption this means that the wave travels a sufficient distance to encounter 4 times 1023 times (1/) electrons per sq. cm. of wave cross-sectional area. At 1,760 electrons per cubic metre this means that the wave must travel over a distance of (1/) times 2.27x1026 cm to suffer a 1% frequency reduction. Since 1 billion light years is a distance of 9.45x1026 cm we then find that the 1% frequency reduction occurs in a period of (1/) times 0.24N billion years. This gives the relationship between N and as one for which N is equal to 24. On the basis of the electron scattering cross-section according to the J. J. Thomson formula of 6.65x10-25 sq. cm, the Hubble time period should be 3.6 billion years, which seems too low. We must remember, however, that this is not a measure of the age of the universe. It is merely the time constant of an exponential frequency reduction curve. It is reasonable to suppose that the process by which we have explained the successful creation of the proton in chapter 4,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
122
as attributable to nine muons coming together within the space occupied by quon charge, may, even so far as unsuccessful events are concerned fall short of achieving that 1760 transient electron level per cubic metre. A one in five chance would enhance the Hubble time period by a factor five. Also, one can even question the merit of using the Thomson radiation scattering formula for reasons to be discussed in Appendix II and readers who need to know more about this before delving into the creation of stars should pause here to read through Appendix II. Had we used instead the cross-sectional area of the electron as based on the Thomson electron form discussed in the early chapters of this work then that Hubble time period would be longer by a factor of 6, meaning that it would be of the order of 20 billion years. Such a step would, however, need theoretical justification as to precisely how the physical interception of an electromagnetic wave extracts energy from that wave. Also, it seems illogical to ignore the physics underlying the derivation and experimental support for the conventional theory of the scattering cross-section of the electron. Given the Hubble constant the theory which involves the Big Bang notion of creation with the universe expanding from the moment of Creation necessarily involves theoretical assumptions that are difficult to verify but suggest that the age of the universe is somewhat smaller than that measured as the Hubble time period. Our uncertainty here in our theory concerns the effective crosssectional area of an electron obstructing passage of an electromagnetic wave in outer space populated by a mere 1,760 electrons per cubic metre of mass density 1.6x10-27 kg/m3. This, incidentally, is of the same order as the mass density of the so-called missing matter that cosmologists say should be present in space to give account of certain features of their theories. I feel, however, that enough has been said to show that we need not belong to an expanding universe with its Big Bang scenario. It seems far more preferable to accept that the facts of record support the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
123
case for a steady-state universe, thanks to our understanding based on this work of how protons are created and the ongoing role of our aether in that activity. This is especially the case as we now address the problem of how a star is created, but go on from there to show how the space domains that feature in this star creation role define boundaries which must one day be traversed by the star at a very acute angle. This means that the star will be located astride that boundary and be partially in one domain and partially in an adjacent domain. Since, as we shall see, the force of gravity does not act in an attractive sense between matter in different space domains, there are then conditions which arise that may cause the star to explode and disperse, as by a supernova event. Accordingly the cycle of life and death of a star becomes part of the syndrome of a steady-state universe rather than one exhibiting the one-off Big Bang scenario. It is one thing to accept that the universe exists and for us to try to probe its secrets, but quite another to say when it came into existence and confront the mystery of what was there before that event. We can never know the answers to these questions but the picture we can form has more clarity if founded on the notion of a steady-state universe. The Creation of a Star Why are there so many stars and not just one large star that sits at the centre of the universe? What causes a star to rotate? How is the energy which it radiates sustained? Cosmologists have answers. It all happened in the Big Bang and within a fraction of a second what had appeared blew apart as its numerous fragments interacted one upon the other to impart angular momentum in opposite spin directions and so form stars that rotate in their ever-expanding distribution in space. They supposedly feed on energy, nuclear energy as they transmute their hydrogen into inferior lower forms of matter such as helium and so emit their radiation. The aether is not a part of this picture of Creation.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
124
The source of their expert knowledge on these matters is their observation of what they see in distant space using high powered telescopes plus laboratory analysis of that pattern of radiation as it reaches Earth. The reason that the energy has to be nuclear is because they can conceive of no other source adequate to sustain the Suns radiation for billions of years. So you may ask how it is that I can claim any special insight into these matters. What have I seen in a telescope that others have missed? As to insight, is that what is needed to ask the obvious question: Why cannot the energy radiated by a star come from the collisions of those electrons of its adjacent hydrogen atoms, given that their energy is sustained by interaction with the quantum underworld of the space medium, the energy of the aether itself? As to that telescope, my answer is that I was looking instead at a situation one can see by looking through a microscope, not at a crystal ball but at the surface of a crystal of iron. My experimental Ph.D. research concerned an energy anomaly found in iron and I spent a great deal of time one summer supplementing that effort by trying to develop a theoretical model justifying the ferromagnetic state of iron, as based on electrostatic and electrodynamic interaction of 3d state electrons in iron atoms. Those atoms are arrayed in a body-centred cubic lattice and I was exploring the trade-off between the negative energy potential of the interactions versus the accompanying mechanical strain energy to explore, not only the ferromagnetic condition, but property dependence upon mechanical stresses as I had measured the loss anomaly factor as a function of such stress. That theoretical research convinced me that a phenomenon known as the gyromagnetic ratio was not attributable to electron spin, as theoretical physicists assumed, but was in fact attributable to the existence of a reaction which halved the strength of an applied magnetic field, a reaction that must also be exhibited by the vacuum medium, the aether.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
125
I later realized that my ferromagnetic model of an iron crystal, if adapted to the simple cubic structure, had something to tell me about the properties of the aether, because it had a message concerning angular momentum and rotation. More than this, however, the iron crystal has an intrinsic structure that is characterized by energy deployment and what one could see in a microscope is what are called magnetic domains, regions of the crystal bounded by planar separating walls which divide the iron into parts in which the electron orbital motion accounting for ferromagnetism have opposite directions. It does not take a genius then to imagine that, possibly, the aether itself might have the characteristic feature of incorporating domains on a large scale and that this might have some bearing on the distribution pattern of stars when born, meaning one star or one binary pair of stars per space domain. I had in mind also the great mystery posed by the hope that gravitation might prove to be a phenomenon linked in some way to electromagnetism. So there I was, at Cambridge, having ideas that I dare not express for fear of ridicule, but pursuing in private my hobby of delving into theoretical physics when my formal discipline was connected with electrical engineering. I was, after all, at the venue where, some two decades earlier Nobel Laureate Paul Dirac had been acclaimed for establishing the case for electron spin by which that gyromagnetic factor of 2 is supposed to come from what I can best describe as pseudo-relativistic mathematical equations. It was a little consolation to think that Dirac had graduated in engineering in his first university, Bristol, and a comfort to think that he saw space as a sea of states from which a missing electron would appear as a positive hole, the positron, but the aether was still a taboo subject and I had a living to earn upon leaving academia. I had already spent three years at Manchester University obtaining my first degree and had two years of graduate apprenticeship before entering Cambridge. At least, being at Trinity College, the venue of Isaac Newton and J. J. Thomson, whose portraits
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
126
overlooked ones dining habits in Hall for some three years, I could hope that that might engender some creative inspiration and, indeed, courage as I quietly pursued my hobby of exploring the aether in the years ahead. As to the creation of a star, I saw that as an event resulting from the aether cooling from a chaotic state into an ordered state, just as magnetic domains form in iron as its crystalline form sheds extra energy in cooling through its Curie temperature. In the aether, however, that energy is released as gravitational potential of the star or binary star pair so formed within each domain. In other words, we are looking at the situation in which gravity as a phenomenon is switched on by domain formation just as the state of ferromagnetism comes into being only when those domains form. Creation as applied to a star then involves the coalescence of dispersed matter, protons and electrons, which means, once the gravity switch is thrown, that many of the protons rush in ahead of the electrons because their mutual rate of acceleration is 1836 times that of the electron-electron interaction. Here is the trigger causing a star to spin, the initial state of it having a positive electric core charge, and this brings us to the point of primary importance in this work. It is a factor that can explain the spin of a photon as well as the spin of a star and may even explain something I shall reveal in the last section of chapter 9, something having technological implications for the alternative energy field. I did, at the end of 1959, document this aspect of the theory in printed form [The Theory of Gravitation, (1960)], but at that time I had not seen the link to any technological implications, as otherwise I might well have changed course much earlier in my career pursuit. The book just mentioned was privately published at that time only to make a break as I changed from a professional role with a major engineering company, English Electric, to a higher management role with IBM in their Patent Operations.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
127
I was sure that a star forms owing to it acquiring a positive core charge density at its creation, a charge which is later sustained by virtue of its hydrogen atoms being crushed together by gravity so as to be close enough for their electron shells to overlap and so develop the ionized state which leaves enough protons free to move inwards under gravity and so sustain that core charge. The charge density would be the square root of G times the mass density of hydrogen corresponding to that overlap of their electron shells. The result is the mean mass density of our Sun, a little over 1.4 gm/cc as I show in Appendix IV. So now let us see how the aether coextensive with the Sun reacts to the presence of this charge. Being a little impatient here I rush to say that it shares the spin of the Sun at the time the Sun comes into being, simply because aether spin means electric charge induction, displacement of charge from its core body to its spherical aether boundary. You might then say that such a proposition would mean that the Sun along with other stars would then have a magnetic moment and so a magnetic field should be in evidence. You could even suspect that body Earth, if also having a coextensive aether sphere spinning with it, would be subject to an internal electric strain and also possess a magnetic moment giving rise to a magnetic field. All very well, you might then say, but how does theory yield quantitative results that we can check with observation and measurement? As I now show, the solar system can be obliging in this endeavour but we need to be cautious. We will proceed in stages and I am sure you will find the commentary interesting and convincing. The Schuster-Wilson Hypothesis That comment above that the sun should exhibit an electric charge density in its core equal to the square root of G times the suns mean mass density should remind any well-read cosmologist of what came to be known as the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis. A. Schuster [Proc. Roy. Soc., 24, 121-137 (1912)] and H. A. Wilson have shown
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
128
that the magnetic moments and angular momenta of the Sun and Earth are approximately related in a common ratio. This led to the hypothesis, the speculation that a moving element of mass as measured in gravitational units might have the same magnetic effect as an electric charge measured in electrostatic units. It seems not to have occurred to those interested in this hypothesis that rotation of an astronomical body might entrain rotation of aether, which could involve the induction of an electric field and so electric charge displacement duly cancelled by charge displacement in that astronomical body. If the latter and not the former gives rise to magnetic action one has here a situation where one can explain the presence of a magnetic moment with no commensurate evident presence of an electric charge. Wilson sought to prove the hypothesis by experiment based on seeking to detect the magnetic action of a swinging iron bar [Proc. Roy. Soc. A., 104, pp. 415-455 (1923)]. The null result of the experiment is hardly surprising. I would not expect the aether to respond to the oscillations of an iron bar though I could contemplate a response if a rotor spinning at the same speed for a prolonged period was used and there were some effect akin to the presence of an electric charge within that rotor. However, one must keep in mind that in 1923 the aether was not surviving as a popular notion in the vocabulary of science. Nor, indeed, could one expect that hypothesis to survive, given the boldness of what it claimed. However, interest in the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis revived in 1947 when W. W. Babcock [Publ. Astr. Soc. Pacif., 59, 112-124 (1947)] succeeded in measuring the magnetic field of the star 78 Virginis. The hypothesis was verified as being fully applicable to three bodies instead of two, the range of angular momenta then being 1010:1. Nobel Laureate P. M. S. Blackett [Nature, 159, 658-666 (1947)] then became very interested and wrote an extensive article on the subject. He began by presenting the hypothesis in the form: (Magnetic moment)/(angular momentum) = G (/c)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
129
where is a constant of the order of unity, c is the ratio of electrostatic to electromagnetic units and G is the constant of gravitation. This was followed by a Table I in which he presented numerical data in support of the above formulation before then enlarging on the whole theme by reference to the research findings of several authors. What is however perplexing for a serious reader of his account is the data he provides in that table for the magnetic moments and angular momenta of the Sun and the Earth. The ratios of magnetic moment to angular momentum for Earth and Sun are shown to be 1.11x10-15 and 0.79x10-15, respectively, whereas my calculation of G (/c) gives the value times 0.86x10-14. There is a factor of 10 discrepancy if is to be of the order of unity and I can but suspect that there has been a numerical miscalculation on Blacketts part which is quite misleading even if an error factor of 10 was seen as of the order of unity in the context of a number 10 raised to the fifteenth power. In the event, however, Blackett himself was sufficiently intrigued by the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis to mount a further experiment [Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 245A, 309-370 (1952/53)]. He contrived to acquire a quite large object of pure gold just for the period of the experiment and placed this in a wooden shed in a rural location remote from any metal objects or external power supply equipment, his purpose being to use an extremely sensitive magnetometer to see if the concentration of mass by the high density of gold allowed that object to reveal a magnetic property attributable to its rotation with body Earth. Again, not surprisingly, there was a null result, because surely, if we are really looking at a property of the aether, one cannot expect the aether itself to increase its action merely because of a mass seated in very dense matter. So here was an astronomical observation of major importance but, owing to it not complying with ones hopes on the laboratory front and in spite of the related efforts of many authors, it was merely a hypothesis that had somehow to be buried and forgotten. The aether
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
130
had not been seen as a factor involved owing to it also having been buried and forgotten for not itself complying with an assumed property that it did not possess and yet the basis of the SchusterWilson hypothesis was a pointer to the existence of the aether. Such is the arena of scientific endeavour, at least where cosmology is concerned. If the aether spins with an astronomical body and such spin can induce electric charge displacement, then one might still expect that hypothesis to hold true at least in a limited sense as applied to hydrogen in a star, and all the more so, given the opening comments of this chapter, my observation that ionization in the Sun must endow it with a core charge that has the density implied by that SchusterWilson hypothesis. It could well be that there is something fortuitous about the way in which the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis has crept into physics. The problem with the numerical data might well arise because it is so difficult to be sure what magnetic properties a star has. There are Sun spots on the Sun which signify regions of ionized gas spinning independently of the general spin of the Sun itself. The magnetic fields in evidence from spectral line shifts in radiation from the hydrogen atom fluctuate over time and make estimates of magnetic moment unreliable. Accordingly, whilst accepting that the G (/c) factor has a role in cosmology by linking gravitational action on ionized gas with an astronomical body having a core electrical charge density and core mass density that are uniform and related, we will not ponder further on the specific values of magnetic moments of such ionized bodies. Instead, we shall look to the aether to reveal something of relevance to this curious factor. We are converging onto the proposition that aether spin involves induction of a charge density within the spinning aether sphere, owing to charge being displaced to or from its spherical boundary. This charge density is neutralized in its electrostatic effects by virtue of a corresponding charge deployment of opposite polarity
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
131
within the astronomical body seated within that aether sphere. Accordingly, one can only sense the magnetic effects associated with one of those charge components, namely the action of the charge displaced within matter. This is further supported by my contention that the ionization of hydrogen in a star will, owing to collisions between K shell electrons in gravitationally compacted hydrogen atoms, free just enough protons to set up the precise density of positive core charge that the hypothesis requires. I can provide some further insight into the reasons why aether charge itself, absent a reaction in coextensive matter, does not set up a primary magnetic field action. Reason (a) is that we found in chapter 7 that all the right results emerged from analysis of aether structure without our incorporating any magnetic interaction in the aether model considered. Reason (b) will emerge from chapter 9 where we derive the Neumann potential and see that we need to retain the Fechner hypothesis to explain the phenomenon of electromagnetic interaction. The Fechner hypothesis requires quantum electrodynamic charge pair creation and annihilation of the kind we associate with moving electrons, but electrons are not part of the basic aether medium. Reason (c), also to be discussed in chapter 9, is that the aether charge that has freedom of movement is governed by statistical factors by which the energy involved optimizes its deployment. The aether can set up a magnetic effect by the reaction which accounts for that gyromagnetic factor of 2 being halved, but this is a reaction and not a primary action unless, as applies where we have stored field energy in an inductance, we deliberately terminate current flow in matter with the result that the aether induces the back-EMF that feeds the return flow of the induction energy. Reason (d) is the fact that, contrary to general expectation, one can explain gravity and derive the value of G as an aether property without associating gravitation with an electrodynamic action. Enough has now been said to show that the aether figures prominently in the process of star creation. In contrast with my earlier
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
132
accounts of the theory involved, where I discussed first how the setting up of an electric charge density in a body of astronomical proportions accounted for the creation of our Sun and the planets, I will, before delving into the mathematics of space domains, start here by introducing space domain theory. Space Domains Although cosmologists like to think that the action of gravity knows no bounds and that matter, however separated by distance, will be subject to the unabated action of gravity as defined by the value of G that we measure here on Earth, I think otherwise. Gravity has a limited range of action. It only operates between matter seated in the same space domain or between matter and quons of the aether lattice seated in the same space domain. The latter can be verified in the following way. Consider a region of aether in the near vicinity of Earth and the effect of the gravitational potential of Earth and Sun on quons located in that region. Those quons, which define the E frame of the aether, move in circular orbits in which they are dynamically balanced by the gravitons in the G frame. Each has a mass mo which, subject to gravitational potential , imports an amount of energy mo which is held at the seat of that quon as the thermal vibration energy of that quon. This is an energy quantum kT, owing to the quon having only two degrees of freedom, imposed by the constraint of keeping in synchronism with the orbital motion of other quons, this constraint precluding the third degree of freedom. T is the temperature in Kelvin and k is Boltzmanns constant, 1.38x10-16 ergs/K. This gives us the equation: mo = kT ........................................... (8.3) Now, in chapter 7, we were able to show that the mass of the quon was 0.0408 times the mass of the electron, as one can see from equation (7.25) by substituting the value we derived for r/d. Since we then know that the electron has a mass of 9.109x10-28 gm, the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
133
temperature of the quon system, which we can refer to as the aether temperature or cosmic background temperature, if it can be measured, will give us the value of , the gravitational potential in the near vicinity of Earth. Now, of course, we can only be referring here to the 2.7 K temperature exhibited by any rarefied form of matter that interacts with the aether at high altitudes above the Earth. It appears that radiometers carried by U-2 aircraft flying at altitudes of 20 km detected a 390 km/s component of Earth motion through space by interpreting the observed local anisotropy of the 2.7 K temperature by reference to an assumed isotropic distribution. This was reported in October 1977 [Phys. Rev. Lett., 39, 898] and again, on November 3rd 1977, under the title: Aether Drift Detected at Last at page 9 of the journal Nature, followed in May 1978 by an article The Cosmic Background Radiation and the New Aether Drift in Scientific American. With T as 2.7 K, equation (8.3) tells us that is 1.002x1013 erg/gm. So here we have an approximate measure of the local gravitational effect of all the matter in the universe that lies within the range of gravitational action. I say approximate because one cannot rule out a small contribution to temperature from another source and because the assumption concerning the two degrees of freedom may be too rigid an assertion. However, since G is 6.67x10-8 cgs units, body Earth of mass 5.977x1027 gm and radius 6.378x108 cm contributes about 6.2% of this value of . Also, the Sun of mass 1.989x1033 gm at a distance of 1.496x1013 cm contributes 88% of this value of and so, even if the other planets plus the rest of the universe within gravitational range contribute nothing to this potential, we can account for 2.6 K of that temperature. This is close enough to justify my assertion that gravitation has a limited range. As I show in Appendix II, the inertial property of a particle vests in its electric charge responding to the influence of an accelerating electric field in just such a way as to conserve its energy
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
134
and avoid radiation of its intrinsic electric field energy. This is not to say that the accelerated electron is inactive in the role of radiating energy, because a group of electrons accelerated together can operate collectively in developing such radiation and one has to look also at the kinetic energy (magnetic energy) associated with electromagnetic wave propagation. This key to understanding the nature of inertia is of vital importance to cosmological theory. Ernst Mach (1893) regarded the background of very distant stars as a firm base of reference for the determination of inertial action. Quoting from p. 169 of the book: The Structure of the Universe by J. Narlikar (Oxford University Press; 1977): Mach concluded that inertia owes its origin to the background of distant stars. Remove the background and the body will cease to have any inertia! This reasoning is known as Machs Principle. Then on p. 170 of that book one reads: In the early 1950s the Cambridge physicist Dennis Sciama suggested an interesting interpretation of Machs principle. He argued that, when a non-inertial coordinate frame is used, the inertial forces arose because of gravitational forces exerted by distant matter. Imagine a body like the Earth which is being attracted by the Suns gravitational field. In the frame of reference in which the Earth is at rest, we can argue that it is acted on by two equal and opposite forces: (1) the Suns gravitational force of attraction and (2) the force exerted by the rest of the Universe. The latter is expected to depend on the density of distant matter and its distance from the Earth. Starting with this idea Sciama deduced from general arguments the relation: GT2 = 1
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
135
In this relation, is the mean density of matter in the Universe and T is the time scale associated with the expansion of the Universe. If we use Hubbles constant H, we may write T = 1/H. Sciamas ideas on this theme are typical of the reasoning used by cosmologists who cannot contemplate gravity having a limited range of action, and look to find answers to the problem of inertia in the far distance of space, whereas the phenomenon of inertia is something they can research on a laboratory bench. All they have to do is to look into the physics of the electron and avoid the a priori assumption that a single accelerated electron must radiate energy by saying instead that it seeks to conserve the energy it acquires from its interaction with the electric field that produces that acceleration [see Appendix II]. In mentioning Sciama, I am reminded that I received my Cambridge Ph.D. in 1954 as did Sciama, and that a few years later I met with Sciama to discuss my ideas and the aether theory I present in this work. He was polite and attentive but showed little interest other than saying: We all believe in the aether, but we call it space-time. The message was clear; relativity rules in the mind of the cosmologist and unification of field theory means building on Einsteins foundations to discover the ultimate link. I maintain that the 2.7 K cosmic background temperature, coupled with the theoretical derivation of the quon mass, in the aether which I have explored in deciphering Natures coded messages, provides the evidence that gravitation has a restricted range of action. I would have liked in this section on space domains to be able to explain what, on an ab initio basis, determines the size of such a space domain. That is a problem I have not solved and one which I can but bequeath to future researchers. In the analogous situation, that of the magnetic domains which form in the crystals of a ferromagnetic material, domain size is determined, as ever, by an energy
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
136
optimization process. The domain walls which divide adjacent domains have an energy density per unit area owing to the field reversal that occurs in traversing the wall. The volume of domain enclosed by the domain walls determines an energy which scales in proportion to domain size, the energy density being partially strain energy (positive potential) and magnetic field energy (negative potential). Combining these energies, optimum (minimum) energy criteria determine the domain size, of the order of 100 microns or so in iron. It is not so easy to see a way forward along these lines when considering the space domain, bearing in mind we are dealing with distances measured in light years. However, before moving on from this chapter section, we will approach the problem by imagining the initial creation of our Sun in a space domain and looking to see if, in acquiring its initial angular momentum, it did that by drawing on the resource of the space domain in which it was born. We shall assume one single space domain devoted to the creation of the Sun and see if we can deduce the physical size of that domain, using the data we have derived for the photon in chapter 6 and for aether structure in chapter 7. In deriving equation (6.17) we saw that an energy E fed into the aether involves the addition of an angular momentum of E/ and, from equation (6.16), half of this energy goes into kinetic energy. Conversely, if the aether sheds an energy E as gravitational energy it loses angular momentum E/ and kinetic energy E/2. This angular momentum, as shed by an entire space domain, is assumed to go to the star. On this basis each quon in the domain will shed energy given by the equation: mo = .......................................... (8.4) where H is here the angular momentum released by each unit cell of the aether. We have seen that the mass of the quon is 0.0408 times that of the electron and we know r/d is 0.3029, where r is the Compton
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
137
electron wavelength 2.426x10-10 cm divided by 4, and so can determine d. From this, given that each cubic cell of the aether has a volume d3 and that electron mass is 9.109x10-28 gm, the mass density of the quon lattice is approximately 144 gm/cc. When we double this to add the equal mass density of the graviton system, the total mass density of what might be referred to as the structured space medium is 288 gm/cc. It is high compared with the mass density of Earth or Sun but low in comparison with the massenergy density that applies to the virtual muon population of the aether. Yet we do not sense any resistance in moving through this aether, thanks to the inherent inertial balance of the aether medium. We shall see presently in this chapter how such a mass density can be confirmed by the evidence available. Meanwhile we denote this 288 gm/cc mass density as o and formulate an equation for the total angular momentum (AM) shed by a domain to form a star. Although space domains must have planar boundaries as with magnetic domains and so are likely to be cubic in form, it eases calculation to assume a spherical form of radius D, merely to estimate the scale involved. From (8.4), bearing in mind that only half of o is effective in interacting with the gravitational potential , the total angular moment shed in forming the star is: (AM) = The result is: and so D is given by: (AM) = GMD2/ .............................. (8.6) D2 = S/Go .................................... (8.7) where S is the parameter angular momentum /mass of the star. We can now calculate D as it applies to the creation of the Sun. At creation, prior to the Sun shedding its planets, its angular momentum, as evaluated in Appendix V, was some 3.2x1050 cgs units
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
( GM/R)( /2)(4R )(1/)dR ................. (8.5)

o 2
0
138
and its mass 2x1033 gm. With o as 288, G as 6.67x10-8 and as 7.8x1020 also in cgs units, we then find that D is 4.6x1020 cm or 480 light years. If the Sun was created within a cubic space domain one would expect its cube dimension to be of the order of 760 light years on this basis, a figure that might seem to be a useless piece of information, were it not for certain geological evidence. Given that our solar system is travelling through the aether at some 390 km/s subject to an uncertainty of 60 km/s, as detected from the U-2 aircraft radiometer experiments measuring anisotropy of the 2.7 K cosmic background radiation, the Earth would surely traverse a domain boundary more than once in every period of one million years. Such an event must be quite traumatic if the range of gravitational action is confined within a space domain. One would need to pray for a fast crossing in a direction normal to the planar boundary of the domain, as a crossing at a very acute angle would prolong the lapse of gravity and involve enormous upheaval and earthquake activity. So, you see, understanding more about Creation even in a steady-state universe can bring with it the threat, one day, of impending doom. Geological history must have its own messages of record and such history will inevitably repeat itself one way or the other. We will end this chapter by digressing into this subject and also into the theme of neutron stars, but first we must complete our analysis of the aether properties by considering the theory of aether spin by reference to Fig. 8.1 and the one bright hope that it brings for the prospect of our tapping energy from the aether itself. Aether Spin We have seen how the photon is explained as a tiny unit of aether structure spinning about a central axis. It was implied that the presence of an electron might suffice to nucleate such a spin on the basis that its electric field acting on the group of quons and from the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
139
centre of that group might induce that state of spin. Now we shall look at this picture to see what happens on an astronomical scale. Referring to Fig. 8.1, a quon, denoted q, describes an orbit of radius r at the angular frequency of our quantum underworld and we will now assume that, for some reason, there is a superimposed rotation of the centre of that orbit owing to motion at angular velocity R about a central axis at a distance R. We suppose these two circular motions are coplanar, meaning their axes of spin are mutually parallel.
Fig. 8.1 Now, the overriding constraint that governs our aether and accounts for so much of what is fundamental to the physics of our universe is the synchrony of time keeping that ensures there is no departure from conformity with the angular frequency. One then sees from Fig. 8.1 that, when the two motions are compounded, the radius of the quon orbit is affected and must vary between r(1+R/r) and r(1- R/r) for the condition of synchronous motion to apply. In effect, the quon moves at a steady speed in orbit about a new centre radially displaced from the remote axis through a distance R/. This means that, if a spherical body of aether with its quon lattice spins at the angular frequency , there will be an accompanying
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
140
induction of charge density s given by incrementing the radius R of a disc of charge density by this amount R/. We then have: (s)R2 = [(R + R/)2 - R2] .................... (8.8) Which gives: s = 2/ ......................................... (8.9) This is a formula for aether spin by which a charge density of s is induced in the aether when it spins bodily at the angular frequency and, conversely, a formula giving the rate of spin produced by the presence of a charge of density s. Here we have something that has eluded the efforts of generations of physicists who seek to understand the mechanics of the universe, whether as believers in the existence of an aether or not. The value of as the charge density of the continuum is known from the theory, but it is charge which is neutralized by the presence of the quon population. This means that the only charge density which is in evidence is the induced charge density s. However, even this, when present owing to aether spin, can induce charge displacement in matter, and vice versa, in a way which, in certain circumstances, reveals itself by setting up a magnetic moment without exhibiting a measurable electric field. Having now regard to equation (6.8) in chapter 6, since we proved that x is 2r, we can write: 8qr = mo2r ................................. (8.10) which, by writing o as 2mo(/q), tells us that; o = 16(/)2 ................................ (8.11) Then, having in mind the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis and the charge induction in a star by virtue of the K-shell atomic electrons of hydrogen colliding to set protons free and so develop a positive core charge density of G1/2 times the mass density m of the star, we can now formulate: s = m (G) ..................................... (8.12) which, from (8.9) and (8.11), gives the following relationship between the angular velocity of the aether spin and the mass density of the star:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
141
= m (4G/o) ........................... (8.13) Since we have, by theoretical analysis of the aether derived the numerical values of G and the mass density o of the quon-graviton system, the term in brackets is known to be 5.39x10-5 rad/sec per gm/cc. The equation (8.13) is important because it tells us how fast the aether of a star spins owing to its positively charged electrical core, assuming our theory is correct. This spin is sustained by the presence of that distributed charge set up by gravitational forces being balanced by proton charge repulsion to cause the core mass density to be uniform at the value 1.4 gm/cc set by the K-shell electron collisions in the close contact between the stars hydrogen atoms. Now, although we are progressing in our quest to understand the processes involved in Creation, the formation of our universe, there is an element of speculation involved, once our analysis involves us in looking too far beyond our own solar system. You may regard the space domain as a mere notion but you will see the evidence before we end this chapter. Meanwhile, however, I shall concentrate on giving my account of how our Sun was created and how it evolved to form the planets. The Creation of the Sun The aether was in a chaotic state having no structure and no order. Then it found order just as iron does when it cools from its molten state to form crystals and then, at a lower temperature, the Curie temperature, form magnetic domains and bring ferromagnetism into being. However, the aether analogy is the formation of the quon lattice structure with its space domains and with gravitation as the emerging phenomenon, rather than ferromagnetism. So somewhere in this sea of aether there was the space domain in which our sun was born. That space domain had a certain physical size which our theory suggests was a cube of the order of 760 light years in its side dimensions. With order and a surplus of free energy
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
142
came the creation of protons and electrons to keep electrical charge in balance, but gravity was now in control and those protons came together faster than the electrons and so set up a stellar body, our sun, with a positively charged core. The relatively few electrons that came in late converged on the Sun at its boundary spherical surface but were held there because by then the aether coextensive with the body of the Sun was spinning at the speed determined by equation (8.13) above. Independently from this, however, the matter which constituted our sun was also spinning because it had acquired the angular momentum shed by the aether owing to its gravitational potential. That angular momentum was the quantity defined by equation (8.6) above, which was the value 3.2x1050 cgs units that we have already related to the space domain size. As one can work out from these data, given the mass of the sun together with that of the planets and its radius, the Sun at creation was spinning at an angular velocity of 8.3x10-5 rad/sec or about once every 21 hours [See Appendix V]. Is it not then interesting to find, from equation (8.13) that our aether theory tells us that the Suns aether, even now, spins at 7.5x10-5 rad/sec or about once per day, like the Earth today? Is this a message that says, working backwards, that the size of a space domain is determined over eons of time by stars being created and then suffering annihilation in a cycle of events which are governed by an overall process of equilibrium in energy and angular momentum deployment? I leave that thought here on record and move on in my more immediate quest. How did the planets form as our Sun somehow shed its angular momentum? Well, I can but assume that, once formed at the centre of its space domain, the sun was left in limbo for quite a while before it drifted into a boundary wall of that domain. Here it would, being so slow in traversing that first boundary, be subject to enormous gravitational upheaval as its surface material would tend to break away. Once released, of course, by being thrown off, the inertial
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
143
reaction would impart momentum through the centre of the Sun and it would then travel much faster through cosmic space and many a domain boundary from then on without suffering much loss of matter. I remind you that I cannot claim to know all the answers and at this stage I can but rely on something I referred to on page 158 of my book: Physics Unified. I there stated: R. A. Lyttleton in his book Mysteries of the Solar System, (Clarendon press, Oxford, p.34; 1968), has explained how magnetic forces exerted within a system of charge by its rotation and self-gravitation will force angular momentum outwards. Thus the transfer of angular momentum X to a concentrated surface zone is understandable. In a sense this can be thought of as a phenomenon similar to the gyromagnetic reaction already discussed. The reaction angular momentum of the field absorbs angular momentum from the centre of the body and the primary balance of angular momentum is driven to the outer periphery of the rotating system, all as a result of the diamagnetic screening effects within the electrical core. Here that reference to gyromagnetic reaction will be seen as a topic we discuss in chapter 9, and that quantity X as belonging to the matter shed by the sun to form the planets is here introduced in the following equation: kQ2/R2 = X2/mR3 .............................. (8.14) This equation merely says that a positive electrical charge Q sitting inside a charged sphere of radius R and interacting with a negative charge Q at the surface of that sphere will develop a force that can be balanced by matter of mass m having an angular momentum X. The factor k is merely a coefficient introduced to help the onward discussion.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
144
The Creation of the Planets The argument is that when the sun traversed its domain boundary the normal gravitational pull on mass m was eliminated for much of the transit period. Also the result the electrical attraction would be affected because one can see space domains as defining regions of space and anti-space in which electric polarities are reversed. By this I mean that, whereas here in our own space domain of the present era, we have protons that are electrically positive and electrons that are electrically negative, one could find the situation reversed in an adjacent space domain. On this basis it is plausible to suggest that the mass m with its angular momentum X could break away from the Sun when the domain boundary is crossed or, perhaps, there might be a sequence of such eruptions and separations as successive domain boundary crossings occur in the early life of the sun. The overall consequence has to be what we see today, which is a system in which the total planetary mass m in relation to the Suns mass M can be formulated as: m/M = 32/25mGk .............................. (8.15) This equation is derived from (8.14) given that Q is G1/2M and that M is 4mR3/3, with X as 2MR2/5. Consider what this equation (8.15) means. It tells us that, if we know the total mass and angular momentum of the solar system and accept that this was all seated in the Sun when it was created then we know . With m then known to be 1.4 gm/cc from our hydrogen ionization theme, as discussed in Appendix IV, or as is evident by dividing the Suns mass by its volume, we are in a position to deduce the value of m/M theoretically. Surely, then, if this were to be even reasonably close to the value we derive from astronomical measurement of our solar system, we would be justified in crying out: Eureka. After all, we are discussing Creation and the birth of our planets, including Earth, and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
145
it is indeed a challenge for physics to give a justified foundation for such a claim. Well, Appendix V, shows the value of m/M based on observation. The total mass of the planets as divided by the mass of the Sun is 1/745. So what does equation (8.15) tell us? Remember that G is 6.67x10-8 cgs and we have just shown that is 8.3x10-5 rad/sec, so with m as 1.4 gm/cc we find that m/M is 1/355k. Now you see why that factor k was included. If only it were to have the value 2, then the m/M ratio of 1/710 would be close enough to 1/745 for the cry: Eureka! We can but move on now to consider how the Earth itself was created. The Creation of the Earth The Earth has a m value of 5.5 gm/cc and of the initial Earth before the Moon was ejected was, according Lyttleton (Science Journal, 5, 53; 1969), 5.5 hours per revolution or 3.2x10-5 rad/sec. This is easily verified by adding the Moons angular momentum in its lunar orbit to that now possessed by the Earths spin, given the assumption that angular momentum is conserved. In this case we find that for k =1 the Moon/Earth mass ratio given by equation (8.15) is 1/83. Here we can shout: Eureka because the mass is known from astronomical measurement data to be 1/81 and that surely is close enough for us to see merit in our theory. We do seem to have a viable theory of Creation as applicable to planetary formation, but must somehow explain how k as pertaining to the sun can have the value 2. What is the difference between the Earth in its state of crossing a space domain boundary and the sun in crossing such a boundary? In this primeval state the Earth can hardly have consolidated as a solid body. It must have condensed from an ionized gas and the core charge induction of G1/2 times that mass would hold for atoms that have shed an electron as it is not restricted to protons. The problem, however, is
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
146
why our Earth formed from a spread of atoms of many forms given its source in the hydrogen atmosphere of the Sun. If there were such heavy atoms in the Sun, how is they were the ones expelled to form Earth along with its partner of similar form Venus? Maybe Jupiter and Saturn were created in the first domain boundary crossing by the Sun, and Uranus and Neptune in the next boundary crossing, then Earth and Venus, followed by Pluto and Mars, with Mercury and a body that broke up to form the asteroids as the final traversal that created any satellites. Maybe atomic transmutations to form heavy atoms can occur in profusion at times of traversal of space domain boundaries, particularly in smaller bodies. Whatever the answers are, one at least can see a reason for physics to operate in an unusual way during the transitions at those domain boundaries. One possibility that I have in mind is the thought that Venus and Earth were expelled in opposite directions when the Sun traversed a domain boundary at an oblique angle. The surface segment of the solar sphere that penetrates into the adjacent domain will then lie to one side of the Suns spin axis and the ionized matter that is shed will tend to be thrown off in a plane at right angles to that spin axis. Inevitably, therefore, if the matter which formed Venus went off into the forward direction and so moved faster into the new domain, the matter forming our Earth would be thrown backwards and, being still in ionized gaseous form, it could experience its own excursion back across the domain boundary and so back into the domain it had just left as part of the Sun. In that case it too would be subject to break up on the basis of equation (8.14). The moon would then emerge as the Earths satellite in virtually the same creation stage as the Earth itself. This would be long before the Earth solidified and so implies the creation of the moon independently of the notion that its creation might account for the Pacific Ocean being so large. As to the Earth solidifying, that would begin to occur as the gaseous matter rapidly deionized and as the Earth cooled upon moving well away from the sun. As to the processes regulating those atomic transmutations
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
147
necessary to build the heavy atoms of the Earths composition, that has to remain a matter of speculation, though such processes could well be activated during the many successive crossings of space domain boundaries over eons of time, possibly hundreds of millions of years, before the Earth assumed its present form. Meanwhile the Sun itself would remain immune from such transmutation activity, because its tremendous physical size would, by its strong gravitational pull, keep its hydrogen atoms in close enough contact to remain ionized. Note that the ionization condition, if in accordance with what is outlined in Appendix IV, will preclude direct contact of the protons of adjacent atoms and so make atomic transmutation into heavier atoms less likely. Moving on, we come now to our next Eureka exclamation as we find the answer to that k=1 or k=2 dilemma. The answer, it seems, depends on whether the astronomical body in question has a spinning aether of larger or smaller radius than the body itself. The Ionospheric Aether Upon crossing a domain boundary there is a transition between space and anti-space, analogous to the transition between matter and antimatter, meaning a reversal of charge polarity in the aether itself. So our Sun with its proton charged positive core, as compensated by a negative charge induced by aether spin and charge displacement to the spherical surface, will, in crossing a domain boundary, suddenly find that the core charge polarity induced by aether spin is reversed. There will then, according to whether the aether spin radius lies outside the Sun or inside the Sun, be an effect as defined by equation (8.14), where k is 1 or 2. This action is depicted in Fig. 8.2 where the red circles represent the bounding contour of the astronomical body and the blue circles the bounding contour of the associated spinning aether.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
148
Fig. 8.2 The two alternatives are illustrated in the upper part of Fig. 8.2 and one can see that the electric field effects of the core charge plus aether spin charge cancel in both cases to leave a charge Q, negative in one case and positive in the other, sitting within the outer charge Q of opposite polarity. Remember that we are discussing circumstances that apply in the very early stages of Creation. When the space domain boundary is crossed the lower part of Fig. 8.2 represents the charge deployment. The core charge Q of the body remains as before, but the aether spin, being sustained in direction by angular momentum conservation, involves quons and charge continuum the polarities of which have reversed and so we have a charge 2Q sitting within a negative charge Q at the body surface in one case but 2Q as offset by a negative aether surface charge Q sitting within a negative charge Q at the body surface in the other case. Here is the explanation of how k can be 2 or 1. We can conclude that the Sun has, or at least had during the planetary creation phase, an aether spin that was of larger radius than the Sun itself,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
149
whereas Earth, for which k is 1, had an aether spin bounded within what was effectively its physical surface. The story unfolding from this is that our Sun was created by an onset of gravity accompanied by an inflow of protons ahead of electrons and by an inflow of aether angular momentum. This was a one-off event occasioned by aether structure crystallization which introduced the synchronous dynamic state and allowed gravitons to form and so introduce the action of gravity. Since Creation, our sun has shed much of its initial angular momentum to form planets, but its inherent core charge is maintained by gravity acting on its ionized atoms in a preferential sense focussed on free protons. In its turn, this core charge sustains aether spin at a rate of spin that is unrelated to the actual spin of the matter comprising the sun, but an aether spin which, over time, must reverse in direction to adapt to the normal state where core charge is compensated by a neutralizing charge displacement. The conditions prevailing for a short period during and after crossing a space domain boundary are therefore exceptional and are in no way representative of what we observe today as our Sun moves through space well within the confines of the local space domain. As to our Earth, during this initial creation phase it must have been gaseous in form and so of much larger physical size that it is today. As its ionization vanished and heavier matter evolved so that it became consolidated in the form we see today its aether spin would be sustained, not by gravitationally induced core charge, but by its residual aether angular momentum. Aether spin would become the primary factor resulting in electric charge displacement and the Earth would respond by deploying electrons in its metallic and semiconductor composition and ionic displacement in its oceans along with deployment of free charge in the aether itself. The spin of the quon lattice system sets up radial charge displacement from the spin axis and so a charge system that shares that spin but the counterflow of non-spinning aether charge, as needed to balance linear momentum owing to the cosmic motion of our Earth with its spinning aether
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
150
provides the action which neutralizes the induced charge electrostatically but not its magnetic effects. We therefore have the situation where, after the moon had been shed by the Earth, it could, for a short period, induce the charge effect which produced aether spin and imported angular momentum and, thereafter, as it lost its charge induction capability when no longer ionized, leaving the aether already spinning to hold on to whatever angular spin momentum it had acquired. This would keep the Earths aether spinning in the same direction as the Earth traverses successive domain boundaries in its onward cosmic motion with the solar system, but owing to the charge polarity reversals of the aether as each new space domain is entered, there then needs to be a reversal of the Earths magnetic moment at each domain boundary crossing. Such a reversal would take effect over a period governed by eddy-current reaction as the currents induced in the Earth retarded the transition, but our expectation then has to be that our space domain theory is open to test by our search for the geological fingerprints left by such reversals. This brings us to the final topic of this chapter, geomagnetism. Geomagnetism Before we delve too deeply into this question of the Earths magnetic field, it is appropriate to note that two compensating charge effects are involved in an electrostatic sense, one seated in the Earths body form and the other seated in the aether spinning within body Earth. Additionally, there is the factor that the aether spin is about an axis that does not share the precession of the Earths spin. Here may lie the reason why the geomagnetic poles are at latitudes offset from the geographic poles by as much as 17o and why those geomagnetic poles move around the Earth at the 73o latitude in cycles of 960 years duration. In 1659 the magnetic declination at London, England was zero. By 1820 this declination had reached its maximum westerly of 24.5o and it reduced to 11o 52' W by 1933, the expectation being that it will be zero again in the year 2139.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
151
So here you can see that something involved in setting up the Earths magnetic field is moving within body Earth and changing its spin axis very slowly, a sure sign of something having a very large amount of angular momentum subjected to forces that cause the kind of precession one sees in a spinning top. This has to be a message which says the aether is there spinning within body Earth! A great deal of effort has been expended by physicists in trying to prove or disprove claims concerning the source of the Earths magnetic field. Some decry the idea of a magnet sitting in the Earths core. The reason is that the shape of the Earths magnetic field does not fit the dipole pattern. Some have argued also that the field cannot arise from an electric charge sharing the Earths rotation, even allowing for some factor neutralizing its electrostatic action. Their reason is the same, the shape of the field as measured at the Earths surface and in comparison with measurements at depths a few miles below the Earths surface. None, however, seem to have factored into their analysis the simple fact that a distributed core charge of one polarity accompanied by a compensating surface charge of opposite polarity would combine to determine a magnetic field pattern that fits what is observed. As to the magnitude of the field, we can calculate the geomagnetic moment involved, noting that whatever the component for the distributed core charge, the surface charge will set up double that in the reverse sense. The net magnetic moment in theory is, therefore, 1/2c times the electric charge velocity moment, or: (1/2c)(2/5)(4s/3)R5 .............................. (8.16) Here, R is the radius enclosing the charge of density s and is the angular velocity of its rate of spin. Since the charge here is induced by aether spin we need to use the equation (8.9) to eliminate the charge density term and give a result dependent only on R and plus two constant parameters of the aether. We then obtain: (8/15c)R52(/) ............................... (8.17)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
152
which, since is e/d3 and is c/2r, gives us our final formula for the magnetic moment induced by aether spin as: (16/15)erR52/d3c2 ............................... (8.18) In this expression er is the Bohr magneton, known from experiment to be 9.27x10-21 cgs units, d is 6.37x10-11 cm as we know from the evaluation of r/d in chapter 7 and e and c as measured are 4.803x10-10 esu and 2.998x1010 cm/s, respectively. Applying this to our Earths aether, if deemed to spin at the same angular velocity as Earth itself, namely 7.27x10-5 rad/s, and if R is 6.45x108 cm, we obtain a magnetic moment of 7.86x1025 in cgs emu. Now the corresponding value of the geomagnetic moment as estimated from measurement of the Earths magnetic field is 8.06x1025 which is close to our theoretical value. If R were 6.50x108 cm then the magnetic moment in these units would be 8.17x1025. I conclude from this that the Earths magnetic field is generated by aether spin and that the aether sphere spinning with body Earth, albeit with its spin axis tilted with respect to that of Earth and there being precession causing the geomagnetic poles to move around the Earths geographic poles. The Earths radius is 6.38x108 cm and so its aether sphere extends a little way above the Earths surface and this may have a role in accounting for the outer ionosphere layer of our upper atmosphere. As to the magnetic action involved, I see the primary induction as that of charge displacement in the aether which is matched by a balancing charge displacement in the matter constituting body Earth, but the latter charge providing the magnetic field and the aether charge having a passive role in that respect. Such is my theory of geomagnetism, a theory which convinces me that the subject of aether spin, whether by entrainment with a rotating material body to so induce an electrically charged condition or by a spin action arising from the prior existence of a charged state, has a potential role in future energy technology. Note that, whereas we needed to argue that the Earths aether spin was bounded within the Earths material radius in its primordial
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
153
creation state, as evident from the k = 1 factor, we find that, upon consolidation and contraction to its ultimate form, it has come within the aether spin boundary. This seems a consistent picture and so, our final task in this chapter 8, is now to show how geomagnetism can tell us something about the space domain pattern on a universal scale. For the record I can say that discovering the basis of aether spin and obtaining this result for the geomagnetic moment were very early achievements in my theoretical efforts. They date from the second half of the 1950s as one can verify by referring to my work entitled: The Theory of Gravitation, the preface of which is dated 22nd November, 1959. On page 32 of that work, under the heading The Calculation of the Geomagnetic Moment, one can see how the same numbers emerge from the same formulae as those introduced above. As there noted the results obtained suggested: ... that the Earths aether terminates at a mean height of about 140 miles above the Earths surface. This suggests that the ionosphere may be a phenomenon arising at the aether boundary. It should be noted that it could be that the aether boundary is graded and occurs in stages , corresponding to different ionosphere levels. These levels are at mean altitudes of 45, 75, 105 and 155 miles respectively. There was, in fact, one difference which affected the resulting numerical derivation, in that my analysis in that early work took account of the 23.5 degree tilt between the Earths spin axis and the axis in space about which it precesses. Charge induction by aether spin is subject to a reducing factor, according to the cosine of any such angle of tilt, because the quon orbits of radius r are about an independent axis in space, which I assume is closer to that about which the planets orbit the sun than to the Earths spin axis. This was factored into that earlier treatment of the subject, but is omitted here
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
154
to keep the presentation simple and avoid digression along tracks that are open to debate but do not affect the primary case presented. The derivation of the geomagnetic moment by such a theory was, of course, enough for me to cry Eureka at the time, nearly 50 years ago, but, as ever, the doctrine of the aether was the bugbear. When opportunity presented itself some ten and more years later, I was able to draw my theory to the attention of Sir Edward Bullard, who was a key contributor to the physics of geomagnetism. He had published papers on the theory of the origin of the Earths magnetic field in terms of differential rotation of parts of the Earths core and the theory of hydromagnetism that was of interest in the middle of the 20th century [E. C. Bullard et al., Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 243A, 67-92 (1950)]. The only reaction I drew from that contact was his comment that my theory did not explain the magnetic moment of planet Mars. Inevitably, you see, such contacts lead to one being side-tracked and diverted, with really no scope for recovery that addresses the main issue. Another such example was after my 1969 book: Physics without Einstein was published and led to a published reviewed by a scientist of the National Physical Laboratory in U.K. My theoretical derivation of the fine structure constant on page 115 of that work had given the result: hc/2e2 = 137.038 in agreement with what was previously of record as its measured value, whereas the latest consensus as to its experimental value had become a figure of 137.036. The tone of the review, though guarded, made me feel that it was thought my way of deriving this number was contrived to give a fit, rather than being good physics. Yet I had on page 111 introduced a section entitled: Space Polarization Energy, which was evidently a little speculative as to a term which enhanced r/d from its formal zero energy aether structure value of 0.30289 to 0.30292 and a fine structure value of 137.036 requires, according to the formula given by the theory, equation (7.24), that r/d should be 0.302916, which might excuse my error in relying on the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
155
approximate value 0.30292. Happily, thanks to the intervention of Dr. D. M. Eagles and his employment at the National Standard Laboratory in Australia Measurement, the necessary fine-tuning of my theory owing to discovering a resonance that governed that space polarization energy duly emerged. It led to evaluation of that factor governing N in the decoding exercise introduced in this work and gave the required result for the fine structure constant. As to our final Eureka of this pursuit to fathom the secrets of Creation, it concerns a theme I first wrote about in 1977 by a paper published in a little known periodical named Catastrophist Geology. It appears in volume 2 at p. 42 and describes space domains and their correlation with geomagnetic field reversals and geological disturbances. Then, in 1980, I discussed the subject again at pp. 168-174 of my book: Physics Unified. The following text is, for the most part, a replica of the account there presented. The Eureka cry is warranted because, not only does the historical pattern of geomagnetic field reversals tell us that there is a cubic pattern in space dividing domain regions of interchanged charge polarities as between electrons and protons and aether continuum and quons, but it also gives us a measure the dimensions of those domains and the latter matches what we have deduced from the dynamics of the suns creation. I hope the reader will agree that, given evidence which shows the Earths magnetic field has reversed, albeit over a period of a few thousand years owing to retardation as by induction of eddy currents in the Earths core, and then retained its direction of polarization for a few hundred thousand years before flipping direction again, it is a very difficult proposition to justify by physical theory. One may then begin to think the unimaginable, namely that, for some reason, with the Earth maintaining its direction of rotation owing to its very high inertia, that positive electricity has become negative and negative electricity has become positive. Yet, even then, there will be those who argue that if source of an electrical action reverses polarity and so field direction the sensors indicating that field direction, being
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
156
electrical themselves, must reverse polarity too and so detect no change at all. Either way, however, there is another circumstance that can result in a reversal that would be sensed. This applies if, in moving from one space domain to the next, the quons and gravitons in keeping to the precise rhythm of their dynamic balance, happen to orbit clockwise in one domain and anticlockwise in the adjacent domain. This has the merit of explaining how, on a universal scale, the angular momentum overall can be in balance, as seems likely given that the domain structure condenses from a chaotic state that would have no overall rotary motion. On this latter basis, the key factor governing geomagnetic field reversal is the sustained direction of spin of the Earth and its entrapped aether, regardless of domain boundary transit. Then, since charge polarity induced by aether spin reverses with the change direction of , we would surely have a geomagnetic field reversal at each domain boundary crossing. Although it is convenient to assume that the space domains all have the same size so as to fit together well in a cubic pattern, this may not be the case but we will make the assumption nevertheless. If each domain gives birth at Creation to a single star or a binary star pair, then the size of stars ought really to be more uniform than appears. However, much depends upon the energy in surplus in each domain and so available to create matter, those protons and electrons that form hydrogen. More critical, so far as uniformity of domain size is concerned, is the resulting angular momentum acquired by a star at birth. The key parameter here is that factor S in equation (8.7), the ratio of the angular momentum of a star to its mass. Constant space domain size means that this quantity must be constant, which in turn, for a star which has not shed any planets, means, from equation (8.13), a fixed ratio of mass/radius. However, a likely scenario affecting most distant stars is that there will be planets, in spite of our difficulty in detecting their existence. Accordingly, there is little point in trying to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
157
compare such data but, for what it is worth, let us take an extreme example of a red giant star. Betelgeuse is said by Jeans [The Stars in their Courses, Cambridge University Press, p. 92 (1931)] to be about 40 times as massive as the Sun and to occupy 25,000,000 times as much volume. The mass/radius parameter is 0.137 compared with the sun and the value of D given by (8.7), the radius dimension of the space domain in which Betelgeuse was created, would on this basis be 0.37 of that applicable to our Sun at creation. However, a red giant is believed to be the decaying form of a star, rather than the form it may have had upon initial creation. Since the majority of stars are similar to the Sun, we can, therefore, expect a reasonablyrepresentative pattern of geomagnetic field reversals to emerge from the choice of a simple cubic structured simple domain system. As the reader can see, those who theorize about stars and their creation, the cosmologists, have plenty of scope for research without imagining the Big Bang scenario, but they do need to get a better grasp of the physics which underlies the phenomena we observe here on Earth and within our solar system. Deciphering the secrets which determine the numerical parameters that physicists measure, often with incredible precision, is a pursuit which surely cannot be ignored, given that it can lead us along paths such as we are exploring here in relation to geomagnetic field reversals. If the domain cube dimension were to be such that its volume is that of a sphere having the radius of 480 light years estimated from the Suns data, or 780 light years as that of a cube matched to the volume of the assumed domain sphere in the earlier calculation, then, at its cosmic speed of the order of 390 km/s, our Earth would cross a domain boundary every 600,000 years or so if moving parallel with a cube side. That U-2 speed measurement was, however, subject to an uncertainty factor of 60 km/s and so a reversal period of the order of 700,000 years is consistent with the Suns data. In general, however, the motion will be inclined to such an axis and the planes separating domain boundaries will be crossed more frequently than this.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
158
In Fig. 8.3 the hypothetical pattern of reversals due to motion through cubic domain space is shown in a time scale measured in millions of years before the present time. The solar system is imagined to move in a straight line through the domain space over this period of time, though it does move in a slight arc owing to its galactic motion. The inclination of the line with the domain cube axes is chosen deliberately to give results which resemble the observed reversal sequence and the time scale has been matched accordingly. The names assigned to the reversals are those used conventionally to designate these events. There is a reasonably close correlation. The interesting result, however, is that such an erratic pattern of events lends itself to decoding in this way. I believe that this is affirmative support for the domain theory suggested, especially as the size of the domains derived from the empirical data fit is in close accord with that calculated for the Sun. A textbook showing the Earths magnetic field reversal pattern over the past four million years is one by D. H. Tarling and M. P. Tarling [Continental Drift , Bell, London, pp. 52 and 66 (1971)]. They also comment on the rather perplexing evidence which shows that fossil species have disappeared at times of reversal and new species have appeared shortly thereafter. This implies that the geomagnetic field reversal was accompanied by a rather more traumatic event. Reporting on documentary evidence gleaned from the deepsea floor of the Indian Ocean, the Science Correspondent of the U.K. newspaper The Times wrote in 1972: .... tiny metallic and glass beads that originated from outer space were fragments from some great cosmic catastrophe that caused molten particles to splash into the upper atmosphere some 700,000 years ago. The shower
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
159
Fig. 8.3
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
160
of debris coincided with the last reversal of the Earths magnetic field. The reader will notice that Fig. 8.3 shows a recent reversal of the geomagnetic field. The above report and the Tarling book both suggest that the last reversal was 700,000 years ago. If this were true then another reversal would be imminent on the time scale used in Fig. 8.3. However, since these reports were written, evidence of a reversal about 12,000 years ago, a very short-lived reversal, has emerged. This fits very well with the empirical evidence in Fig. 8.3, which shows a near crossing of a cube domain edge, meaning two reversals in rapid succession. I was unaware of the latest discovery when outlining this domain theory at the end of my book Modern Aether Science, published early in 1972. The fact that we have had a magnetic reversal in relatively recent times is reassuring if such events are accompanied by cosmic upheavals. One may well wonder whether catastrophic geological events can be traced to this recent period. On a longer time scale it is interesting to consider the circuital motion of the solar system in its galactic cycle and contemplate the fact that the Earth would cross the domain boundaries at different angles of incidence with a four-fold periodicity per galactic cycle. If, as my theory indicates, the gravitational field between matter in the Earth is disturbed when the domain boundaries are traversed, the faster the crossing, the less this disturbance. The crossing will be most rapid when the Earth approaches the boundary in the normal direction. If it approaches a boundary at a low angle it will take much longer to traverse it. Indeed, it seems statistically possible for an approach to be at such a low angle that the Earth could disintegrate on reaching the domain boundary. The probability is very small but it is a consequence of this theory and one might wonder whether the asteroids really originated in a planet broken up in this way. These ideas are rather speculative but they take encouragement from the researches of J. Steiner [Jour. Geol. Soc. Australia, 14, 99 (1967)], who did, in fact, visit me in England to discuss my theory
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
161
several years ago after becoming aware of my book: Modern Aether Science. He has made an extensive study of the possible correlation between geological events and the galactic motion and concluded that the constant of gravitation G may, in some way, depend upon the period in the galactic cycle. The theoretical interpretation of such data is difficult in view of the uncertainty in the present state of cosmological theory, particularly so far as concerns variation of G. The problem is further confused by the expanding Earth hypothesis which is dependent upon a slowly varying G. Yet Einsteins theory hardly permits G to vary and my theory as presented in this work requires G to be as constant as the charge-mass ratio of the electron. One feels that if the latter were to change then all other parameters, such as speed of light and the dimensions of the aether quon lattice structure, would change as well. I therefore favour the supposition that G is constant but only acts between matter within the confines of a common space domain. This renders G effectively dependent upon the close proximity of a domain boundary as far as geological events are concerned and seems to offer scope for relating geological events and galactic motion. Reverting, therefore, to the statement above that there would be a four-fold periodicity of gravitational upset in the galactic cycle, given the space domain picture, I draw attention to another of Steiners papers [Geology, p.89 (1973)] in which he writes: If Phanerozoic geological history incorporates any periodicities, they are of the order of 60 or perhaps 70 million years .... The galactic periodicity of the solar system is, however, approximately 274 million years, representing the length of the cosmic year, or one revolution around the galactic centre. I see this as a message which says that space itself has a cubic structure and have in mind a circular orbit traversed by the solar system which cuts across space domain boundaries almost tangentially four times per revolution and so results in tremendous gravitational upheavals in body Earth. A crossing normal to the space domain
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
162
boundary would be about a half a minute in duration, certainly enough to leave a trace in geological history, but the crossings that occur at very acute angles some four times per galactic cycle could be of several minutes duration and the loss of gravity between matter temporarily astride the boundary would be devastating at such times. Can you wonder, therefore, if I am slightly amused when those knowledgeable on such matters declare with confidence that dinosaurs became extinct some 70 or so million years ago owing to our Earth suffering impact from a large asteroid at about that time? Doomsday, or rather the next doomsday, at least for mankind, may be a game of chance encounter with an asteroid but if we want to predict how far away we are from certain extinction then future generations of cosmologists need to map those space domains and chart our motion to predict when and at what angle we are due to cross those boundaries as we progress along our collision course. My guess, from Fig. 8.3, is that we are safe for about 300,000 years, but only if there was, in fact, a boundary crossing some 12,000 years ago. That said, one could speculate concerning the long-term future of our Earth as it is transported through the vastness of space, riding, as it were, on the back of our Sun, a star that itself will surely have an eventual encounter ending in its demise, possibly as an event we call a supernova. To be sure, when our Sun explodes in such a way, our Earth will become nothing other than a multitude of energetic particles dissolved into and then swallowed by the all-pervading aether. Our speculation, however, has purpose because astrophysicists do witness such rare events from a very far distance and ponder over the data that they collect, looking for inspiration to guide their curiosity into the creative and destructive forces that prevail in our universe. Such data includes evidence which points to the debris of stellar destruction by creating what they believe are neutron stars, stars that are minute in size, when compared with a normal star, yet having an enormous mass density. So we shall now engage in a brief journey of
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
163
exploration as we probe the structure of such stars and seek to understand how they are created. Neutrons, Neutron Stars and the Aether Physicists in general are indoctrinated into the belief that neutrons exist in atoms in order to account for the imbalance of charge and mass of the atomic nucleus, the Z and A parameters. For the basic hydrogen atom, which has a proton as its nucleus, Z = A = 1. For all other atoms A is greater than Z and so these atoms are deemed to contain A-Z neutrons. Yet one surely must wonder why such higher order atoms cannot be conceived as having a charge of Z units nucleated by a core of small mass but centred within a system of A neutrons, the latter being protons or anti-protons that are rendered neutral by displacing charges normally occupying sites in the aether. However, as atomic theory developed with the discovery of the neutron, physicists were led to believe that the aether is a pre-20th century notion that became unnecessary once Einstein introduced his four-dimensional mathematical portrayal of space-time. This was even though the curvature of space-time was deemed to account for gravity but yet could not bring the long-sought unification as between gravitation and electrodynamics, nor account for the quantitative value of G, the constant of gravitation, in terms of, for example, the charge/mass ratio of the electron or proton. Now, sitting between these two problems, that of the neutron and that of the aether, there is, as it were, neutral ground, which might offer a decisive insight into this authors completely opposite perception that neutrons, as distinct from protons or anti-protons, do not exist within atoms, but that the aether does exist and is needed to explain gravitation and provide field unification as between electrical interaction and gravitation. Here I am assuming that some physicists, and particularly astrophysicists, who have glanced through the preceding chapters of this work, will have the neutron in mind and be reluctant to accept that I can jettison the notion of a neutron as something having a real
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
164
existence in atoms, given also their insight into the discovery of what they term neutron stars. Accordingly, the issue now to be addressed is the question: Do neutron stars really exist and if so what form does the so-called neutron assume in such a star? This is a truly fascinating question, given the mounting evidence from astrophysics that stars do exist which have enormous mass densities as if the mass of a normal star is squeezed into a very small volume of space. I persist in contending that neutrons, as particles distinct from protons, do not exist in atomic structure and my reason, simply, is that what atomic physicists presume to be neutrons are really anti-protons that have unseated and replaced quons in a region of aether occupied by the atomic nucleus. The hydrogen atom is special. It comprises, in A = 1 form a proton having a satellite electron. In A = 2 and A = 3 forms it comprises a deuteron or triton, respectively, along with a satellite electron, the deuteron and triton being rather special particles comprising protons bonded by an electron-positron accompaniment, as discussed elsewhere. See the paper entitled: 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, v. 9, pp. 129-136 (1986), also reproduced as Paper No. 1 in the Appendix of my book: Aether Science Papers , published in 1996. See also my Energy Science Report No. 5, 'Power from Water: Cold Fusion: Part I', 26 April 1994, which discusses the creation of the triton. These items are all of record on my website www.aspden.org . For atoms other than hydrogen, the physics of their creation has involved transit across a space domain boundary, owing to the motion of a star through space by which it leaves the domain of its birth and so moves into an adjacent space domain in which the charge polarities of the aether components are reversed. In adapting to this new domain environment, a small proportion of the protons that have been created to form the star can become seated in aether sites normally occupied by the quons. Owing to the electrically-neutralizing effect of the aether charge continuum they then exhibit the properties that we
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
165
ascribe to the neutron as an atomic constituent. The charged nucleus central to such groups of neutrons is formed from the merger of electrons, made possible during the space domain transit phase owing to the charge polarity inversion that features in the transition between what is, in effect, a region of matter and anti-matter or aether and antiaether, a process by which they are converted into a merged positron form of charge Z times the unitary charge e. The message here is that atoms of higher order than hydrogen are probably created over time as a star traverses space domain boundaries every few hundred thousand years or so, a subject discussed in the previous section of this chapter. Certainly also such atoms of higher order than hydrogen do not contain protons that are free from aether structure. The protons, or rather their anti-particle form, the anti-protons, that exist in such atomic nuclei are locked into the aether structure and indeed nucleate a unit of aether that can move through enveloping aether, each such proton contributing in effect to the atomic weight of the atom in proportion to the quantity A of nucleons that are deemed to be present with a quite small mass contribution from the charged composite positron charge of Z units. This argument as to atomic structure is well supported by the authors analysis dating from 1974 and published under the title 'The Chain Structure of the Nucleus', also of record on my website: www.aspden.org . However, it is mentioned here solely because we are considering what is meant by a neutron and are about to engage in a discussion of the composition of what is termed a neutron star. So, by way of summary, I have, in earlier chapters of this work, introduced the notion that the aether is composed of charged particles which I have called quons, these being set in a cubic structured array, owing to their mutual electrostatic repulsion, within a uniform continuum of opposite charge polarity, whereby the aether is electrically neutral overall. This is the defining structure of the aether, but there are other particles, particle-antiparticle pairs of charges, present, the gravitons, the taons and the muons, which make the aether an omnipresent sea of activity, seething with energy, but yet
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
166
somehow preserving an internal equilibrium and contriving to avoid detection, except by indirect, but very important intrusion into the physical world as we know it. So how do I approach the problem posed by the neutron star? Well, one can see that those quons defining the structure of the aether itself are, so far as we are aware, hiding as electrically neutral entities in that neutralizing background continuum and their mass effect in a gravitational sense is absorbed by the equilibrium of the aether so far as concerns its interaction with the mass of any matter present. However, the point I am coming to, be it a wild suggestion or not, but it surely being one worth exploring, given evidence that stars having enormous mass densities seem to have a real existence, is the suggestion that maybe a normal star, in contending with an excess of spin energy, can collapse into a form nucleated by a region of aether in which protons unseat and replace all the quons, so creating a very dense star in mass terms. At least this possibility warrants consideration, first in quantitative terms to see if the results fit with what is observed, and then in qualitative terms to see if we can provide a physical account of how this rare event in stellar evolution might occur. As we shall see, we encounter a quite extraordinary situation, because the factors governing gravity as we know it are severely affected. Yet, here again, thanks to the authors independent research on a theme not directly related to astrophysics but what is primarily a technological issue, there is insight which guides our enquiry. Here I refer to the subject of high temperature superconductivity as a pointer to the existence of the supergraviton as needed to provide dynamic balance for atomic molecules that are of high mass or even certain atoms at the upper end of the atomic mass scale. This has been the subject of work published elsewhere: 'The Supergraviton and its Technological Connection', Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 12, pp. 179-186 (1989). This paper is also of record on my website www.aspden.org . The key point is that the gravitons present in association with a highly concentrated mass in matter form
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
167
must themselves have high enough mass and be close enough to provide that dynamic balance by a close direct coupling with matter. The optimum state is one where these gravitons, though present in equal numbers in positive and negative electrical charge form, are not so prevalent or are such as to distort the aether from its normal state of equilibrium, that form in which it determines the values of the fundamental dimensionless physical constants on a universal scale. However, where exceptional conditions prevail and matter finds itself compacted to very high mass densities, then the aether is subject to some distortion but it will strive to adapt and must keep that dynamic balance that is the basis of gravitational action. Under such circumstances where matter is present in very highly concentrated mass form, the optimum energy equilibrium conditions favour the creation of a form of graviton that has a much higher gravitational effect than provided by the g-graviton or the graviton. It follows therefore that we must expect to encounter a gravitational anomaly if we seek to understand the state of a star which, from the evidence of astronomical observation, exhibits a very high mass density. It is appropriate here to note that the theory by which we have in this work explained the creation of our Sun and Earth, is based on an aether that has been shown to have a mass density that is some 200 times that of the Sun, half being in the quon constituent of the quantum underworld and half being in its graviton constituent. We are about to embark on a discussion of the neutron star for which the evidence of observation is said to indicate a mass density that is so enormous that it dwarfs the mass density of the aether we are considering. Indeed, in seeking here to discuss the neutron star we entering a realm of orthodox physics that loses sight of reality and introduces notions that are manifestly absurd. Any clear-headed reader will surely see that the following statement quoted from a news item on p. 3 of the July 2003 issue of Physics World, the monthly journal issued
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
168
to members of the U.K. Institute of Physics, contains a message that cannot possibly be valid: Isolated neutron stars are highly magnetized, rapidly rotating objects that are formed by the collapse of massive stars. Although they are typically only about 10 km across, neutron stars are at least 40% heavier than the Sun and their core density is higher than that of an atomic nucleus. One is tempted to ask in expletive form: How on Earth can the core density be higher than that of an atomic nucleus?, but know the answer will be: We are not talking about anything experienced on Earth! Instead, one must surely ask: Without an understanding of the true nature of the force of gravity what justification can there be for assuming that G is the same regardless of the mass density of the interacting matter involved? If the answer to that is: Isaac Newton proved that G is a universal constant and so it must apply to neutron stars then I say it is time to wake up and think again. Surely, once we begin to think that the evidence from a gravitational effect points to a source that is of higher mass density than the atomic nucleus, we ought to suspect that G, as a factor governing gravitational interaction, has itself increased in value and misled us by giving far too high a v alue for the measure of the mass density. Can G be Greater in a Neutron Star? Since this work offers an insight into what governs G, the force of gravity, let us ask how the aether might react (a) if it has to balance a system of protons taking up a full occupancy of the quon sites and (b) if, instead of the heavy leptons serving the graviton role, we substitute the very prevalent muon as the only alternative available. Now, before proceeding any further, I must make the point that, for a neutron star to have a mass of the same order as that of our Sun, whilst having a radius that is of the order of 10 km, it would need to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
169
have a mass density that is greater than that of the Sun by a factor in excess of 3x1014 and a mass density close to 5x1014 gm/cc. Then, in adhering to my belief in the aether theory presented in this work, I need to compare this with the mass density of the aether corresponding to its total energy density and almost wholly seated in the pair of virtual muons that populate each cubic cell of aether, this mass density having the limiting value which is less than 4x106 gm/cc. Note that these virtual muon pairs already exist in the aether and so, in adopting the role of the graviton, any distortion will be minimal especially in terms of energy adjustment. Going further and presuming that the creation of the neutron star will involve decay of numerous protons which revert to the muon form from which they were created, one can see that there could well be enough muons available to fill the needed super-gravitational role posed by very dense matter. However, here we confront the limiting mass density imposed by that proton occupancy of the quon sites in the aether and this mass density is the proton-electron mass ratio 1836 times 24.52 times the graviton-coupled quon mass density of 144 gm/cc. The factor 24.52 is the mass of the electron in terms of the effective dynamic mass of the quon, the latter being half of the cube root of that fundamental factor N of 1843 discussed earlier in this work, it being the volume of a sphere of charge constituting the quon as divided by the charge volume of the electron. This mass density is therefore some 6.48x106 gm/cc, a value in no way comparable with the astrophysicists standard assumption concerning the mass density of the neutron star. You will see from this that my vision of the aether can in no way support the belief that the neutron star has the very high mass density that is claimed on the basis of observation. By observation here I mean the inferences drawn from observation as based on that unproven assumption that G, the constant of gravitation, is a universal constant that applies within the very dense matter of a neutron star. I would rather be prepared for G to be different under such circumstances and contend that those virtual muons can replace
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
170
gravitons and that the mass density of a neutron star is no more than that value of 6.48x106 gm/cc just derived. Note that this is 4.6x106 times the mass density of our Sun, a typical star composed of hydrogen gas nucleated by protons that can move freely in the aether. Now, as to G and the possibility that it can become greatly enhanced in value by those virtual muons assuming the graviton role, we are here looking at a lepton form that has a charge volume some 14,769 times greater than the g-graviton and a mass that is 0.0407 times that of the g-graviton. To check this, keep in mind the derivation of g as 5062.3 from equation (2.6) in chapter 2 and the derivation of the energy quantum 412.6658 as that of a virtual muon pair from equation (7.29) in chapter 7. Then cube the mass-ratio 5062.3/206.33 and evaluate 206.33/5062.3. The ratio is 3.62x105 but is subject to a one third factor (corresponding to the factors involved in deriving equation (2.3) in chapter 2), modifying it to 1.21x105 and this has to be squared to derive the scaling factor for G itself. So you see, G within the neutron star will be greater than the normal value here on Earth by a factor of some 1.46x1010. The new combination of G and the stars mass density come into play when a normal star such as the Sun traverses a space domain boundary at an extremely acute angle, a very rare event which means that the stellar body sits astride the boundary for a period long enough to create the mayhem in which the protons of the normal star displace aether quons and so form the nucleus we call a neutron star. During this process the energy of the star is conserved, which means preservation of the magnitude of the quantity: 3GM2/5R .............................................(8.19) or: (4)2GR5/15 ..........................................(8.20) as both and G adjust to the new values. Evidently R changes in this process and even M changes but our primary consideration is the conservation of the energy that characterizes the creation of the original star, inasmuch as during this
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
171
period of violent activity as the star sits astride the boundary between two space domains, a boundary across which charge polarity reverses, particles of matter, even protons, have independent existence and can conserve mass-energy by being transmuted into other forms, reverting to the virtual muon state from which they were created. Expression (8.20) simply tells us that R has reduced by a factor that is the fifth root of the amount by which G2 has increased, the inverse of the fifth root of (4.6x106)2(1.46x1010) so that R is reduced from its parent star radius by a factor of 4.99x104. Taking the Sun as typical of the star which undergoes this transmutation into a neutron star, we can now estimate the radius of the neutron star as being of the order of 14 km, the Sun having a radius close to 700,000 km. Our theory therefore does provide a way of estimating the size of a neutron star that conforms with observational data. A Comparison with Standard Theory According to standard theory neutron stars are formed when the degenerate core of an aging supergiant star nears the Chandrasekhar limit and collapses. Supposedly, a neutron star of 1.4 solar-mass units, consists of some 1057 neutrons held together by gravity and supported by neutron degeneracy pressure. In explaining this, Carroll and Ostlie in their book An Introduction to Modern Astrophysics, published in 1996 (AddisonWesley), derive a formula for the radius of the neutron star at p. 598, based on theory analogous to that applicable to a white dwarf star, of which they say: For a neutron star of 1.4 solar-mass units, this yields a value of 4.4x105 cm. As was found for white dwarfs, this estimate is too small by a factor of about 3. That is, the actual radius of a 1.4 solar-mass neutron star lies roughly between 10 and 15 km. As will be seen, there are many uncertainties involved in the construction of a model neutron star.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
172
Well, here you see what standard theory has to offer. It lacks the benefit of insight into the true nature of gravitation and imagines that neutrons exist as some kind of gas, without explaining how they emerge by degeneration from the hydrogen of a normal star, and the result is an estimated physical size that is of the order of one thirtieth of the volume of a neutron star actually observed. My theory has led directly and unambiguously to a 14 km radius that conforms with observation. My theory does not rely on the mere speculation that, given the discovery of the free neutron by James Chadwick in 1932, it was feasible to imagine that such free neutrons could coalesce to form a neutron star. Instead I have explained the true nature of gravitation and derived the correct value of G by pure theory based on an aether sub-structure and, after showing how protons are produced, have explored whether those protons might, under certain circumstances, become seated in the aether and so exhibit the property we regard as that of the neutron. Accordingly, far from it being a weakness of my theory that I discard the notion of neutrons as being present in atoms having a Z value greater than 1 in spite of the evidence pointing to the existence of a neutron star, I claim a better understanding of the composition and structure of such stars than is available from standard theory presently of record. Conversely, in the light of this account of the neutron star, I see this as strengthening the basis on which I have, in that 1974 reference above, explained the atomic structure of atoms of Z value greater than 1, those purportedly containing neutrons. Indeed, in a sense, I could say that a neutron star is, in effect, an enormous atom, so far as its internal structure is concerned. I go further in my own speculations by suggesting that any normal hydrogen star can, if it happens to traverse a space domain boundary at a very acute angle, experience the traumatic upheaval of its protons sitting astride a boundary between space and anti-space in the sense of charge polarity inversion, a clear recipe for decay shedding an enormous amount of energy in what surely is a supernova.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
173
The geological evidence of recurrence of gravitational upset for a few seconds as body Earth along with the Sun traverse a space domain boundary at a cosmic speed of some 300-400 km/s in a direction at right angles to that boundary is surely enough to point the finger at this scenario of stellar evolution, without delving into theory as to how stars might evolve as they shed their energy slowly over time in the form of thermal radiation powered by nuclear transmutation. Keep in mind that stars were created, each in its own space domain, rather than at a common point in an event called a Big Bang. They radiate energy but that energy is absorbed into the aether and the aether has a way of regenerating matter from that energy, protons and electrons which inevitably are drawn into the stars by gravity. Therefore, in developing theory as to how stars evolve one should factor into the analysis those space domain crossings which are a matter of life and death where stars are concerned. The Magnetic Field of a Neutron Star It is a curious fact that astrophysicists see no problem in declaring that a neutron star has a very powerful magnetic field but yet is composed of particles that are neutral in electric polarity. Here in this work, however, we have seen why our Sun, owing to its composition of hydrogen atoms squeezed closely together by the action of gravity, has developed a state of ionization by which enough of those atoms shed electrons to leave electrically charged protons in a free state. Their stronger mutual rate of acceleration under gravitational attraction pulls them more closely together than their associated free electrons and so the sun has a positively charged core sitting within a spherical bounding shell of negative charge. This, as we have also seen, is a recipe for inducing aether spin as the whole body of aether bounded within that same shell is caused to rotate to set up a compensating charge displacement. The mathematical analysis involved revealed that G2 was a measure of the charge thereby neutralized by aether spin, but,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
174
conversely, should, for some reason, there be already a body of aether that has been set rotating, the matter sitting within it not acting as the primary charge causing that rotation, then aether rotation itself could become the primary action with charge induction in matter becoming the secondary effect. You will see here that I am picturing a situation just discussed where the protons of the normal star are somehow replaced by neutrons and looking for a basis on which to infer that the neutron star can set up a magnetic field owing to it sharing the spin of the coextensive aether. If those protons are seen as anti-protons once they enter the new space domain and so can unseat and replace quons in the aether, then they will appear electrically neutral. Although their mass is far greater than the quon mass that need not unduly distort the aether in a dynamic sense so far as affecting the quantum-related aether radius parameter r within that neutron star body, because of the synchronizing constraints asserted by the powerful electrostatic interaction prevailing within the relevant space domain. This assures that aether rotation must develop a magnetic field in a neutron star, just as it does in a normal hydrogen star in which electrons neutralize the action of almost all of the protons present. Already we have deduced a typical radius value for the neutron star based on application of the aether theory advanced in this work. Also for that typical neutron star we have deduced by theory the amount by which that quantity G2 exceeds the value normal for a star such as the Sun. This is all we need to derive an estimate of the magnetic field set up by a neutron star in its surface regions, as based on data for the Sun. However, owing to various factors, including sun spot activity, taking the Sun as a basis of reference for this computation, though possibly sufficient as an approximation, is not as reliable as an estimate based on the data we have for our Earths geomagnetic properties. So, taking Earth, which has a magnetic field strength of the order of 0.5 gauss at its surface, an aether radius slightly larger
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
175
than its actual equatorial radius of 6,378 km, a mean mass density of 5.5 gm/cc and an angular velocity of 7.27x10-5 rad/s, as the basis of reference, we should be able to estimate the magnetic field at the surface of a neutron star. Take note that, in the system of units we are using , the magnetic field of a spherical object can be estimated, given knowledge of its magnetic moment, by dividing that magnetic moment by the volume of the object and multiplying by the factor 4. This assumes that the magnetic field within the sphere is uniform. In fact, as applied to the Earth, the history of physics records that the greatest step forward in terrestrial magnetism was made by Gauss in a memoir entitled Allgemeine Theorie des Erdmagntismus dated 1839, in which Gauss calculated the positions of the Earths north and south poles and estimated its magnetic moment as 0.33R3, where R is Earth radius. This corresponds to a magnetic moment of 0.08 per unit volume and, multiplying this by 4 indicates a mean magnetic field within body Earth of about 1 gauss, whereas we know that the field strength over much of the Earths surface, as directed along lines that dip at an angle with respect to the horizontal, is closer to 0.5 gauss. Now, remembering the Schuster-Wilson hypothesis introduced earlier in this chapter, the magnetic moment of a spherical astronomical body of radius R spinning about an axis through its centre is proportional to G1/2 times its rate of rotation times R5. This means that the magnetic field of that body is proportional to G1/2R2. So, for the above estimate of the physical size of a neutron star, a 14 km radius based on the assumption that the source star from which it forms is similar to our Sun and in forming the neutron star deploys energy equivalent in magnitude to all of its gravitational potential energy, we can estimate the factor by which R changes. It is 14/6500 or 2.13x10-3 based on Earths aether having a radius estimated as being 6,500 km. We know the factor by which G changes. It is 1.46x1010, as was shown above. As to , this is the quantity 6.48x106 gm/cc as divided by 5.5 gm/cc, a factor of 1.18x106,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
176
and this then leaves us with the task of estimating the factor by which changes. Now, unfortunately, I have not, as yet, seen a way of deducing theoretically the rate of spin of the neutron star formed by the collapse of the source star, as otherwise this theory of neutron star formation would have been included in the earlier first draft edition of this work. Fortunately, however, in June 2003 it was reported in the journal Nature (v. 423, pp. 725-727) that both the speed of rotation and the magnetic field of a neutron star had been measured. That news item already mentioned as being at p. 3 of the July, 2003 issue of Physics World declared that this was the first ever measurement of the magnetic field of a neutron star and, concerning the measured field of 8x1010 gauss, the onward report at pages 27 to 30 of the September, 2003 issue of that same periodical declared: Although huge by terrestrial standards, this is much lower than expected, and the discrepancy is still not understood. This being the first reported measurement of the magnetic field of a neutron star, it is therefore very opportune and indeed very gratifying to find that this authors analysis does explain the magnetic field both quantitatively and qualitatively. The period of the star was stated as being 0.42413076 s, thereby giving as 14.8 rad/s, whereas the magnetic field strength measured was said to be as high as 8x1010 gauss. The neutron star factor by which scales in relation to that of Earth is, therefore, 14.8 divided by 7.27x10-5 or 2.04x105. Collecting the various factors together to evaluate the magnetic field of the neutron star using the overall scaling factor G1/2R2, we obtain: (1.46x1010)(1.18x106)( 2.04x105)( 2.13x10-3)2 which, upon evaluation, is 13.2x1010. This is the factor by which we estimate the magnetic field of the neutron star to exceed that of body Earth. Now, the 8x1010 gauss measurement of the neutron stars
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
177
magnetic field was based on cyclotron resonance of electrons close to its surface and so, if we were to relate this to an Earth measurement of magnetic field strength of 0.6 gauss, we have the truly astonishing result that a neutron star magnetic field some hundred billion times the strength of the field here on Earth has been fully explained by the aether theory of record in the earlier draft edition of this work and elsewhere in the authors other publications before that measurement was reported in the science literature. So you see, we have here an account of the properties of a neutron star, based on a theory which does not admit the existence of neutrons as having a stable existence in matter, whether that matter be an isolated atom or a stellar body. We are looking instead at the notion that protons or antiprotons exist in such matter but to appear as stable electrically neutral particles such protons or antiprotons have to displace like-polarity charges in the structural underworld of the aether, as evidenced by the so-called neutron star. As to the free but short-lived form of neutron detected in the experiments of high-energy physics, that has already been fully explained by this author elsewhere. See that reference above in this section to the paper entitled: 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, v. 9, pp. 129-136 (1986), where one has of record the full theoretical derivation of its mass, its magnetic moment and is mean lifetime, all in terms of the aether parameters as derived in this work. What is particularly satisfying from my point of view, as author, is that the extension of the theory to account for the neutron star has added weight to the argument that indeed there are space domain boundaries built into the underworld space fabric of our universe, as otherwise it would be far too speculative to devise a reason why a normal star might suddenly collapse to form a neutron star. It was intuition that set me on course to the belief that space domains might exist, but intuition born some 50 years before writing these words, a time when I was engaged on researching the magnetic energy properties of iron in relation to anomalous activity in what is a
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
178
crystalline substance containing within each crystal a pattern of magnetic domains bounded by planar domain walls. Apart from one further comment, this completes the main thrust of what I have to say on this subject and on the aether in particular. That comment is the reiteration that, whereas I have suggested that atoms of higher order than hydrogen are created during the traversals of space domain boundaries by normal hydrogen stars shedding protons which take up quon sites in sectors of aether that become locked into the structure of the newly formed atomic nucleus, there is the very rare occasion when the action escalates to the point where what emerges is a truly enormous heavy atom in the form of a neutron star. What remains now in the next chapter is the need to collect together certain loose ends and, in particular, clarify where electrodynamic action fits into the physics of Creation. Hopefully, however, enough has already been said to satisfy the reader that our decoding exercise is complete, or at least sufficiently complete to meet our set objectives. Whether what has been said will cause cosmologists to alter course in their theory concerning the Big Bang scenario remains to be seen. It will, I am sure, take some time, but at least I have done my best in presenting the case against that belief and the best I can hope for is that those who read this work will begin to understand what is implied by the word Creation.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
179
CHAPTER 9
General Discussion
Introduction Having outlined what I regard as the physics of Creation by concentrating on the essential foundations and features of the theory, there remains much that now needs discussion, particularly as a result of the author having confronted a problem in the theory as originally developed. That problem is at the very heart of the theory of gravitation where it is unified with the physics we associate with electricity and magnetism. As readers have seen, the theoretical derivation of G, the constant of gravitation, has been based on gravitation being an electrostatic phenomenon arising from the displacement of charge of density from space taken up by the gravitons needed to provide the dynamic balance for the mass of matter which thereby experiences gravitational attraction. The self-repulsion of means that holes in it will be attracted to one another and, by their coupling with matter, rendering matter self-attractive and so establishing the phenomenon of gravitation. In the authors earlier theory, the conventional assumption was made that gravitation had to be unified with electromagnetic action, but such assumption must fail for the reason now to be explained in the first part of the following discussion. Though much of this chapter will be devoted to discussion of several other topics of interest peripheral to the main theme already covered, there is also need to give special attention to an important issue of technological importance. This probably
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
180
warrants a book of its own, but it is so diverse in character and is ever evolving, besides lacking in academic recognition, that it seems best to mention it but briefly in this final discussion section rather than give it a chapter or two of its own. I refer here to the prospect of our being able, as it were, to mimic some of the creative forces in Nature by tapping into the energy resource of the aether in an effort to extract energy which we can use to replace our dwindling oil and gas reserves. This, therefore, is the scope of this chapter 9 and it is hoped the reader will find it of interest, whilst appreciating that it is no easy task to find that my study of electrodynamics, as motivated by the desire to forge the connection with gravitation, though having spin-off pointing to new energy technology, has, in the process, failed on the gravity front. Thankfully, however, the pillars on which the theory stood, meaning the formulae for those coded messages concerning the basic dimensionless physical constants, stand firm. Thankfully, also, the theory as it now exists is much simpler and easier to understand, since the theory of gravitation is now devoid of dependence upon the intricacies of electrodynamics as rooted in the Fechner hypothesis and its quantum electrodynamic equivalent. The Neumann Potential The Neumann potential dates from 1845 and is an empirical formulation derived from electrodynamic theory by which the energy potential of two interacting current circuit elements, here denoted QV/c and qv/c, is: Qq(V.v)/Rc2 ....................................... (9.1) where R is the spacing between two charges Q, q moving at velocities V, v respectively and c is the speed of light. The dot between V and v signifies that the term in brackets is a scalar product which means that if the angle between V and v is , then the product has the value Vvcos. For our purposes here, it is
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
181
noted that, by applying this Neumann potential to calculate the force of attraction as between two charges moving mutually parallel at the speed of light with respect to the electromagnetic reference frame in which matter is seated, I did in my earlier theory obtain a force of mutual attraction in which the (V.v)/c2 term reduced to unity. I seized upon this situation to build a theory of gravitation around the electrodynamic formula, assigning charge to gravitons according to volume of continuum charge that they displaced and so arrived at the same value of G as that derived above in chapter 2. The problem that arises is that the Neumann potential applies only to actions which are supported by a quantum electrodynamic process akin to that found for electron currents. That empirical formulation does not have a textbook derivation from first principles but when we really delve into such a first principle derivation it becomes evident why the gravitons as a current source behave differently from electrons as a current source. The analysis is as follows. Considering two charges Q and q spaced apart by that distance R, energy is transferred at speed c between their kinetic energy and the Coulomb interaction energy and, owing to its momentum and massequivalence, this results in a force given by: (1/c)(E/R)(R/t) ................................. (9.2) where: E = T [(Qq/R)/t] ................................. (9.3) Here E is the energy in transit between the potential and kinetic forms and T is the time taken for energy to traverse a distance R at speed c. Equation (9.3) reduces to: E = - (R/c)(Qq/R2)(R/t) ........................... (9.4) and so the force term given by (9.2) becomes: (Qq/R2 c2)[(R/t)2 - R(2R/t2)] ...................... (9.5)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
182
Since R/t is the velocity component along the line of R and (- 2R/t2) is the acceleration term given by the square of the velocity component at right angles to R as divided by R, then we see that (9.5) reduces to: (Qq/R2 c2)U2 ....................................... (9.6) where U is the relative velocity between Q and q. By supposing that there is an electrodynamic frame of reference in which elemental current elements as individual electrons each comprise two charges +e and -e moving with opposite velocities that are each half that of the primary charge, the above force expression has four components. The U2 term becomes: (V - v)2/4 - (-V - v)2/4 - (V + v)2/4 + (-V + v)2/4 ......... (9.7) which emerges as -2(V.v) and so makes the force term (9.6): -2Qq(V.v)/R2c2 ..................................... (9.8) When this force is integrated with respect to R from R to infinity, we find that it corresponds in magnitude to double the empirical term (9.1) that we refer to as the Neumann potential. This means that the magnetic field set up by any electron current is really double that we have assigned from our measurements but do note here that we are delving into action at the truly fundamental level and have not accounted for the reaction effects of any charge that might be moving in that field. This introduces us to the problem of the gyromagnetic reaction. That assumption introduced in making the step between (9.6) and (9.8) dates from classical physics of the 19th century and is known as the Fechner hypothesis. Its modern equivalent is a feature of quantum electrodynamics by which an electron in motion is accompanied by the statistical presence of electronpositron pairs created by quantum fluctuations in measure related to the kinetic energy. This adds mass and explains why the mass of an electron increases according to the formula prescribed by the theory of relativity, but also it explains how an
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
183
electron current is conveyed. This involves the progressive creation and mutual annihilation of opposite charges e, allowing an electron to convey current, but by moving towards a positron coming in the opposite direction, sharing that action, then decaying by annihilation with that positron to leave an electron ahead in the field as if the primary electron itself is the sole mover. The Gyromagnetic Reaction Here, as a preliminary, it is appropriate to take note that, in deriving equation (9.6), we need not have presumed that both Q and q were leptonic in the sense that they involved charge pair creation and decay. It suffices to say that q has that property but not Q. It may then be verified that the U2 term becomes: (2V - v)2/4 - (2V + v)2/4 = - 2(V.v) .............. (9.9) as before. Note also that, in saying that energy travels between Q and q, a distance R at the speed c, it may seem that we are ignoring what is normally assumed, namely that the energy possessed by an electric charge is distributed over its field, rather than concentrated in the body of the charge. It is an interesting mathematical exercise to work out the field distribution of the interaction component of the mutual energy of the two charges as a function of distance from either charge. The fascinating result of this exercise is, surprisingly, the fact that there is a zero net interaction energy within the sphere of radius R centred on either charge and that the interaction energy density reduces as the inverse square of distance as the radius of such a notional sphere increases beyond that distance R. This means, quite simply, that, in shedding some of the interaction field energy owing to change of R, the energy so released must traverse that exact distance R regardless of which of the two charges is to receive that energy as added kinetic energy. The reverse also
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
184
applies and so T as used in (9.3) above is definitely R/c. The mathematical proof of this is to be found in my paper entitled: The Spatial Energy Distribution for Coulomb Interaction published in the periodical Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 25, 456458 (1979). The question then of interest stems from the fact that the energy can only travel from Q to q or from q to Q at any given instant, and there is the further complication, that we really never ever can have two electric charges in isolation from the rest of the universe, given that the aether is seething with numerous electric charges which sustain the oscillations we associate with the passage of electromagnetic waves. I can envisage, for example, a charge Q with two charges q, one on each side of the charge Q. If energy flows from Q to both of the q charges at the same time, then there need be no reaction force on Q but yet there are forces acting on both of the q charges. Looking purely at each component interaction as between any two charges in an electrodynamic system, we cannot therefore contend that action and reaction must balance. What we can say, given a choice between balance of linear action and reaction and balance of turning action as produced by a force couple, is that the latter must surely balance so far as two-charge interaction is concerned, but the former need not be in balance. This is a vital factor in the development of electrodynamic theory, where, historically, the wrong assumption was made. Just test your knowledge of physics by considering two electric charges moving in general directions relative to one another, work out the magnetic field that one produces on the other and then apply the Lorentz force law, which you are told is valid because it is consistent with Einsteins theory. You will find that there is an out-of-balance force set up by such a charge system. Action and reaction are not equal. There is balance for the force components acting along a line drawn between Q and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
185
q but there are outof-balance forces acting on the charges at right angles to that line. To get answers which fit what is observed the tests have to involve an electron current flow around a closed circuit as part of the interaction. So you see, accepted electrodynamic theory breaks down when applied to the physical underworld and the charges that move as part of the aether. So, how can we proceed? The answer is that we must explore the significance of that factor 2 in expression (9.8). Let us now consider the action of electron current flowing around a solenoid which has a cylindrical copper core. Textbooks will tell you that each cc. of copper has as many free electrons moving through the metal as there are atoms in that 1 cc. volume. Those electrons experience the magnetic field of the solenoid and so are deflected into reacting orbits which set up a magnetic field in opposition to the applied field. By the accepted electrodynamic laws of physics it is then found that the reaction field must virtually cancel out the effect of the primary field. In theory a magnetic field cannot penetrate a lump of copper, but in reality we know that it can! We then face the problem of free electron diamagnetism, a problem which baffled physicists of the early 20th century. The problem was never solved. It was ignored, in a sense, by resorting to a vague notions such as one that depended on a governing rule prescribed as a law of statistics and which bears the name of Miss Van Leeuwens theorem. It is an absurd proposition devised to get the books to balance and one that does not warrant further consideration here but I give the reference as J. de Physique. (6) 2, 361 (1921), particularly pp. 372-374. The proper approach was to see those reacting electrons as interacting with the primary electrons in the solenoid and exchanging energy as part of an equilibrium process rather than being servile in their response as if energy can only flow one
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
186
way. The force which the motion of one electric charge asserts on another such moving charge is not something that is ruled by a mathematical formulation. It depends upon energy equilibrium criteria and may or may not exist if the energy so dictates. With this in mind, therefore, let us, for the moment, replace that factor 2 by a factor k and see where a little analysis can take us. Let the true applied magnetic field be of strength Ho and suppose this to be offset by a diamagnetic reaction field Hr to produce an effective field H given by: Ho - Hr = H ........................................ (9.10) By Lorentzs force law, which we can use because Ho is deemed to be produced by a solenoidal electron current flow or the equivalent, the force Hev/c acts on a charge e of mass m moving at speed v perpendicular to the magnetic field of strength H. This charge e is, for example, an electron in that copper core. The charge will be deflected into a circular orbit with this force in balance with centrifugal action: Hev/c = mv2/x ...................................... (9.11) Here x is the radius of the orbit. Regardless of the direction of motion or polarity of the reacting charge, the deflection is always in the sense that results in a reaction field opposing the primary field Ho. This reacting field strength is found from the reaction current moment evx/2c, that is the area x2 times the current ev/2xc. Thus the total reaction current moment per unit volume of the field is given by: (evx/2c) = (mv2/2)/H ............................... (9.12) from (9.11). The summations apply to unit volume . The value of Hr is, conventionally, 4 times this quantity, but we need to introduce that factor k and so: Hr = 4kE/H ..................................... (9.13) where E now replaces the kinetic energy density of this reaction. Combining (9.10) and (9.13) we obtain:
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
187
HoH - 4kE = H2 ................................ (9.14) With k constant and assuming that magnetic interaction energy criteria require the energy fed into the kinetic energy density to be the maximum that is possible we see that, to make E a maximum, we must have 2H equal to Ho. In turn, this means that k has to have the value 2 that we deduced above from first principle analysis based on Coulombs law, because this gives the result that E is H2/8, which is the magnetic field energy density within that copper core. There is no free electron diamagnetism on this basis and we have found that the anomalous factor of 2 introduced in (9.8) is wholly consistent with what is observed, which means that the Neumann potential is no longer an empirical quantity but rather one derived from and wholly justified by fundamental theory based on Coulombs law. The by-product of this, however, is the implication that the aether must exist as a medium that can itself react to halve the action of any primary magnetic field. Here is a case supporting the aether and based on pure theoretical foundation. More than this, however, we have to confront evidence that tells us that a fundamental unit of magnetic moment set up by a reacting charge in motion will be double the strength expected from standard theory. The magnetic moment to angular momentum ratio, otherwise known as the gyromagnetic ratio, will be double that implied by classical theory. This is a phenomenon that is observed experimentally and been totally misunderstood as being attributable to an anomalous spin property, the so-called half-spin feature of quantum theory. In fact it is evidence which points a finger clearly at the reality of the aether. Furthermore, it is a phenomenon that is further fully supported by the ferromagnetic properties of iron, nickel and cobalt in a truly impressive manner as one can see from my paper Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism in the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
188
periodical: Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 281-288 (1978). The Law of Electrodynamics Allowing for aether reaction and the equivalent free electron diamagnetic reaction present in electrically conductive media we have seen why the Neumann potential governs electrodynamic interaction. Also, an astute reader will have noticed that in invoking Fechners hypothesis to advance from the force expression (9.6) we made it impossible for us to use the Neumann potential as a basis for gravitational force. The reason is that our graviton system requires the force of gravity to arise from the interaction of gravitons that have a common motion at speed relative to the E frame, a motion that assures that those gravitons move in unison in mutually parallel directions at all times. Therefore, that expression (9.6) says that, since there is no relative motion, there can be no electrodynamic action as between the gravitons and so no electrodynamic contribution to the force of gravity. This may also explain why, in formulating our detailed analysis of aether structure in chapter 7, we avoided completely assigning electrodynamic properties to the aether itself and so avoided magnetic field energy considerations. The latter, it seems, belong only to the province of electrons, namely the material world. It is in this latter world, our real world, that we make the measurements pertaining to magnetic fields and electrodynamic forces, and having introduced a theoretical derivation of the Neumann potential, it is of interest now to explore how this leads us to the formulation of the proper law of electrodynamics. Here I use the word proper because physicists concerned with electrodynamic action have been too willing to cut corners, as it were, and be satisfied by rules of thumb and contracted versions of electrodynamic law, such as that of Lorentz. The latter only
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
189
applies to actions which arise from steady current flow around a complete closed circuit, current flow that must be that of electrons and cannot be that of charge displaced, as across capacitor plates, where the aether is involved. The research on this question was motivated by the quest to connect electromagnetism and gravitation but there were also certain anomalies as to the cathode reaction forces exerted in cold cathode discharges in gas at very low pressure. I do not intend here to go through the formal analysis by which I derived the law of electrodynamics. It is of record elsewhere, as in my paper The Law of Electrodynamics in Journal of the Franklin Institute, 287, 179-183 (1969). Energy from Nowhere? At this stage, as we approach the end of this work, I feel I must explain that after many years of developing this theory of Creation by challenging much that is today accepted as correct, particularly Einsteins Theory of Relativity, I have in recent years been drawn into the forum of discussion that concerns what some call free energy. This is energy tapped as if from nowhere, meaning the aether. If, as I claim, the aether is a scene of ongoing creation of matter which eventually decays but which, in the meantime, feeds our energy needs, as by the Suns radiation, then one can but wonder whether we can get into the act, as it were, and invent a few shortcuts by which to tap energy from the aether directly and so help mankind to face up to the impending energy problems of our future. As already stated, this energy topic warrants a book of its own, but, owing to age, destined to be a spent force as a pioneer in the research arena, I wish to be remembered for my theory of the aether as outlined in this book and the many papers and earlier work I have authored.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
190
The free energy theme does, however, warrant mention in these closing pages. So, as we continue with this DISCUSSION theme, I pose the following question that could, I feel, have been addressed by researchers back in the 1910-1920 period when that free electron diamagnetism topic was much debated. Given that the magnetic deflection of free conduction electrons in a copper core embraced by a magnetizing solenoid will surely cause those electrons to set up a reaction field opposing the field applied by that solenoid, why cannot we draw energy from those electrons and so gain power from whatever it is that sustains the perpetual motion of electrons in atoms? Consider the following argument. We switch the current on in that solenoid and it produces a magnetic field H in that core. This field acts on the free electrons in the core and causes them to produce an opposing field. The back EMF induced in the solenoid will be proportional to the switching speed and the difference between H and that field reaction. The energy input will be so determined. Then, opening the switch suddenly to reduce H to zero, the reaction field will become responsible for the primary change of magnetic flux linking that core and will induce an unopposed EMF that adds power to the solenoidal current as it is reduced by the opening of that switch, no doubt by forming an arc discharge, but possibly delivering more output energy than was injected as input. Wishful thinking you say, because everyone knows that one cannot get something for nothing, particularly energy, given our acceptance of the Law of Conservation of Energy. However, look again at the physical structure under consideration. If the diamagnetic effect were to be so overwhelming that it virtually equalled the strength of the applied magnetic field, a reasonable proposition given that there are so many electrons moving freely in that copper core at very
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
191
high speeds, then the input energy would be very small. In contrast, given a little inertia in the magnetic moment and related angular momentum reactions of those electrons owing to their reacting orbital motion, we would see the full reaction field active in delivering energy output and that would be far in excess of the energy input. So, here we see that standard physical doctrine of the early 20th century, doctrines we adhere to today, suggest that we can, as it were, get energy from nowhere. You say that is impossible. I say that you then have to face up to the fact that the physics you rely on is faulty. Now, why was this aspect of the subject not explored and resolved long ago? If one begins by assuming that this is a no-gain situation then logic says that the applied magnetic field is really double the value indicated by standard physics and the reaction field is half the strength of the applied field. Then the difference in field strength during power input is the same as that during power output, given the latter is a sudden switch-off of the applied EMF but the current decay lags owing to the inertia involved. So, here, by use of simple logic one can reason that the applied field really does have to be double that of the reacting field thereby induced. That factor of 2 we deduced above by the mathematical reasoning of theoretical physics has to be correct. So where is the error in standard physics? It resides in the fact that we formulate our laws of physics and our theories on the basis of experiment in which currents act on individual electric charges in motion, whereas certain hidden factors need consideration when numerous reacting charges are affected by those currents. In the context of the above analysis by which we derived the Neumann potential I can but point my finger at that term T in equation (9.3). The time T is the distance R divided by c. Energy travels at speed c over the distance R in time T, but that energy travels one way and the question is: Which way?
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
192
It will surely travel in the direction, Q to q or q to Q, according to optimum energy criteria, rather than according to a man-made law that suits certain conditions that do find support by Mother Nature working according to those same energy criteria. Remember that without energy there is no force and, whenever you rely on force equations to tell you something, do be sure there is enough energy at the right place to support what you say. The case I put is that those free conduction electrons in that copper core are only deflected by a magnetic field to the extent that the kinetic energy of the reaction has reached its maximum level as determined by the strength of the resulting magnetic field. This may seem to be an arbitrary way of overriding the principles of accepted physics, but at least it is a process based on optimization of energy deployment and the alternative seems to be to let physics sink in a sea of confusion, because physicists in general are too stubborn to question what they have been taught and look to others to deal with the anomalous issues that arise, but seldom get a hearing in refereed publications. As to the scope for tapping aether energy by the method outlined above, I submit that it is not possible, even though standard physics would say it is, but do not lose heart, we will come to a ray of hope on that theme before we conclude this DISCUSSION chapter. Concerning the Michelson-Morley Experiment I well know that there will be some readers who wonder how, in advocating the existence of a real aether, I have disposed of the implications drawn from the Michelson-Morley experiment. This was an experiment in which rays of light were reflected back on themselves in one direction of the Earths motion and compared with corresponding rays reflected back on
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
193
themselves at right angles to that motion. No consideration was given to the fact that a ray of light encountering the energy of a ray of light coming the other way might have its propagation speed affected by that encounter, but, that aside, the experiment purported to imply that the speed of light is referenced more on the apparatus used in the test than on motion though the aether. Now, unlike the effects in a solid material medium, where lateral field oscillations occur on the passage of electromagnetic waves, with the atomic structure of the solid absorbing the strain, the aether copes by setting up a reciprocal field oscillation. Remember that we have in the aether the structured system of quons immersed in a sea of muons. If the quons are displaced laterally in setting up an electric field as the wave propagates in a forward direction, so some of the relatively massive muons must be displaced in an opposite sense to provide dynamic balance. This duality applies also where the quon lattice system is moving steadily along as it shares the motion through space of body Earth itself. This primary action would involve a build up of quons at the forward boundaries of the Earths aether, were it not for the quons suffering annihilation along with an equal amount of continuum charge, with the energy being merged to create muon pairs which, as a secondary system, migrate through the Earths aether in the reverse direction to transform back into quons and continuum charge where needed at the boundary where the lattice system separates. The net inertial effect of this is then zero. One then sees that, by analogy with an optical effect named after Fresnel, we can expect this reverse flow to affect the speed of light through the primary structure. Fresnels theory explains why the speed of light increases in proportion to u(1-1/n2) where u is the velocity of the disturbing medium and n is the applicable refractive index. This can be deduced from electron theory, but
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
194
it has been verified by experiments in which the speed of light through moving water is measured. Applying this same theory to the aether itself, and recognizing the counter displacement, it is an easy matter to arrive at the result observed experimentally by the famous Michelson-Morley observations. Let there be N like charges e per unit volume within an electrical continuum of uniform but opposite charge density . Then: Ne = ......................................... (9.15) Let N1 and N2 denote the population density in the primary structure (the quon system) and secondary structure (the muon counter flow), respectively. Then: N = N1 + N2 ................................... (9.16) On the basis of electron theory the propagation velocity is proportional to (Noe2/m), where there are No charges e of mass m per unit volume, and the system has a resonant mode at frequency given by the angular velocity: 2 = 4Noe2/m ....................... (9.17) By analogy with the properties of matter we know that the propagation velocity is given by (P/), where P is the pressure modulus of the medium and its mass density and so this guides us to the formula: c1 = (P/N1m) .................................... (9.18) for the speed of light c1 set by the primary structure of the aether, where becomes N1m. Let v denote the velocity of the primary structure (the quon system) and u the velocity of the secondary structure, the reverse flow of muons. The linear momentum of the aether has to be zero unless there is a build up of electric field. Hence: vN1 + uN2 = 0 ................................ (9.19)
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
195
Now refractive index n is the ratio of light speed in an active medium to that in the undisturbed vacuum state, the latter being denoted c. Hence: n = c/c1 ........................................ (9.20) The speed of light in the frame of reference set by the quon system, the Earths frame so far as our laboratory experiments are concerned, then becomes c as augmented by the Fresnel drag of u(1-1/n2) caused by the reverse flow of muons. From (9.18) and (9.20), n2 becomes proportional to N1, with P constant, so that, from (9.14), n2 is 1-N2/N so that 1-1/n2 is -N2 /N1. We then see from (9.19) that 1-1/n2 becomes simply v/u. Thus the Fresnel drag in the vacuum, which is u(1-1/n2), is the velocity v of the primary structure, proving, from simple classical electron theory, that the speed of light will be referenced on the vacuum structure moving with the Earth, as was found by Michelson and Morley. That vacuum structure is the system of lattice charges, the quons, in the aether theory presented in this work. The Numbers Game I have founded this account of Creation on the task of deciphering the significance of the measured numerical values of certain dimensionless physical constants. In discovering the physical formulae by which these constants are determined it is found that there is very close agreement between what the theory indicates and what is actually observed. In this quest, however, it is a cause of very considerable anxiety to find that theory can, for example, bring one within, say, 0.1% of the measured value, when the estimated range of error in that measurement is somewhat less than this. One wonders if there is something that one has missed or whether there is an overriding factor such as a wave resonance that modifies the physical parameter involved.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
196
Interested readers who study my published work and see how the theory evolved will notice many such situations, including the step that determined N as being necessarily an odd integer which was 1843 that value of N introduced in chapter 2, and I can but say that it would make this account of The Physics of Creation far too long had I sought to include them all. One must also keep in mind that the techniques by which physical constants are measured can bring in their own uncertainties, apart from the range of error attributable to merging data from different measurements at different laboratories that are based on the same measurement method. Furthermore, if one struggles to get the perfect fit between theory and experiment then one may be seen as cooking the books, as it were, when one is only exploring tentative hypotheses to see if one can discover the physics that underlie the true reason for the discrepancy. By way of example, consider the two graviton forms discussed in Chapter 2, the -graviton and the g-graviton, as well as the quon or aether lattice particle introduced in that chapter by reference to the integer factor N of 1843 . When I first discovered the structure of the aether and published this in my 1960 booklet The Theory of Gravitation, I pictured the graviton as a minute element of charge occupying a spherical hole and moving in circles around the inner bounding surface of that hole to set up the electrodynamic interaction that accounted for the force of gravity. I had the concept of dynamic balance but had not been bold enough to see the graviton system as one having mass equal to that of its dynamic partners including matter. I was writing at a time when reference works indicated that the measured value of the fine-structure constant (-1) was 137.038 and not 137.0359, as now measured. I struggled a little in that work to make sense of the correction for the finite size of the aether lattice particle which put doubts on my theoretical
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
197
quantification in the digits beyond 137.0. Only by the passage of time, six years to 1966, when I published a new edition of The Theory of Gravitation, was that lattice particle question resolved, but by then also I had the correct picture of the graviton, or rather the g-graviton form, which I saw as having a mass of some 5063 electron units. I derived that value of 5063 by theory (equation 5.19, pp. 76-79) of that work but at that time had no inkling that the tau-lepton would emerge in my later theory as a partner to the g-graviton. Indeed, since the taulepton had yet to be discovered at that time, it was bad enough having to predict the existence of an unknown particle, the graviton, of 5063 electron mass units (2.587 Gev), as a feature of my theory of gravitation. On the question of whether the 2.587 GeV particle has ever revealed itself in high energy particle experiments, I did find reference to a so-called (2585) bump listed by the Particle Data Group on p. 314 of Physics Letters, 170B, published in 1986. It was specified as 2586 +/- 45 MeV. I also found that there had been interest in Japan in the research of Hasegawa who had proposed the existence of a fundamental energy quantum with a rest mass two or three times as high as nucleon rest energy (the H-quantum) which a 1973 paper by Nanjo and Takana (Suppl. Prog. Theor. Phys.) 54, 120 said had a mass energy between 2.4 and 2.6 GeV. As my theory of gravitation evolved, with its dependence upon gravitons of mass-energy 2.587 GeV, so I was ahead of the field in this regard, but it came as a massive boost to my theory when I read about the discovery of the tau-particle in 1979 and was able to show how its mass is derived theoretically in my book Physics Unified, page 121 (1980). Even so it was not until 1988 that I was able to publish papers revealing the role of the tau-particle as a graviton alongside the g-graviton, by virtue of their functional link as described in chapter 2 above.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
198
The perplexing question that I will not attempt to answer is whether that link is a 100 per cent rigorous relationship by which the precise mass of one determines the precise mass of the other. Extraneous influence regulating the precise value of either quantity can affect the evaluation of G at the part per 10,000 level and I feel this is best left for future research consideration. I am mindful also that I have, in my writings (Hadronic Journal, 9, 153-157; 1986) given reason for suggesting that the taon has a mass energy related to the proton by a ratio which is the cube root of 3 times the fourth root of 3. This may seem a curious contention but perhaps less so in the light of what has been said about hyperon creation at the end of chapter 4. One finds from this that the taon has a mass-energy of 1.8982 times 1836.152 times 0.511 MeV or 1.781 GeV, which is 3485 electron mass units. This commentary on graviton mass values will give meaning to the numbers 3485 and 5063 as introduced in the section of text which follows, but I would just add a note here to say that in my published work there is mention of the supergraviton which I suspect is generated in the presence of very concentrated elements of matter, typically a heavy atomic nucleus. The value of G must remain the same but to provide local dynamic balance for a very heavy element of mass the normal gravitons would need to get too close to one another and so, by their combination, I suggest they can cope with this situation in an interesting way. This phenomenon reveals itself in the field of warm superconductivity where it appears that, when integer clusters of super-gravitons provide the dynamic balance for atoms or groups of atoms, the energy of electron flow is sustained by tapping the thermal energy of the atoms. See my paper entitled The Supergraviton and its Technological Connection, Speculations in Science and Technology, 12, 179186 (1989).
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
199
At another extreme, as I have already shown in chapter 8 when discussing the neutron star and as I shall mention below in the next chapter THE EPILOGUE, it is conceivable that the energy activity affecting gravitons can be so intense in some parts of the universe that they cannot form in a quasi-stable form and so the virtual muons themselves have to stand in, as it were, and provide the dynamic balance that is associated with gravity. This can lead to an enormous escalation of the value of G, making stars centred in that activity exhibit an extremely high anomalous mass in no way commensurate with their inertial mass by the standards set within our solar system. Hydrogen Creation by Graviton Decay Here I now wish to engage in a rather speculative digression. It is prompted by having received, when half way through the writing the original version of this work, a rather unusual communication from a scientist named Dr. Paul Rowe. He claims to have found experimental evidence showing that, under certain circumstances, hydrogen can appear as if from nowhere and he sees this as sourced in the aether. He is also able to quote references to the earlier research of other scientists who have discovered the anomalous appearance of gas, presumably hydrogen, in their experiments. The common feature of these experiments is an electrical discharge or an explosive reaction in the presence of metal, aluminium or tungsten. Now, it has been shown earlier in this work that, though the aether is not a system of rather elusive protons, it can, from its muon activity, create protons. Also we have seen that matter once formed by those protons combining with electrons can take up position in the E-frame of the aether and share its harmonious jitter motion. In so doing it puts the aether out-of-balance dynamically which is why the aether responds to provide the
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
200
counterbalancing motion of a system of gravitons created in the G-frame, thereby giving rise to the force of gravity. Upon consideration of Dr. Rowes claim in the context of the theory governing proton creation, theory which we verified earlier by deriving the Hubble constant, one finds that it is impossible for protons to be created on demand by explosions or electric discharge, unless there are other factors needing consideration. Note that proton creation according to this authors theory arises only where there is energy present that is surplus to the equilibrium requirements of the aether. One cannot then see how a chemical laboratory bench experiment can involve energy input on a scale that can create hydrogen atoms, meaning creation of matter according to the equation E = Mc2. However, I have engaged in a little speculative enquiry and taken note of the factor posed by the metal flakes of Dr. Rowes own experiments and the metal electrodes of the other experiments he has in mind. I asked myself how a piece of metal, that is electrically conductive and of higher mass density than its immediate environment, might cope with the cosmic motion through space in requiring the aether to adapt its graviton system to the presence of that metal. Note that a unit of mass that is part of an element of matter moving through the aether will have an inertia not shared by the corresponding unit of mass in the graviton system. The gravitons are part of a leptonic underworld that governs quantum mechanics and they are created where required from the energy of the aether. The passage through space of a piece of metal will involve the creation of gravitons at its forward surfaces and the corresponding demise of gravitons at its receding surfaces. In short, this poses the interesting question of how gravitons shed their energy in their decay mode. It is a question I have not addressed until now [February 2003] but one which captured my attention when I asked myself how many graviton groups, those
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
201
two -gravitons plus one g-graviton, would be needed to create protons with a negligible energy surplus, given a decay stimulus, namely the impact of a virtual muon upon one of those gravitons by which it exchanges polarity with the muon and so can engage in pair annihilation with its associate -graviton. This becomes a question of how many units of 3485+3485+5063+207 are needed to create an integer number of proton-antiproton pairs. I was then surprised, indeed very surprised, to find that only three such units, totalling 36,720 electron mass units would be needed, as this is exactly 20x1836, 1836 being the proton-electron mass ratio. Now, do bear in mind that this diversion is a speculative exercise, but consider too the implications in the light of Dr. Rowes experimental findings. I was intrigued and so I took the analysis further. Dr. Rowe had measured the volume of gas that had appeared anomalously in his discharge experiments. It was only a few cc. at atmospheric pressure and so I wondered how I might account for that. My thoughts were on the possibility that the creation of protons and anti-protons at the receding metal surface could capture electrons from the metal and so create hydrogen from the protons, whereas the anti-proton might even combine with the nucleus of a metal atom and change its isotopic character. In a sense this is creating matter from the aether by stealth, but one has cause to wonder given the anomalous atomic transmutations that are reported to occur in so-called cold-fusion experiments. I have in mind here the paper by David Moon entitled The MODS Theory of Cold Fusion can explain Tungsten Cathode Plasma Electrolysis that was published in the Volume 8, Issue 47, 2003 of the periodical Infinite Energy . In any event, with the problem of estimating how much hydrogen gas might be created per sq. cm. of metal surface by graviton decay still in mind, I reasoned that we move through
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
202
space at a cosmic speed of some 3.5x107 cm/s and I was able to put a rough figure on the lifetime of the gravitons and so could proceed. I quote from my paper An Empirical Approach to Meson Energy Correlation that was published in Hadronic Journal9, 153-157 (1986): The one direct indication which the author has seen arises from the likely possibility that the decay of the tau and the decay of the g-particle may be associated. The tau has a lifetime of 4.6x10-13 s and falls in a class of particles discussed by J. D. Prentice [Physics Reports, 83, 102 (1982)] as in the 10-13 s range. One such reported decay time was 10.69x10-13 s for the longest-lived entry .... giving a fitted mass of 2583 +/- 26 MeV/c2..... This might be direct evidence of the g(2587) particle. Multiplying a lifetime of this order by that cosmic speed one finds a range of a few hundredths of a micron. Then taking the mass density of the metal times this as a measure of the mass of hydrogen produced per square cm of metal surface per discharge event we expect hydrogen gas at atmospheric temperature and pressure to be of cubic cm order, as Rowe found. Accordingly, I do think we need to take Dr. Rowes claim seriously and see that he has discovered a way of generating hydrogen from the aether. Whether or not this could be developed into a new source of power depends upon the energy involved in setting up those electrical discharges, but at the very least research confirming his findings will surely be research proving that a real aether of the kind envisaged in this work does exist. Such research could include testing the composition of the hydrogen produced to see if it contains the normal percentage of deuterium. Newly created atomic hydrogen should not be
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
203
contaminated by the presence of the deuterium isotope. Such a finding would confirm Dr. Rowes claim that hydrogen is being produced ab initio rather than being absorbed somehow from the chemical environment of the test apparatus. In conclusion, I feel obliged to draw attention to the fact that the generation of hydrogen from the aether, if pursued on a large scale, could, in the long term, be destructive of life on Earth because our oxygen supply is limited and by creating water as we burn up our atmospheric oxygen resource we merely add a few metres to the levels of our oceans to leave us with only nitrogen to breathe. Some other energy resource is needed and that brings me to our next and final topic of discussion. Vacuum Spin as a Prospective Energy Technology The aether was shown in chapter 8 to have properties conducive to what was termed vacuum spin, this being the basis on which stars and planets acquired their rotation and much of their kinetic energy. In this final discussion section I now give my reasons for thinking that, by exercising a little ingenuity, we might be able to tap energy from the aether by replicating in laboratory apparatus the conditions which govern the vacuum spin phenomenon. This account which now follows is the unamended text of a paper I presented in Berlin on June 14th, 2002 to an audience interested in alternative energy techniques. Since it was compiled before this work: The Physics of Creation was written it will, so far as concerns the vacuum spin theme, be somewhat repetitive, but I thought it best to leave the text of the paper unamended. It now follows as a conclusion to this chapter 9. ______________________
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
204
OUR FUTURE ENERGY SOURCE: THE VACUUM A Scientific Introduction Whilst oil companies scan ocean beds in search of future drilling sites by which to replenish our dwindling energy resources there seems to be little or no interest in looking for energy within the omnipresent vacuum medium which exists everywhere, both here on Earth and in outer space. The reason, of course, is that scientists do not recognize the vacuum as a source of energy. They tell us that the vacuum is, in simple words, a mere nothing, but yet they teach by reference to textbooks which declare that the vacuum has a magnetic permeability expressed as o of value 410-7 henries per metre and a permittivity 1/oc2 of 8.854187817x10-12 farads per metre. How can the vacuum, as a medium devoid of matter, be said to have such curious properties if it is a mere nothing? Consider what we mean by that word permittivity. It tells us how much energy we can store by setting up a voltage between two metal plates in a vacuum. That energy sits in the vacuum not in those metal plates! The vacuum has a way of releasing that energy when that voltage is reduced and that mysterious quantity we call `permittivity' governs that action. Note now my point that a magnetic property is also involved owing to that o term, as is c, the speed of light. Magnetism is basically a dynamic action arising from electric charge in motion and motion implies energy. The vacuum, that mere nothing, also somehow determines the speed of light c, a factor in the famous energy equation E = Mc2, and yet scientists ignore the vacuum as a potential source of energy. There is indeed much they have to learn about this aspect of
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
205
Energy Science and I intend here to summarize this in four stages. In the first and third of these I will point to free energy technology that has been demonstrated. In the second stage I will outline the physical principles involved and in the fourth stage I will conclude my message by reminding you that our universe had to be created from energy that apparently came from nowhere and cast some light on that great mystery. I. Capacitor Magic or a Mere Dream? I want you to imagine that you have discovered an electrical capacitor that you can charge with energy and which, on discharge, gives you double that amount of energy as output. It is as if you can perform magic, though you are merely dreaming.
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
How would you turn this into a practical device? The problem you face is that the capacitance is quite small. Let me tell you how I would do it. I would connect two identical capacitors through an inductive circuit to form a resonant system and let the energy oscillate between the two capacitors, as one discharges whilst the other charges. I would draw power off, as,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
206
for example, by incorporating an electrical load denoted R in Fig. 1. Now, the chances are, that if I built such a device it would not work because of that low capacitance property and the energy loss owing to the resistance of the inductive circuit. So, exercising my ingenuity, I would connect a high d.c. voltage V to the capacitors (see Fig. 2), knowing that this additional source could not deliver energy continuously, once I had switched the device on. The reason is that d.c. does not flow through capacitors. For a high enough d.c. voltage this would, as I can verify by basic electrical theory, have the quite remarkable effect of making the energy oscillations escalate in strength sufficiently to overcome the resistance loss problem. I would then surely have a working free energy device. If I did not use that high voltage d.c. polarizing source then there is still the possibility that I could get a self-sustaining oscillation and draw as output a small amount of free energy, but only if I made sure that the inductors were quite large and wound from thick gauge wire so as to have a very low resistance. Can solving our future energy problems really be so simple? It is such a wonderful dream, truly magical, but we have, of course, to live with reality and here we need to face up to the facts of life. Can such a capacitor property ever be a reality? As to facts, I have several examples in mind, three of which I now mention. Firstly, as long ago as 1871, there was a U.S. patent granted which comprised two cross-coupled inductive components each having two concentric windings separated by insulation and so constituting, in effect, a capacitor which could develop a resonant oscillation with the inductance of the other cross-coupled component. Fig. 3 is a copy of Fig. 2 of that
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
207
patent. The introductory paragraph of the patent specification stated that the invention: relates to the combination of two or more simple or compound helices and iron cores or magnets in such a manner as to produce a constant electric current without the aid of a galvanic battery. Here then in 1871 was U.S. Patent No. 119,825, as granted to Daniel McFarland Cook of Mansfield, Ohio, telling us how to build a device which somehow generates electricity with no evident power input source. Here I see a device in which electric charge can oscillate between the two components and somehow generate a steady excess of output energy which is supplied by the windings on those two inductive components. Here there was no priming d.c. high voltage input source, but large gauge wire was specified as essential for the inductive windings.
Fig. 3
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
208
These were very early days in the history of the electrical power industry. Thomas Edison was only 24 years old and Nicola Tesla was 15 years of age at the time, so it is no wonder that this very important invention was buried in Patent Office records. Secondly, there is the almost incredible story of the efforts of Dr. Henry Moray. It was reported that on 21 December 1925, Moray and three others, who went along to witness what was to be demonstrated, took a trip to a canyon in USA which was well removed from any electric power lines. A wire antenna was strung between two points well above the ground and connection made from the antenna to Morays apparatus, which itself had a ground connection. Electric power was delivered as if from nowhere. It was said to be powered by radiant energy, energy somehow delivered via the aether, but in spite of repeated demonstrations, some delivering substantial power measured in kilowatt terms, Morays discovery, notwithstanding our developing hunger for a new energy source, has not found its way into modern technology. The reason, of course, is incredulity on the part of our learned scientists plus lack of insight as to the true energy source. A description of the Moray device by T. J. Yates of Cornell University, dated 16 March 1929, says that, in the demonstration he witnessed, two wooden boxes were placed on a table. On one box there was a high-frequency transformer and in the other box there were ten large capacitors and ten small capacitors, these all being connected by wires in a circuit including the antenna. One can see, therefore, that somehow it is possible to set up a resonant inductor-capacitor circuit which can deliver aether energy with the help of an antenna placed well above ground level in open air which delivers that high d.c. input voltage but not the steady input power needed to explain what was observed.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
209
It is, by the way, experimental fact that atmospheric electricity exists everywhere in the open air and has a vertical voltage gradient of several hundred V/m. It is caused by solarpowered thermal radiation exerting a downward pressure on electrons in the atoms of our atmosphere. Of itself, this is not a useful source of power but, as the Moray apparatus shows, it can serve as a priming agency in setting up the operating charge on those capacitors. Thirdly, there are the reports on the free energy apparatus of the Methernitha community in Switzerland. They have an electrical generating machine they call Thesta-Distatica. It produces a substantial output of electrical power. Its main features are inductive coils connected to a pair of glass Leyden jars plus an electrostatic generator that we in England call a Wimshurst machine. When the discs of that Wimshurst machine rotate high voltages are generated and the pulsed output somehow activates the energy-generating properties of those two Leyden jars. A Leyden jar is merely a capacitor having concentric cylindrical electrodes, one on the outside and one on the inside of that glass jar. Here also we have two capacitors in an oscillatory circuit and a d.c. source that can supply high voltage but very little energy. Yet, somehow those capacitors can tap aether energy and generate electricity which serves that Swiss community. I believe we have here a situation where there is skill and knowledge in that community as to how to build this free energy device, but I feel sure that no one there understands the physics that can explain where the energy that is generated really comes from. An extensive account of both this Swiss discovery and the story of Henry Morays efforts is provided in a recentlypublished book by Keith Tutt entitled The Search for Free Energy, published in 2001 by Simon & Schuster (ISBN 0-68486660-9).
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
210
II. The Physics of the Magic Capacitor All physicists have heard of Clerk Maxwell and Werner Heisenberg. Some few may have heard of Alexandre Veronnet. Maxwell's name is associated with electrical displacement within the aether (the medium we refer to as the `vacuum'). Heisenberg's name is linked to quantum mechanics and the Principle of Uncertainty by which matter has an underlying jitter motion as if sharing a universal circular motion in tiny orbits at the very frequency physicists associate with the creation of the electron. As to Veronnet, he has also a place in history. On December 16, 1929 the French Academie des Sciences conferred the Henry Poincare medal on Louis de Broglie for his work on wave mechanics, but on that same occasion Veronnet was presented with the Prix Lalande for his works in astronomy. The point I want to make is that Veronnet saw the aether as having electrical structure and an underlying quantized angular motion akin the that we learn of from Bohr's theory. Veronnet realised that jitter motion in the aether could perhaps explain why electrons in atoms have a quantized angular momentum, that is, why they have specific energy quanta linked to their rotation.
Fig. 4 So, as I see it, it is quite logical that we should be influenced by the perceptions of these three great men of science
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
211
and begin to portray the aether as I do in Fig. 4 which I copy here from page 89 of my 1980 book Physics Unified (ISBN 085056-009-8). Here I depict the vacuum as having a cubic structure, a state of order of the kind we see in crystals or in the magnetic domains of a ferromagnetic material. In each notional cubic cell there is an aether particle describing a circular orbit with all such particles keeping in step in a synchronous motion. They all have the same electrical polarity and are immersed in a continuum of uniform charge of opposite polarity and are attracted to their respective centres of those cubic cells, but are displaced from those centres to radii at which their mutual electrostatic energy avoids being negative. Therefore they must move in orbit to assure that their centrifugal force is in balance with the electrostatic force attracting them to the centres of those cubic cells. It all sounds very hypothetical, but I can assure you that this model of the aether holds the key to solving the prevailing mysteries of physics, and it is unquestionably correct.
Fig. 5 However, here my subject is concerned with capacitors and their free energy potential and I must not digress into other fascinating realms of fundamental physics. So let us now consider a parallel plate capacitor sitting in the aether as just portrayed. I refer now to Fig. 5.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
212
When I asked myself what happens when an electric voltage is applied between those two capacitor plates I could see that the aether charges would all be displaced in unison relative to the centres about which they are in circular orbit. Then I could see that they could not keep strictly in synchronism with their counterparts elsewhere in nearby space unless they were subject to a continuous very high frequency oscillation of energy exchange, something I felt was impossible. Then, and by then I mean nearly 50 years ago, I saw how Mother Nature deals with this problem. If that applied voltage has a two-fold effect, in that it displaces the aether charge in the direction of the electric field to a new equilibrium position but also produces, between the capacitor plates, a continuous motion of that charge at right angles to that direction, then there can be absolute synchrony with external space charge with no high frequency energy exchange problems. In Fig. 5 the centres of the charge orbits are indicated and one can see that charges seated between the capacitor plates have an eccentric orbital motion and so their velocities in orbit need to be compounded with a superimposed velocity in order to keep in synchronism throughout their orbital period. This means the whole structure of aether particles must acquire a linear motion in the space between the capacitor plates, a motion which increases as the voltage between those plates is increased. In other words, I could see that one unit of electrical energy added to charge the capacitor would be supplemented by a further unit of energy accounting for that linear motion and it would be supplied by the external quantum jitter of the aether, since it was the external aether that was applying the constraint that assures the universal synchrony. Here was the free energy source but the extra energy was locked into that aether motion and, as soon as the capacitor was discharged, that motion would collapse and dissipate the energy within the aether itself as it recovers and sustains its equilibrium.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
213
What I have just described applies to the parallel plate capacitor but even back in the late 1950 era when I was researching on these matters I knew that that aether motion produced by electric field action could import both energy and angular momentum but I saw this as limited to the realm of cosmology and so of no technological significance. I earned my living by dealing with technological issues but still let my thoughts wander into pure physics and that higher plane that is the realm of those who seek to understand our universe on a grand scale and delve into that quest for the Holy Grail that is termed Unified Field Theory and the problem of gravitation. With a Ph.D. in electrical engineering and working in a high technology corporate environment I really had no platform from which to project my scientific contribution, especially as my belief in a real aether medium made me an outcast from the world of theoretical physics. Nevertheless, 20 years on, in the 1970s I had seen how the aether feeds energy into events on body Earth, as evidenced by the creation of the thunderball and the inflow of energy to power the action of a tornado. This was still far from the free energy technology theme we are discussing today.
Fig. 6
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
214
To jump rapidly ahead, now consider Fig. 6. Here I show a section of a concentric capacitor. That aether motion I mentioned is now not linear motion but rotary motion confined between the capacitor electrodes and so, when the capacitor voltage is reduced, that motion will have inertia and not dissipate by collisions which feed energy back into the enveloping aether. Instead, it will try to sustain the electric displacement, meaning that it will deploy its energy into the release of electrical energy which can be drawn from the capacitor. In other words, we have our magic capacitor. It can deliver very nearly twice as much energy on discharge as is supplied during charging! One, therefore, now has a physical explanation of the energy source that may have been tapped accidentally and in ignorance of the true physics involved, by Cook back in 1871, Henry Moray in the 1920s and the Methernitha community in the 1980s. That, at least is my personal assumption, and I leave it to others to judge on such matters, whilst I am all too conscious of the implications of what I say here from the point of view of patenting technology in this field. If we now move ahead to develop technology that taps energy from the aether, guided by the physical principles just outlined, will the U.S. patent granted in 1871 be seen as prior disclosure? Will the work of Henry Moray, which was denied U.S. Patent protection, be seen as prior disclosure? Will the confusing reports we have heard concerning that Methernitha apparatus be seen as prior disclosure, when the only inference is that Leyden jars (concentric capacitors) were used in conjunction with a Wimshurst machine to deliver the `free energy' as they claim? If so, then the patent system offers no incentive to those who pioneer the forthcoming revolution in the free energy field, but we must do our best to take things forward in spite of the inevitable hostility of those who oppose our efforts.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
215
III. Free Energy: The Way Forward Fig. 7 shows how one can design a circuit aimed at tapping aether energy. I leave it to those of you who understand electrical circuit theory to work out what may be the practical scale of what is suggested on the basis of this magic capacitor theme. Nevertheless, 20 years on, in the 1970s I had seen how the aether feeds energy into events on body Earth, as evidenced by the creation of the thunderball and the inflow of energy to power the action of a tornado. This was still far from the free energy technology theme we are discussing today. To jump rapidly ahead, now consider Fig. 6. Here I show a section of a concentric capacitor. That aether motion I mentioned is now not linear motion but rotary motion confined between the capacitor electrodes and so, when the capacitor voltage is reduced, that motion will have inertia and not dissipate by collisions which feed energy back into the enveloping aether. Instead, it will try to sustain the electric displacement, meaning that it will deploy its energy into the release of electrical energy which can be drawn from the capacitor. In other words, we have our magic capacitor. It can deliver very nearly twice as much energy on discharge as is supplied during charging!
Fig. 7
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
216
My own calculations assure me that a concentric capacitor system running at a bias of, say, 25,000 volts and oscillating at, say, 100 kHz, can deliver power, whether on a power/size or a power/weight basis, that can more than rival existing power plant technology - all with no chemical pollution and no cost for fuel input. It can even suit the needs we have for powering an automobile when our oil resources dry up. One can, therefore, dream of what might be possible, but, as ever, one might be deluded and encounter new obstacles, but, at least, one should confront those who ridicule the possibility by getting them to heed the underlying scientific message in the hope that they will wake up and see the sense of joining us, or leading us, in our efforts. As to those obstacles, one might doubt whether aether energy can flow in fast enough to satisfy one's design specification, but I feel assured on that from the performance data reported by those who have witnessed Henry Moray's demonstrations. The one obstacle I would see as warranting special attention is the effect of large current oscillations at a high kHz or even MHz frequency in the large inductors of a future power generating plant. There are those who worry about the adverse EM (electromagnetic wave) radiation effects of using mobile telephones. To allay such concerns I draw attention to the Energy Science Report No. 10 that I published in 1997, Cyclotron Resonance in Human body Cells (ISBN 085056-011-X), where I discussed the real danger, which occurs at the much lower power frequencies as used in overhead power lines and in electric blanket heating. High frequency EM power radiation leaking from our future power generating systems need only be an interference problem affecting radio communication that happens to be in the same frequency band. As to the way forward, I can but draw attention to my 1996 publication Energy Science Report No. 8, entitled Power from Space: The Correa Invention - (ISBN 0-85056-016-0).
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
217
That report was essentially directed at highlighting the experimental findings in Canada of Alexandra and Paulo Correa, who have already proved over-unity operation of their PAGD (Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge) technology. As that report explains I see there the same physical action for generating excess power that I have just discussed. Also I mention that I was so interested by the recently reported experimental efforts of the Correas on another anomalous energy generating theme [The Reproducible Thermal Anomaly of the Reich-Einstein Experiment under Limit Conditions, Infinite Energy, 7, 37, pp. 12-21, 2001] that it caused me to write about this energy inflow from the aether topic in a related article published earlier this year [Gravity and its Thermal Anomaly, Infinite Energy, 7, 41, pp. 61-65, 2002]. In that Report No. 8 I also mentioned the apparatus designed by Geoffrey Spence, an inventor based in U.K. This is the subject of his U.S. Patent No. 4,772,816. I feel, after what I have explained to you about the physical principles of tapping energy from the aether, that, just by looking at Fig. 8, copied from that patent, you will see how this relates to the Spence invention. Electrons injected into a chamber formed between two concentric electrodes are deflected into the inner electrode by a pair of magnets that provide and magnetic field along the central axis of the concentric electrodes. Of itself, this should add no excess energy, because the energy fed into accelerating the electrons is merely absorbed by electrostatic repulsion in charging the central electrode and so the capacitor. However, if that electron flow pulsates and there are connections to draw electron current from that central electrode then the pulsation implies a recurring sequence of charge and discharge. That magic capacitor function is then harnessed.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
218
Fig. 8 The questions then are whether the Spence invention really works and whether it is commercially viable? Well, I wrote that Energy Science Report back in 1996, six years ago, and it is only a few months ago that I heard any more of that project. Geoffrey Spence has developed the prototype product to the stage where he has closed the loop in the sense that a portion of the output power was fed back to impart the energy needed to sustain the electron beams. He has a self-sustaining unit that can deliver kilowatts of useful electrical power with no visible energy input. In the light of what I have discussed here, there will, no doubt, be those who take note of my message but say: "Well, we have heard it all before; so, when will see aether energy heating our houses and powering our automobiles?" My answer is that it will be only be when the scientific explanation of that potential source of energy is well understood and endorsed by our energy research community. That is the real hurdle that stands in the way of progress, given that inventors in this field who see excess energy are mystified themselves. I recall Stanley Meyer in 1993 at the International Symposium on New Energy held in Denver, Colorado (April, 1993) describing his so-called Water Fuel Cell. He claimed to
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
219
be producing a combustible gas mixture of hydrogen and oxygen by the electrical pulsing of a concentric cylindrical capacitor using water as a dielectric. His oral explanation and the paper as published in the conference proceedings were completely incomprehensible, even allowing for his terminology for a resistor as an amp consuming device or as an amp inhibitor. He inferred that some kind of cold fusion process was involved but it was evident he had no idea as to the true source of the excess energy that he was claiming. So, having explained the energy source, and guided by what others have discovered, I feel vindicated in asserting that a concentric capacitor system can perform as the magic capacitor of our dream world and I just hope that I may live long enough to see the technology applied on the grand scale. IV. The Energy of Creation As to the grand scale of things, what can be grander than the creation of stars such as our sun and their satellites such as our Earth? I see a beginning where matter, essentially protons and electrons, is dispersed throughout space, along with the electrical charges that come together to form the aether. Once the aether condenses from a state of chaos into the ordered state of its quantum form, as by shedding a little more of the energy which created that matter, then the phenomenon of gravitation would be born. There is analogy here with the state of ferromagnetism which appears in iron only when it cools into a state of order that we see as magnetic domains in the iron crystals. I simply mention this because it was my Ph.D. research interest in ferromagnetism that caused me to think in depth about the aether. Once gravity appeared then those protons, being of greater mass than the electrons, would cluster together in each space domain to form a spherical body of matter having a positive
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
220
electrical charge, pending the eventual arrival of all the electrons. That would set up a radial electric field and, as I have explained, that means aether energy inflow and aether spin. The star so formed will acquire angular momentum and, as that builds up, the star will seek to shed much of that angular momentum as matter, and so we have the planets. My message here is that the prospect of free energy and our future on a non-polluted Earth is related to the very creation of this our Earth and the scientific community that seeks to explain everything as a Big Bang scenario in an expanding universe is wandering astray and neglecting the real issue common with the phenomenon of Creation, our concern with aether energy as a free energy source that can power our future.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
221
CHAPTER 10
The Epilogue
Having concluded this account of The Physics of Creation, I can but let the reader judge and form his or her own opinions on the subject. Defining God as the Creator, the better our understanding of the creative forces at work in our universe, the more likely we are to find the ground on which to build a common religion conducive to a peaceful existence. However, as indicated in the INTRODUCTION on page 1, those who lead in this quest will have to be conversant in the language of physics, as otherwise they will be basing their beliefs on fictional notions, historical hearsay or mere hope and intuition. Awareness of the Science of Creation plus a will to embrace the discipline of a common and universal moral code of behaviour should surely suffice as the intellectual basis for ones religious horizons, without the promise of life after death. The scientific approach reveals how the universe was created as a system of order developed from chaos and so established an aether in which events governed by statistical factors created the forms of matter we see evolving around us. We are part of that system of matter and though subject to a game of chance we can, as thinking beings, optimise our prospects of survival in a secure and happy environment, albeit having, as do all particles of matter, a limited lifespan. Education founded too heavily on religious indoctrination in ignorance of the physics that rules the universe can but lead to unnecessary strife given that there will always be those who challenge the word of those who say they speak for a God of their own making.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
222
Concerning the physics, however, there are lessons from history that we must learn. Though the language of physics is universal, the stories told in that language can be conflicting and the truths of Nature have yet to be presented in their ultimate form. This work on The Physics of Creation is a major step in that direction. As to history, in recent centuries it has been important for scholars to build their scientific convictions on religious foundations, rather than build their religion on the evidence emerging from scientific discovery. Admission to the scholarly fraternity and the funding of institutions of learning depended upon religious disposition. Rivalry and prejudice combined with dogmatism have been dominant factors amongst scholars and there is no reason to think that what has been presented in this work will emerge unscathed from the debate which it will hopefully foster. With this in mind, it is interesting to compare the physical picture of the aether as now envisaged with what is implied in the following words, quoted from a book NEWTON: The Making of a Genius (MacMillan, 2002) by Patricia Fara. On pages 82-89, under the heading DISCIPLES, she refers to the physician George Cheyne (1672-1743) concerning Newtons conjectures about gravity, with this as a statement on page 87: Cheyne was one of the first of Newtons successors to explore aether models, which became increasingly prevalent from around 1740. Interpretations varied enormously, largely because as the mediators between matter, motion and spirit, aetherial fluids carried huge theological implications. Relying on arguments that ranged from the ineffably vague to the extraordinarily convoluted, natural philosophers described weightless invisible fluids of subtle particles seeping through the pores of solids, forcing gases to expand, and cushioning the sun in a great repellent cloud whose graduating density maintained the planets in their appropriate orbits.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
223
Often authenticated by the adjective Newtonian, aethers proliferated and diversified as authors with very different religious commitments summoned them up to explain mysterious phenomena like electric charge, magnetic repulsion, or human memory. Our modern generation as a result has been brain-washed, as it were, into believing that the aether is non-existent, merely an oldfashioned idea that has been disposed of by scientific evidence. It was seen as a medium which provides an absolute frame of reference in which the speed of light is constant, but experiment based on reflecting light back on itself in different directions in the laboratory on Earth which moves at very high speed relative to the cosmic background, failed to provide a measure of speed through the aether. As the aether did not live up to mans expectations it had to be discarded in favour of a philosophy based on Einsteins doctrines on space-time and relativity which makes the observer the frame of reference. Yet, surely, we must bear in mind that the existence of the aether is not a question of whether Newton was right or wrong in that belief, or whether, in modern physics, Einsteins authority is the governing factor. The experimental facts in the discipline of physics, if interpreted correctly, tell us what we need to know about the aether and neither Newton nor Einstein has shown us how Mother Nature determines G, the constant of gravitation in terms of a unified theory. As to scholarly debate and challenge of ones ideas, in a chapter entitled ENEMIES, Patricia Faras study of Newton shows how God features in the aether discussion. On page 113 of her book one reads: Protagonists on both sides often used the metaphor of a clock to portray the conflicting accounts presented by Leibniz and Newton of how God superintends the universe. On Newtons model, God is constantly active throughout the cosmos, and intermittently exerts His
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
224
supreme power to intervene and alter the laws of nature. Leibniz was scathing about this view: Nay, the machine of Gods making is so imperfect, that he is obliged to clean it now and then .... and even mend it, as a clockmaker mends his work. Surely, he protested, God is no sloppy mechanic, but a skilled craftsman who could initially wind up His clock to run perfectly throughout eternity. According to Newton, God created independent, individual particles that, as they travelled through empty space, constantly interacted with each other and formed new associations. In contrast, Leibniz maintained that God has established a harmonious universe completely filled by inherently active entities called monads. Although they operated independently, and no longer needed Gods direct control, Leibnizs nomads had been in a sense pre-programmed so that they worked together to fulfil His plans. It is no wonder that, by invoking God, these ideas about the aether should attract comment and, indeed, ridicule by the nonscientifically minded men of religion. National rivalry also contributed to the criticism directed at Newton, as we see from some words on page 139 in Patricia Faras book in the chapter entitled FRANCE. Nor does great NEWTONS famous system stand, On one compact foundation, simply plannd Reflect how vainly is that Art employed, Which founds a stately fabrick on a Void Confess the fair result of sober thought, Who builds on vacuum, merely builds on nought.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
225
This was attributed as a quotation from a poem Anti-Lucretius by Cardinal de Polignac (1747), dedicated to promoting Religion and Virtue and said to be resolutely Cartesian. In presenting an account of the aether in this year 2003 it seems unlikely that the religious opinion will intrude in such a way, given the state of science and technology of our modern day. However, one has to consider the climate of opinion prevailing amongst the scientific community. I therefore introduce what I have to say on this by making one final quotation from Patricia Faras book which appears on page 254 in a chapter entitled INHERITORS: Newton may have regarded himself as a giant who stood on others shoulders, but new contenders for the position of outstanding genius would, in their turn, come to surmount him. During the twentieth century, the main competitors for Newtons place were Einstein and Hawking. I find this a curious assertion as it is hard to belief that, in the pursuit of scientific truths, one should be contending for the position of outstanding genius. In this modern world of communication with its all pervading media activity one would surely need to have a publicity agent to engage in such a contest and the winner claiming the title could but feel somewhat foolish. One need not question Einsteins genius, as such, given the impact he has had on those who teach physics. However, whereas the physics of Newton will survive in the teaching curriculum it seems improbable that Einsteins space-time notions can survive for long, given that physics students emerging from their school education may have heard of Einstein but know next to nothing about his theories. Already in this work we have seen how aether theory can so easily explain the phenomena on which Einstein has built his claims. Certainly, I see no case for saying that Einstein could ever displace Newton as a figure head in the world of physics.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
226
Einstein made his contribution in the earlier years of the twentieth century and the contender for Newtons place at the end of the twentieth century is, according to Patricia Fara, Stephen Hawking, a professor at Cambridge University in England. Hawking bases his claim to fame on Black Holes and their effects on leptons in nearby vacuum, but one must wonder how anything meaningful can emerge from a study of effects in remote space, given that the study is based on insufficient knowledge as to the nature of gravitation. There seem to be some stellar objects in galaxies that exhibit enormous mass compared with our sun, if that estimate of mass is based on the value of G that we associate with Newtons observations of our solar system. However, G depends upon those gravitons discussed in chapter 2 and therefore one could say that a star which finds itself in a region of aether subject to intense energy activity might have its quantum dynamic motion balanced by gravitons that are leptons of the heavy electron variety, muons, rather that tau-leptons that are superheavy electrons. The mass of the stellar object need not be too different from that of the sun, but the volume of the associated graviton system in the vicinity of that object could be greater by tens of thousands, meaning that G as applied to that object could even be many millions of times greater than applies in our solar system. Stephen Hawking may have been born 300 years after the death of Galileo (1642), as we are told by his books, just as Isaac Newton (1642-1727) was born 100 years after the death of Galileo, but that is hardly a qualification adding authority to their respective contributions. If it were, then I too, being born in 1927, two hundred years after the death of Newton, would hope that this could add a little weight to what I have offered in this work. It is on this light-hearted note that I now close this account, whilst noting that more information concerning my theory and its onward development can be found by inspecting my website www.aspden.org which I maintain in my retirement as my voluntary contribution to the scientific community.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
227
APPENDIX I
The Exclusion Zone of Interaction Energy

When two particles interact owing to the interaction of their mutual electrostatic or gravitational fields, the fact that field energy density is proportional to field intensity squared means that there is a cross-product component of energy density separate from the selfenergy components of either particle. This cross-product component is what is meant here by interaction energy. Our task now is to prove the following theorem: Given two particles separated by a distance r and subject to an inverse square of distance law of force, prove that their interaction energy sums to zero within a sphere of radius r centred on either charge. Why is this important? It is important because in physics we face the problem of working out how fast that energy can transfer from its distribution over the whole of the field enveloping the particles to satisfy the Principle of Conservation of Energy by moving to or from the kinetic energy state which is seated with and shares the motion at the particle location. For the electrostatic case, consider a charge Q in the figure above as developing a radial electric field VQ at radius x. Imagine then a charge q distant r from Q developing a radial electric field Vq at the radius x from Q. Let y denote the distance from q and a point P under consideration at radius x from Q. Then, with as the angle between VQ and Vq, we know that the interaction energy density component at P is: (VQVq cos)/4
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
228
Fig. I.1 Also, VQ is Q/x2 and Vq is q/y2. Now consider the volume of an elemental section of a spherical shell of thickness dx at the radius x, as subtended at P by a small solid angle from q. The elemental volume is y2/cos times this angle per unit thickness of the shell. If this is multiplied by the above expression after replacing VQ and Vq by the above terms in x and y, we find that the cos term is eliminated as is the y2 term, to leave us with an expression for the energy attributable to that elemental section dx of shell is Qq(dx)/4x2 times the solid angle mentioned. Since this does not depend upon y, we can evaluate the total energy component dE for the full solid angle of 4 to obtain: dE = (Qq/x2)dx Provided x is greater than r, the fields VQ and Vq are in the same direction. With x less than r the two regions of the spherical shell intercepted by the same solid angle have opposite and cancelling interaction energies owing to the change of direction of VQ relative to Vq. Thus within the radius r the interaction field energy sums to zero and so the proposition is proved.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
229
Now we could have replaced Q and q by masses M and m and, by introducing G, the constant of gravitation, as a coefficient, reached exactly the same conclusion, namely that there is no net interaction energy within a sphere centred on M or, by the logic of symmetry, centred on m. Accordingly, whether we have in mind the electrostatic interaction or the gravitational interaction, the energy transfer for change of separation distance involves energy having to traverse the distance r in going to or from the kinetic energy state in the process of transfer with field energy. A separate mathematical analysis based on the use of MacClaurins Theorem can show that the interaction field energy distribution at radii beyond r is inversely proportional to the square of x. From that one concludes that the precise distance energy travels in its transfer between field and kinetic energy is the distance r. The latter analysis is of record in chapter 1 of my book: Physics Unified and also in a paper of mine published by the U.K. Institute of Physics [The Inverse Square Law of Force, J. Phys. A: Math Gen., 13, 36493655 (1980)]. The importance of the theorem here presented is evident from the analysis in chapter (9) where we derived the equation (9.6) which led us to a physical foundation for the Neumann potential in terms of the Coulomb interaction. An equally important result, however, is that afforded by the clear analogy with the gravitational interaction, because equation (9.6) has a gravitational counterpart that is the basis of the point made in chapter 5 by reference to the expression (5.1). Physicists whose minds are entrenched in relativistic doctrine would do well to take stock of what has just been stated here, because one can see, from the argument that follows expression (5.1) in chapter 5, that the perihelion motion of planet Mercury can be explained by the simple classical logic of classical field theory, once the theorem presented in this Appendix I is given due attention.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
230
APPENDIX II
Inertia and E = Mc2

The physical basis of inertia and so of the well-known formula E = Mc2 resides in the Principle of Conservation of Energy and, contrary to what many physicists believe, the unwillingness of an electron to radiate and so shed the only attribute that accounts for its existence, its electric charge and the energy intrinsic to that charge. Electron acceleration in company with other electrons accelerated by the same electric field will engender a collective action by which energy can be said to be dispersed by setting up electromagnetic wave propagation. If N electrons are involved then the rate of energy radiation is, by Larmor theory, said to be proportional to N2. Physicists who see this as applying to radio transmission from antenna in which numerous electrons are caused to oscillate in synchronism with one another must, however, ask themselves whether the radiation might be proportional, not to N2 but to (N2 - N), whereby we exclude radiation of the very energy that keeps the electrons alive. Why, I ask, should physicists just declare that an electron is accelerated without, as they do, factoring into their analysis the external electric field that causes that acceleration? Now I could write many, many pages in support of my concern, but see no reason for replicating and developing what I have already published elsewhere. My book: Physics Unified includes a discussion in chapter 4 where I refer to 17 authors who seem to be troubled by this problem. These authors include Dirac and Einstein. If you think Einsteins theory is rigorous, ask yourself how we measure relativistic mass increase of a fast-moving electron unless it
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
231
is rapidly accelerated. Then note Einsteins words in a famous paper of his entitled: On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies : As the electron is to be slowly accelerated , and consequently may not give off any energy in the form of radiation, the energy withdrawn from the electrostatic field must be put down as equal to the energy of motion of the electron. The reference is Annalen der Physik, 17, 891 (1905). If you respect the work of Nobel Laureate Paul Dirac, just look up the paper in which, in discussing the classical theory of energy radiation by accelerated charge to accommodate relativistic principles, he stated: It would appear that we have a contradiction with elementary ideas of causality Here the reference is Proc. Roy. Soc., A167, 148 (1938). So my case is simple. Just go back to see how the formula for electron energy radiation was derived in the first place. I will not repeat the analysis here but will present the mathematical integral on which it is based: 2 [ (1/8)(efsin/c3t)22(ct)2sin cdt] d = 2e2f2/3c3
0
This is derived at p. 81 in my book: Physics Unified. There are two important points to notice about this formulation. Firstly, it contains no symbol which represents the intensity of the electric field which must be present in order to set up the acceleration f. Secondly, that factor of 2 before the integral sign is put there because it is assumed that the electric field disturbance that is propagated must, by virtue of our understanding of Maxwells theory of wave propagation, be matched by the propagation of an equal magnetic field disturbance.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
232
Now I can declare quite categorically that once the accelerating electric field of strength V is included that integral above becomes zero, provided we have: Ve/f = e2/2c2(ct) and since e2/2(ct) is a measure of the electric field energy outside the radius ct, t being time, that remains to be accelerated as the disturbance progresses at speed c, it is evident that here we have a formula that tells us that an electron will accelerate in just such a way as to avoid shedding its electric energy, the condition being that the inertial mass is the electric field energy involved divided by c2. So we have E = Mc2 derived by classical electron theory and a physical insight into the nature of inertia. The reason I am delving into this subject here is my concern about the theory of the Hubble constant in relation to the classical formula for the Thomson scattering cross-section of the electron. The theory for this depends upon the above formula for the rate of energy radiation by the electron deemed to be accelerated by the passage of an electromagnetic wave intercepted by the electron. If there can be no radiation of electric field energy by the isolated electron accelerated by such a wave then, in that respect, the scattering crosssection of the electron must be zero. However, I can see the case for the magnetic disturbance, or rather the kinetic energy disturbance implied, to still ripple through as part of the resulting wave propagation. To that extent, and bearing in mind that there is a measure of qualitative evidence supporting the Thomson scattering attributed to electrons, I tend to the opinion that an electromagnetic wave encountering isolated electrons in space does confront an obstructing cross-section that is half that indicated by the classical Thomson formula. In this case there is logic in looking to the transient creation of electrons by the aethers failed attempts to create protons as a reason accounting for the attenuation of intensity and frequency of waves coming from distant stars. It is just that the theoretical determination
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
233
(chapter 8) of the magnitude of the Hubble constant is affected, but surely we do have here a profound insight into some fascinating aspects of the physics that underpin our universe and I just hope that physicists will see enough reason to revise their opinions in the light of these comments. As to revising ones opinions, readers may find it of interest to read what I have recorded ahead in Appendix VI concerning Einsteins notion of time dilation and also concerning the significance of what I have said in Chapter 9 about Fechners hypothesis and its bearing upon electrodynamic interaction. Our understanding of the physics of Creation is, to be sure, an evolving theme, but one can be equally sure that what is reported here in this work is closer to the truth than a physics based on Einsteins theory.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
234
APPENDIX III
The Electrons Anomalous Magnetic Moment

This Appendix is a slightly edited version of a chapter entitled An Excursion in Quantum Electrodynamics which appears in my book: Aether Science Papers published in 1996. The starting point in the whole of my research has been the subject of electrodynamics and its energy anomalies, by which I mean the experimental anomalies and not the paradoxical notions that beset the theory of the subject. I have found repeatedly, from my attempts to write about such matters, that referees of physics journals delight in pointing to the success of quantum electrodynamics in explaining the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron. They claim such precision in their calculations that is so overwhelming that surely only a fool would dare to think that, by contemplating an aether, there may be a better and easier way of going about that task. So, having discovered the easy alternative, I delved into that wonderful world of QED to see how its magic derived a theoretical value for the g/2 factor of the electron which measurement shows as being 1.001159652193(10). This is the value adopted in consultation with the CODATA Task Group in 1986 and as made available to scientists in U.K. by a pocket chart published by The Royal Society jointly with other learned bodies. The numerical value just quoted is stated to be the magnetic moment of the electron in terms of the Bohr magneton.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
235
I saw that a book entitled Introduction to Gauge Field Theory had been authored by Bailin and Love and published in 1986 under the auspices of the Institute of Physics in U.K. and that the promotion literature specifically declared that it provided 'a detailed treatment of quantum electrodynamics'. I bought that book with the express purpose of seeing exactly how those who really understand QED actually obtain the wonderfully precise number that one understands fits so well with the value measured. In a browsing mood, I first opened the book on page 214 and was pleased to see that chapter 14 began with the words: "The spectacular success of quantum electrodynamics (QED) in calculating the Lamb shift and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron and the muon ...". Yes, that statement meant that what I was looking for would be found in the earlier chapters of the book. After all, here was a book on that very subject. I found the relevant section heading on page 140: 'The electron anomalous magnetic moment'. The opening words were: "In this section, we specialise to the case of QED (Abelion gauge theory) and derive the electron anomalous magnetic moment. For convenience we shall work in the Feynman gauge..." I was expecting then to see the analysis develop to the derivation of something very close to that 1.001159652193(10) number recited above, but, to my horror, the derivation ended on page 142 with the words: "Thus the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron AMM is: AMM = (/2)(e/2m)." Alpha, , is a fundamental constant in atomic physics, the fine-structure constant. I knew that this was only the first-order determination, being the reciprocal of /2(137.036), which is 0.0011614. Evidently the 'spectacular success' was not something I could verify by guidance from that book. I was expected to accept that QED was a 'spectacular success' but it was something I had to take on trust without knowing what assumptions were made in the onward iterations of the calculation.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
236
The book was, of course, full of equations, each one following the other and so conveying the impression of being 'a tight logical structure' but when the crunch came and a numerical result should have emerged I had to be satisfied with the above first-order approximation formula. From my academic background in engineering I had always judged the result of a 'tight logical structure' on the end result, by comparing the numerical value derived with that observed as an actual experimental result. I am now going to make the outrageous statement that QED is so powerful a technique that it is like taking a power-driven sledgehammer to crack a nut. There just has to be an easier way to explain how Nature determines that anomalous magnetic moment! A back-of-an-envelope type of calculation can do better than that QED result presented in the book by Bailin and Love. All that is meant by the anomaly of the electron magnetic moment is that the antics of an electron in motion cannot bring to bear the electric energy in the far field zone fast enough to affect its inertia when in orbit having a very restricted radius. There is a cut-off range connected with the electron's Compton wavelength and only the electric field energy within that range contributes to the electron's inertia in its state of minor orbital motion. This may be an engineer's way of looking at the problem, but it is a realistic approach. If what I have said above about the moving atom and its problems in collecting energy spread over its electromagnetic field is 'phantasy', then so the world of QED is phantasy of an extreme kind, because that goes even further by involving us in the problems of photon-electron interactions and something called 'normalization' to avoid infinities but which amounts to the 'cut-off' range just mentioned. So, I sit, in my aging years, watching the world of physics evolve its 'tight logical structure' and wonder if that world will ever look up my paper, 'Fundamental Constants derived from
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
237
Two-Dimensional Harmonic Oscillations in an Electrically-Structured Vacuum', Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 9, 315-323 (1986). That paper shows, in a few pages, how the electron's g/2-factor, can be explained with at least the same precision that is claimed for QED. The formula is: g/2 = 1 + /[2 (1+31/2/) ] Here, N is determined as the nearest prime number to the value 3/2. Since -1 is just a little above 137, N is 647. The table below is reproduced from that referenced paper to show how g/2 depends upon the value of -1.
(alpha)-1 137.03597 137.03598 137.03599
(g/2) factor 1.001159652365 1.001159652280 1.001159652195
Now, that paper of mine was received by the publishing journal in November 1985 and at that time I, the author, was completely unaware of the prospect that the CODATA values to be adopted later in 1986 would establish 1.001159652193(10) as the g/2-factor of the electron. Nor did I imagine that the -1 value adopted would be 137.0359895(61). What must then be absolutely clear to anyone reading this is the fact that if QED is a 'spectacularly successful' theory because it provides something very close to this relationship between the fine-structure constant and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, then it cannot be any closer than the value derived above using my very simple formula with N as 647.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
238
What I offer, however, is a 'back-of-the-envelope' type of analysis for deducing that formula, whereas the eighth-order calculation based on numerous, indeed thousands of, Feynman diagrams as well as arbitrary hadronic involvements, as needed to get a close QED value, is a task that could well keep the reader fully occupied for several years. That assumes the reader has very advanced skills in the relevant mathematics, skills far in excess of the school-level training which suffices to understand my method. As is well known, the electron exhibits a characteristic wave frequency, c, which is the Compton electron frequency. This is the frequency of the photon corresponding to the mass-energy of an electron at rest. Now, although Einstein may have said that the idea that something can be at 'rest' is meaningless, I do not accept that. You see, it is a question of deciding whether each electron in the universe is a law unto itself so far as external governing influences are concerned, or whether it is regulated by external influence. I can assure you that that Compton electron frequency is a universal regulating rhythm that beats the time and all electrons have to dance to that time. They are not free to wander, each having its own proper time, much as Einstein might have wished that to be the case! If you have read in books about 'time' that there is no such thing as 'universal time' then you have exposed yourself to a 'brainwashing' exercise conducted by devil authors who preach the Einstein doctrine but contribute nothing to the science which sustains technological progress. My method involves an energy cut-off range determined by a wave resonance in the near-field zone of the electron as shown in the figure below. The length of the radial lines in the outer cavity is half the Compton wavelength of the electron, because the field oscillations are phase-locked by the charge polarity condition. The length of the radial lines in the inner core of the electron charge is approximately the electron charge radius a and represents a standing wave condition of much higher frequency.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
239
Pattern of electron field cavity wave resonance Now, the electron itself is a form of energy compressed into a field and we can calculate how that energy is distributed. J. J. Thomson did that calculation in the 19th century to find that, in electrostatic units, the energy e2/2 was seated outside the charge radius . However, he discovered from the study of how electron mass increased with speed, even tending to become infinite as the speed of light was approached, that the effective rest mass of the electron was 2e2/3c2. This meant that, if the electron were hollow within the radius a, then we could write the energy E as being 3Mc2/4. However, even before Einstein came into the picture in 1905, the Cambridge cosmologist, Sir James Jeans had, in his early years before being knighted, explained that mass and energy are equivalent and had
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
240
argued that matter could be annihilated to produce radiant energy. He saw this as being the energy source feeding the sun and all other stars. It is a simple exercise to work out that if the pressure of the electron field at the radius a is the same within the body of the electron, meaning that the charge e has an appropriate distribution conforming with this condition, then the speed of propagation of wave disturbances in the electron charge itself has the value c and that the electric energy inside that radius is e2/6a. So, you see, the net result is an electron of energy 2e2/3a giving a relationship between energy and mass that we can write as E=Mc2. Much of this was accepted physics before Einstein appeared on the scene and was known as 'electron theory', so it is very hard to understand how modern physicists can write that history off as if it never happened! For our immediate purpose, we have now the basis for studying the coordinated wave interaction as between that external influence at the Compton electron frequency and the wavelengths associated with that radius parameter a of the electron. Looking now at the figure showing the pattern of the electrons field cavity resonance, ask yourself how the world outside the electron might interface with the world inside the core charge of the electron. If you think of pressure from the viewpoint of a gas then the interface is just a pressure interface and there is not much to say. However, a gas comprises numerous particles all moving in different directions. There are three degrees of freedom. However, inside that electron it may be that there are not numerous component particles behaving as a gas and moving with those three degrees of freedom. There could be an oscillation that has only one degree of freedom, amounting in its overall effect to a radial oscillation within the radius a. I emphasize here that I have no special insight into what goes on inside an electron. I can only make tentative assumptions and reason on that basis to see how what develops compares with what we see and measure in our experiments. So, I trust you are following the gist of my argument,
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
241
because I am coming to the point that between the sphere of radius a and the sphere interfacing with those Compton frequency oscillations there is an adjustment at constant pressure in going from one degree of freedom to three degrees of freedom. What this amounts to is that the surface area of that intermediate interface will be three times the surface area of the inner interface. In short, the outer interface radius will be 31/2a, subject, however, to a little 'tuning'. Now, if this seems a little speculative, there is an alternative approach giving the equivalent result. Look again at the figure and imagine both the radial oscillations within the core charge of the electron and in the cavity excited at the Compton electron frequency as setting up standing wave antinodes needing to balance those of travelling waves progressing by reflection around a circuit within the middle cavity. You will see that the three-wave interface at the charge surface requires a 120o angular separation. The geometry of this system also requires the outer radius to be 31/2a. A vital consideration is what it is that tells an electron that it is a negative charge or a positive charge. I do not want to dwell too long on this point so I will simply explain that it is all a question of how those the two frequency modes of oscillation beat together. Undoubtedly, as those who may study the history of aether theory may discover, the answer lies in developing the concepts of C. A. Bjerknes of the period 1877 to 1910. Positive and negative are states involving oscillations in antiphase, all positive charges sharing a common phase and all negative charges sharing a common phase, but I leave that research to others. Suffice it here to say that the phase of oscillation is important. The Compton electron wavelength has to blend with the wavelength 2a, as the reader can work out from that pattern shown in the figure. The ratio of these wavelengths has to be an odd integer that cannot be factorized as that would allow the phase of the electron oscillations to have optional values in relation to the regulating
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
242
universal rhythm of the Compton frequency oscillations. All positive electron charges have the same phase and all negative electron charges have the same phase but positive and negative charges are different because they are in antiphase. This is the secret of the meaning of electrical charge polarity. It is just a question of phase, but there is phase-lock ensuring that there are no maverick charges in the electron family. There are only electrons or their positive versions, the positrons. It is on this basis that there is a constraint on the adoption of the distance parameter a as a wavelength. The wavelength (c) assumed by the resonant oscillation within the electron has to ensure that: (c)/2 = Na where N is a prime number. Now, from what has been said above, it can be seen that, since a without this constraint is given by 2e2/3hc, hc being the rest-mass energy of the electron and the Compton wavelength c being c/c, we can write as an approximation: a = (2e2/hc)c/3 From these two equations we find that N becomes the nearest prime integer to 3(137)/2, bearing in mind that , which is 2e2/hc, is approximately 1/137. This gives N, uniquely, as 647. The formula for g/2 is then easily explained because the field energy of the electron disposed outside the cut-off radius R is simply e2/2R and R is simply (c/2)(1+31/2/647). Using the formula: (g/2)(mc2 - e2/2R) = mc2 where m is the normal rest mass of the electron, and also the fact that c is h/mc, it then needs a little algebra to find the residual electron energy thereby effective in confined orbital states of motion. This allows us to determine its ratio to the normal energy applicable for translational motion but one then arrives at the result presented in table above.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
243
APPENDIX IV
Hydrogen as a Star
Stars are ionized. They comprise hydrogen atoms. They have sufficient mass for the force of gravity to squeeze those atoms close together. Their K-level electrons then crash into the electrons of adjacent atoms and so sustain the ionization. As a result the nucleus of the hydrogen atom, the proton, the seat of most of the mass present, can come free and be pulled inwards towards the centre of the star owing to gravity. The result is equilibrium when the electrostatic repulsion of the many protons involved balances the mutual gravitational attraction, not of those protons, but of the full atomic composition of the star that lies within the pressure threshold set by the critical contact between those electrons in the K-level of the atomic structure. The radius of the K-level electron orbits in hydrogen is known to be 5.292x10-9 cm and so, once the pressure reduces the distance between the nuclei of the adjacent hydrogen atoms to 1.0584x10-9 cm, then one can expect the ionization state, as produced by gravitational action and so the dynamic activity of the aether which accounts for that action, to develop in such a way as to give basis for the following formula relating charge density s and mass density m in the star: s = m (G) This is equation (8.12) in chapter 8. Our object here in this Appendix IV is to determine that mass density for hydrogen atoms having contact between their K-level electron orbits. For a simple cubic array of such atoms there is one hydrogen atom in every unit volume defined by the cube of that distance 1.0584x10-9 cm and, since a hydrogen atom has a mass of 1.67x10-24 gm, this corresponds
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
244
to a mass density of 1.41 gm/cc. This happens to be the mean mass density of the Sun. However, we need to justify that simple cubic structure, because most physicists will suggest that some close packing of the kind known to crystallographers will be more likely. To answer this I draw attention to the fact that our analysis of aether structure has already relied on a simple cubic structure of those quons that form the E frame of the aether. The reason there was that the quons repelled one another and sought to be as far apart as possible. The same could apply to hydrogen atoms squeezed close together, because each of those protons sitting at the atoms centre is screened by a single electron. This means that the protons, though 100% screened electrostatically, on average, will sporadically be exposed in the sense that they will, as it were, see the charge of the adjacent protons. In finding the optimum crystal structure they will, like the quons in the aether, then opt for the simple cubic array. That is my case in support of the argument that hydrogen stars will have a mean mass density of 1.41 gm/cc and the one star we can be sure about in determining its mass density is our sun, which has exactly that mass density of 1.41 gm/cc.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
245
APPENDIX V
The Angular Momentum of the Solar System

In the following table the parameters from which the angular momenta of the planets can be estimated are listed. To simplify the data the planetary orbits are deemed to be circular. The data are in Earth units, the mass, orbital radius and annual rate of revolution in orbit being taken as reference. The sun, with an estimated angular momentum, is included to facilitate summation. All the angular momenta are in the same direction as all planets rotate on the same sense as the sun rotates about its axis. Body Mass Orbit radius -----0.387 0.723 1.00 1.52 5.20 9.54 19.18 30.07 39.44 Years per revolution ----0.24 0.62 1.00 1.88 11.86 29.46 84.01 165 248 Angular momentum 20 approx. 0.03 0.69 1.00 0.135 724.6 294.1 63.5 94.3 0.69
Sun Mercury Venus Earth Mars Jupiter Saturn Uranus Neptune Pluto
332800 0.05 0.82 1.00 0.11 317.8 95.2 14.5 17.2 0.11
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
246
The total angular momentum of the solar system may be estimated by summing the last column. It is found to be about 1200 Earth units. The Earth mass is approximately 6.0x1027 gm and the Earths orbital radius is approximately 1.5x1013 cm. The Earth rotates in orbit through 2 radians in a year comprising 3.15x107 seconds. Thus one Earth unit of angular momentum is 2.7x1047 gm cm2/s. 1200 such units makes the total angular momentum (AM) of the solar system some 3.2x1050 gm cm2/s. If denotes the angular velocity of the sun at creation when its mass M was no doubt very much the same as its present value of 1.989x1033 gm and its radius R little different from its present value of 6.96x1010 cm, then based on its mass density being uniform, as has been deduced by reference to Appendix IV, then: (AM) = 2MR2/5 and: = 8.3x10-5 rad/s This is an empirical value based on data found by observation and measurement of our solar system. The fascinating achievement of the theory discussed in this work by reference to aether spin and Appendix IV is the value of indicated by equation (8.13) in chapter 8: = m (4G/o) which, since the term in brackets is known to be 5.39x10-5 rad/sec per gm/cc and since the mass density of the sun is 1.41 gm/cc, tells us, by theory alone, that the angular velocity of the suns aether at creation was 7.6x10-5 rad/s. This differs by less than 10% as a comparison between theory as applied to an event billions of years ago when the sun was created and the evidence before us today from the data we have about the solar system. A little speculation might then suggest that, since we have shown in chapter 8 why the suns aether has to have a greater radius than the sun itself, the suns aether at creation was locked into sharing the angular spin velocity of the sun itself, but
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
247
this came about before the sun had acquired its full inflow of mass and angular momentum. In then spinning faster than the G1/2 factor times 1.41 gm/cc allowed, the sun ceased to share its aether spin angular velocity and, lost all chance of recovering that spin-lock, once it traversed a space domain boundary and shed its planets. I am, of course, in these final words indulging here in speculation, but my object is to tempt readers to find better answers, all in the onward pursuit for truth in our research into Mother Natures realm of Creation. Aspiring students of cosmology might be interested in working out how stars cluster over time so that there can be several sharing a space domain, whereas over large expanses of space between galaxies there will be many space domains unoccupied by stars. One could conceive of two stars created with much the same mass as the sun, but yet are not created as a binary pair, moving under gravity in a common space domain and so being drawn together, either to form a new star of double the suns mass or settling into a stable dynamic system and forming such a binary star combination. With that and the fact that the above equation for does not depend upon stellar mass in mind, such a student might have his or her curiosity aroused upon reading the passage I now quote from P. M. S. Blacketts article in Nature, 159, 658-688 (1947): From statistical evidence on stars of similar type the probable values of these quantities (stellar mass, radius and angular velocity of rotation) in terms of the values for the sun are found to be: M = 2.3 R = 2.0 = 25. The message I read in that factor 25 is that most stars have escaped the experience of giving birth to planets. Maybe at creation they acquired more linear motion than did our sun and so they traversed their first and subsequent space boundary encounters at a
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
248
much higher speed, so that gravitational upheaval during transit had insufficient effect. That figure of 25, as referenced on our sun, clearly says that most stars of the same type as our sun exhibit a rotational speed of approximately once per day, given that the sun rotates once every 25 days. Our Earths once per day rate of rotation corresponds to an angular velocity of 7.27x10-5 rad/s. Is it not then quite fascinating to find that our theory for the creation of a star, as based only on our analysis of aether structure plus what we know about the hydrogen atom, tells us that stars at creation spin at 7.6x10-5 rad/s? Such analysis does not depend upon space domain size, though the latter, given that speed of rotation, does determine the mass of the star.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
249
APPENDIX VI The Hypotheses of Fechner and Einstein Readers will not be surprised to hear that upon reading through what I have written in this book about Creation, there are a couple of after-thoughts that warrant mention. Those who believe Einstein's theory will, no doubt, assume that my theory cannot explain the evidence of record deemed to support Einstein's hypothesis concerning 'time dilation'. Then there will be those who are a little bewildered by my reliance on Fechner's hypothesis to explain the electrodynamic action of electric current flow as arising from pairs of oppositely charged particles created in spaced relationship and then annihilating one another upon coming together by moving in opposite directions. Surprising though it may seem, there is scope for challenging Fechner's hypothesis constructively and thereby overcoming a problem that it poses, but in so doing one finds that the experimental evidence relied upon as proving 'time dilation' may become instead proof that supports the theory presented in this work. There is only one reported type of experiment which purports to support Einstein's 'time dilation' hypothesis. This is that indicating the enhanced lifetime of the muon as a function of its speed. I discount the idea that time dilation is inherent in Einstein's conception of distorted space as a valid means for explaining the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment as already discussed in chapter 9. Also one can dismiss the evidence arising from an experiment which involves transporting an atomic clock in an aircraft flying around the world to see if it loses time or gains time relative to an atomic clock sitting at the base location. Here the question one faces is whether speed or acceleration or both, being different for the flying clock and
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
250
that at rest on body Earth, will affect the clock rate. You see, we are not here discussing time as such but are discussing an atom, meaning the change of energy states of electrons in motion around the atomic nucleus and this involves photons, the frequency of which depends upon energy, not time. The atomic clock rate is affected by change of gravitational potential and so altitude. It confuses the issue to imagine atomic clock rates as changing owing to so-called 'time dilation'. See the Section IV, 'Times Rates of Moving Clocks' of my paper: 'Synchronous Lattice Electrodynamics as an Alternative to Time Dilation, (Hadronic Journal, 10, 185-192; 1987). It is included as the fifth paper of the Appendix in my book Aether Science Papers. Now I must digress just a little before coming to the detail of the theory of dilated muon lifetime, as I now perceive it in the light of the derivation of the muon rest-mass lifetime, as presented in chapter 3 of this work. Imagine a lamp that runs on electricity from an electrically charged cell, a battery. It has a certain illumination lifetime, its light going out once the electric charge from that battery is all shed. Now imagine that the lamp is taken on a long journey accompanied by lots of charged cells. The lamp will glow for a longer period proportional to the number of cells and their total electric charge. Now, if you assembled such a device and observed the enhanced illumination lifetime of that travelling lamp, I believe you would think it a joke if someone said to you: "Ah yes, here is the evidence I have been seeking concerning Einstein's theory. You have proved that Einstein was right when he conceived the notion of 'time dilation'. Time itself really does alter its rhythm and extend itself, the faster the speed of the object under observation." However, the comment may not seem quite so ridiculous if what you were observing was something rather elusive as seen in the microcosmic world within a high energy particle accelerator at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland. Physicists probing the darkness of the unknown by getting fundamental particles to move at very high speeds
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
251
are more closely tuned to think in terms of Einstein's theory than theory at the basic electrician level, and so, upon seeing something that lives longer, as its speed approaches that of light, Einstein's time dilation formula comes immediately to mind. What they saw in that accelerator was a system comprising many muons, a muon being a charged electric particle that, apart from its much greater mass, has features resembling the electron, but those physicists had no idea why those muons had a fleeting existence as, once created, they survive for a brief period only and then all that is left is electrons, albeit moving at high speed owing to the energy shed by the parent muon. It is a great mystery as to how the muon comes into existence and the best reason I can offer is that it already exists everywhere in space and reveals itself as matter only when it (a) takes up position in the dynamic aether lattice and shares the rhythmic motion of that lattice rather than having the random motion in the aether underworld and (b) somehow attracts and becomes attached to two electrons or positrons and adjusts its resonant state in the manner I have described in my paper: The Muon g-Factor by Cavity Resonance Theory, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, v. 39, 271 (1984). In saying it exists everywhere I am merely echoing the message of chapter 3 entitled 'The Ubiquitous Muon'. However, as to the electron itself, you may wonder how that is created. We have seen in chapter 4 the theory explaining how the proton is created from muons and we know from experiment that muons in matter form can decay into electrons or positrons, but surely that might only mean that the muon has shed its hangers-on. We are left with the puzzle of how, in theory, electrons are created. Well, I cannot answer that, except for noting that our theory in chapter 6 has explained how the photon is created in a space medium that has a characteristic frequency, that universal rhythm of space that leads us to the dynamics of gravitation by connecting the mass of matter with the gravitons. Surely the fact that a photon having that characteristic frequency defines an energy quantum which is precisely that of the electron rest-mass, is the clue
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
252
by which to solve the puzzle. One is merely left with a chicken-and egg type of problem, as to whether the electrons are created ab initio and somehow then regulate the oscillations of the underworld of space or whether the universal oscillations and ordered structure of space set in first and so determine the form of the electron. Here we will confine our attention to the question of the muon and its extended lifetime at speed as determined by those experiments at CERN. Yes, indeed, particle physicists could measure the lifetime of the muon just as an electrician can time the illumination of that lamp mentioned above, and they even found that, the faster the muon travelled, the greater its lifetime in proportion to its overall energy, including its rest-mass energy. Yet somehow they missed seeing how, just as for that lamp, the muon in motion needs an entourage of energy cells which is greater in number, the greater that speed. They were well aware that Einstein had, some 65 years earlier, supposed that the dimension of time is woven into the fabric of space, a fabric which can be stretched and twisted, with the result that space can be curved (whatever that means in non-mathematical terms) and time can be dilated (whatever that means in non-mathematical terms). So, when the muon at speed was found by experiment to have a longer lifetime, one proportional to its increase in energy, that was said to be 'proof' that Einstein's theory was right. Quoting the very words used at page 62 in the paper by Bailey and Picasso (Progress in Nuclear Physics, v. 12, Part 1, pp. 43-75; 1970): 'To conclude, the CERN Muon Storage Ring group has proved that the "clock paradox" is established as an experimental fact (at the level of approximately 1.2%).' Well, enough of this, the task here, after some further 33 years from the publication of that paper, is to explain the extension of muon lifetime to those of you who prefer to live in the same three-space dimensional world as those of pre-Einstein times.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
253
Firstly, you must understand what governs the lifetime of the muon at rest. As we saw in the latter part of chapter 3 it was determined by the simultaneous hit of the two electrons or positrons (those hangers-on to the muon in its matter form) by two virtual muons from the aether background medium. Secondly, you must understand that when that muon moves it acquires kinetic energy which takes the form of an accompaniment of muon charge pairs borrowed as needed from that aether background medium. Their presence is transient and regulated by statistical factors subject to the overriding control parameter, the energy momentum of the system. In a sense the muon, being a lepton can be part of a charge system in which pairs of opposite charges are constantly being created in the forward field followed by their decay, but ever subject to the need to preserve energy. Inevitably, however, the ultimate decay event occurs and the muon suffers demise as its energy disperses with the creation of a residual electron or positron. A point of importance here is that the muon that we see as matter has somehow been conditioned to have a core mass that is an odd integer multiple, 207, times that of the electron, whereas by its coupling with two electrons or positrons it adds a mass of two electron units as offset by approximately 2.25 such units owing to the negative electrostatic interaction energy of this combination. [See the author's paper: The Nature of the Muon, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, v. 37, 210 (1983)]. In contrast the virtual muons that become associated in pairs and add kinetic energy to the muon when it moves at speed have a mass-energy that is 206.3329 units of electron rest-mass energy. So, there are two kinds of core muons present, the primary 207 form and the virtual -206.33 form. The muon lifetime is determined by virtual muon hits arising from the quantum electrodynamic fluctuations of the energy represented by the 'ubiquitous' muon field. A single virtual muon hit of a target electron or positron, which occurs some 107 more often than a dual muon hit, will merely rupture the composite three-charge
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
254
muon in a transient sense and cause the electron or positron pair to resettle with a muon. However, there can be charge inversion in this process, by which it is meant that a positive muon and an electron in contact can exchange energy to become a negative muon and a positron. In any event there is an equal chance of the resettling electrons or positrons adopting any one of the residual muons as the core muon, whether it be a muon of the 207 form or one of the 206.33 form. The result of this is that when the eventual dual hit occurs, if that event is for a composite muon form having the 207 muon as a core then that means muon decay, but, if that dual hit has as target the composite muon with a 206.33 muon core, then that merely frees a virtual muon which can find a partner in the virtual muon field and recycle its existence as part of the quantum-electrodynamic activity. The 207 muon is the misfit and it cannot survive this event and so combines with one of its associated electrons or positrons to decay and shed energy to the aether, the neutrino process, whilst freeing the other electron or positron which takes with it its substantial share of the energy released as the decay product of the muon. One can then understand why it is that the chance of muon decay in relation to the decay lifetime of its rest-mass state is diminished in inverse proportion to the ratio of overall energy to muon rest-mass energy. This latter ratio is the total statistical number of those muons, virtual plus primary, to the primary muon component. This is why the CERN experiment involving many thousands of muons moving at speeds which increased their mass more than twenty fold did reveal evidence of the so-called time dilation of the muon. All that the experiment proved was that the 'genie in the lamp' was spreading its influence equal amongst all the energy components of the system, thereby sustaining their energy state for a longer period in proportion to the energy present. The above discussion has concerned the muon and attributed its kinetic energy to its accompaniment in motion by the statistical
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
255
presence of virtual muon pairs. The so-called relativistic mass increase of the muon arises from the mass added by the presence of those virtual muons. The electron, therefore, ought to conform in the same way, by having an induced electron-positron accompaniment and one can assume that it too would have an extended lifetime at high speed, matching its increased energy, if such a lifetime were to be recognized as something we can measure. Apart from the inference to be drawn from electron tunnelling through potential barriers, however, the electron's lifetime is elusive, because the decay does nothing other than recreate the lowest form of matter, the electron. The question of interest then is whether the electron moving as a carrier of electric current is accompanied solely by other electrons or whether they share the task of conveying current with a flow of positrons moving in the opposite direction. This brings us to that problem posed by Fechner's hypothesis. I know it is easy to say that the electrons will annihilate the positrons but it is equally easy to say that, if the current circuit element they represent is suddenly switched off, so electromagnetic inductance will respond to set up a pulse of EMF which creates another such current element by a quantumelectrodynamic process involving electron-positron creation. Such a debate can lead nowhere, but there is an interesting history pertaining to this problem, albeit going back many years before the electron was discovered by J. J. Thomson. One may refer to pages 201 to 208 of volume 1 of a book written by Sir Edmund Whittaker entitled: History of the Theories of aether and Electricity, published by Thomas Nelson and Son Ltd in 1951. After referring to Fechner (1845) and a similar hypothesis posed by Weber (1846) and then discussing these in some depth, Whittaker on page 206 states: "It has been shown (reference to H. Lorberg, Journal f. Math. lxxiv, p. 305; 1878), indeed, that the assumption of opposite electricities moving with equal and opposite velocities in a circuit is almost inevitable in any theory of
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
256
the type of Weber's, so long as the mutual action of two charges is assumed to depend only upon their relative (as opposed to their absolute) motion." Now, here I must confess that, even up to the stage where I had written chapter 9 of this book, being well satisfied at having derived the relative velocity formula from first principle analysby starting from time differentiation of energy according to Coulomb's law [equation (9.2)], I was content to move on by relying on the assumption just mentioned (Fechner's hypothesis) to come to the derivation of the Neumann Potential. This was a logical step given my knowledge of what Sir Edmund Whittaker had written. Also I can see that I may have brushed over an important issue by talking about electron-positron pairs or muon pairs having a 'statistical' presence in accounting for kinetic energy. For some reason, however, while relaxing on vacation after having compiled the first draft of this book The Physics of Creation, I began to wonder about the Fechner hypothesis and what the analysis would reveal if those two 'opposite electricities' moved with opposite velocities at different speeds. To my great surprise, the analysis now to be presented at the end of this Appendix proved that the same result would be obtained whatever the difference in speed magnitude of the two oppositelycharged electric particles. Indeed, one of those particles could be at rest. The essential point, however, is that, for every unit charge of one polarity in motion there has to be another unit charge of opposite polarity at rest, which assures us that the flow of electrons in a conductor can suffice to set up the Neumann Potential, provided there is an atom somewhere in that conductor that is left positively ionized by having shed that electron. Such a result challenges that conclusion above quoted by Whittaker. However, it puts in issue the very basis on which I have just explained the enhanced lifetime of the muon, given the well-known analogy between of the physical properties of muons and electrons. My theory seems to require kinetic energy to be
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
257
that of a neutral presence of a statistical population of leptons which share the motion of a particle. Subject to statistical constraint, a moving electron must then have its kinetic energy linked to the presence of electrons and positrons. The electrodynamic action arising from an electron discharge across a gap between an anode and an earthed cathode cannot have kinetic energy solely represented by the rest-mass energy of induced electrons as that would mean kinetic energy itself has electric charge separate from the primary charge. Enlightenment on this issue comes, however, from that derivation of the formula E = Mc2 in Appendix II. In conserving energy as it is accelerated the primary charge will necessarily contract in radius because the Thomson formula for the electron requires energy to be inversely proportional to charge radius. Collectively with the presence of numerous other such moving electrons this contraction will make space available for occupancy by electron-positron pairs created by absorbing some of that energy. However, when the energy of the electron reaches the threshold value of three times the rest-mass value, the electron can revert to its original form by creation of an electron-positron pair. Such a transition does not involve a major energy fluctuation and the notion of a 'statistical' presence of such charge pairs merely implies that energy is used, as it were, in climbing a staircase, two units at a time with the energy intermediate the steps being stored by contraction of the primary electron. For energy to increase with speed with net electric charge constant, such a scenario apportioning energy as between the contracted state of the primary electron and the transient presence of induced lepton charge pairs, seems essential if the muon analogy is to hold up and muon lifetime enhancement at speed is to conform with the theory already presented. This will, however, pose a question as to whether that lifetime might exhibit a pattern of change in steps corresponding to each stage of charge pair creation or decay. On the other hand one can be confident that electrons carrying current in wire conductors and having kinetic energies far below those needed to trigger electron-positron pair
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
258
creation will perform as required by the Neumann Potential but the equal presence of their counterpart opposite charges, albeit nonmoving, is essential. In any ongoing debate of this subject one needs to keep in mind is that experimental data concerning lepton mass increase at high speed invariably concerns numerous such particles all moving together at the same speed. Under such conditions the lepton-pair created in measure related to kinetic energy can share that function amongst many primary particles, thereby reducing overall energy fluctuation to a minimum. The essential point I do wish to stress is that, if muon lifetimes exhibit what has been assumed to be 'time dilation' and conform with the mass-increase formula, as by my theory based on the kinetic energy being vested in the existence of muon charges paired by opposite polarity, then the analogy between electrons and muons suggests that electron-positron charge pairs must feature in electron current activity. Accordingly, notwithstanding Fechner's hypothesis having been put in doubt, I see that in exploring that problem I have strengthened my case for the derivation of the Neumann Potential based on Coulomb's Law, not to mention the other consequence, the dismissal of Einstein's notion of 'time dilation' as being irrelevant to the physics governing muon lifetime. The analysis mentioned above now follows. The Fechner hypothesis requires electrodynamically-interacting charges Q and q moving at velocities V and v, respectively, to be that of charges + Q and - Q, moving at velocities V/2 and - V/2, respectively, interacting with charges + q and - q, moving at velocities v/2 and - v/2, respectively. We now adopt the more general hypothesis that the interaction is between such opposite pairs of charges, moving respectively at +V1 and - V2 and at +v1 and - v2 , where: and: V = V1 + V2 v = v1 + v2
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
259
The four components, based on the energy potential formula (9.6), now have a U2 term which has the value: (V1 - v1)2 - (V1 + v2)2 - (-V2 - v1)2 + (-V2 + v1)2 which reduces, in magnitude, to: 2[(V1.v1) + (V1.v2) + (V2.v1) + (V2.v1)] which, in turn, contracts to: 2(V1 + V2).(v1 + v2) = 2(V.v) This is precisely the expression obtained by analysis based on the Fechner hypothesis, leading to the force term (9.8): 2Qq(V.v)/R2c2 which, as a negative quantity, becomes a positive energy potential when integrated with respect to R from R to infinity. This energy potential is: 2Qq(V.v)/Rc2 which, as before, is double the Neumann Potential, again bringing into focus the need to accept that the field medium of the aether reacts diamagnetically to halve magnetic action, thereby giving physical foundation for the gyromagnetic anomaly factor of 2.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
260
APPENDIX VII Einstein and 100 Years of Wisdom Physicists will soon be celebrating the centenary of the birth of Einsteins Special Theory of Relativity and as news of such an event reaches the general public via the media, there may be those who ask what is meant by its underlying principle of relativity. In Einsteins own words it is: A generalisation when we express the tenet thus: If, relative to one Galilean co-ordinate reference system, another Galilean co-ordinate reference system is a uniformly moving co-ordinate system devoid of rotation, then natural phenomena run their course with respect to the second co-ordinate system according to exactly the same general laws as with respect to the first co-ordinate system. This statement is called the principle of relativity. I think I know what this means but I doubt if there are many, even of the physics community, who really care as to its meaning. After all, it adds up to saying that whatever happens in the scientific and technological arena today will, if we repeat whatever we did to make that happen, have the same result tomorrow, even though we and our Earth have moved on through the cosmic background. However, I know that there will be those of you who question this because our frame of reference, Earth, is itself rotating. So it really is impossible here on Earth to test what Einstein claims as a principle unless we can stop the Earth from rotating. Alternatively, we could go off in a spacecraft equipped with sensors and controls that preclude any
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
261
rotation. However, Einstein did not do that, nor could he 100 years ago. There is also scope for misunderstanding because, in a sense, Einsteins wording is somewhat ambiguous. He refers to two frames of reference and natural phenomena, but there is doubt here as to whether the principle refers to a specific phenomenon or, rather, physical event or whether what is implied is physical phenomena in general. As an example of what I mean, consider the mechanics of a ball bouncing from a surface. The principles of motion governing that bouncing ball are, by one interpretation, the same if studied from the perspective of either reference frame. But if we think of two observers one in each of those two frames are we to understand that from their individual perspectives, looking at the same ball, their assessment of the physics governing the motion will be exactly the same? On this latter interpretation the principle of relativity would fail because, should the ball bounce from a surface in that second reference frame with a certain velocity relative to that surface and that frame be moving at the same velocity relative to the first reference frame, one observer would see the ball bounce and the other would see it stop on impact. On the first interpretation Einstein was on safe ground in postulating the so-called principle, subject to limiting conditions, because, relying on the teachings of classical mechanics and Isaac Newton, it is a direct consequence of the physical laws governing what happens in the mechanical world. Einstein was aware of this limitation, but claimed his notoriety by venturing beyond that boundary and asking us to accept the principle without such a restriction. On this he declared, after saying that in regard to classical mechanics there was no need to doubt the validity of this principle of relativity,: in view of the more recent development of electrodynamics and optics it became more evident that
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
262
classical mechanics affords an insufficient foundation for the physical interpretation of all natural phenomena. At this juncture the question of the validity of the principle of relativity became ripe for discussion, and it did not appear impossible that the answer to this question might be in the negative. So, you see, here was Einstein himself weighing the validity of his principle as a matter of probability, another word for uncertainty, owing to the physical phenomena that we encounter in electrodynamics, the motion and interaction of electric charges, rather than the physical phenomena that pertain to electrically neutral matter. A point of interest here is that electrodynamics and electromagnetic waves (light) require an electromagnetic frame of reference, whereas mechanics requires an inertial frame of reference and there is an implicit distinction between these akin to the distinction between v and dv/dt, velocity and acceleration. Indeed, one might ask what Einstein had in mind as a basis for that qualifying remark in the last sentence of the above quotation. He does not reveal that. Instead he moves on by declaring that there are two general facts which favour the validity of the principle of relativity. Here that word favour has its implication, given that, in physics, one is expected to prove a proposition rather than judge its merits by speculating on chance. As to the first of these facts, judge for yourself whether what he declares can be regarded as fact: The principle of relativity must apply with great accuracy in the domain of mechanics. But that a principle of such broad generality should hold with such exactness in one domain of phenomena, and yet should be invalid for another, is a priori not very probable.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
263
That is a factual statement in a semantic sense but far from logical in a scientific context. As to his other fact, this is one he develops by reference to observations made from railway carriages moving relative to an embankment, a mechanical scenario, but one he sums up by saying that: In virtue of its motion round the sun, our Earth is comparable with a railway carriage travelling with a velocity of about 30 kilometres per second. If the principle of relativity were not valid we should therefore expect that the direction of motion of the Earth at any moment would enter into the laws of nature. Even though the theme so far was based essentially on what one could describe as mechanics, Einstein then rests his case by declaring that our observations on body Earth have never revealed such anisotropic properties of terrestrial physical space and that This is a very powerful argument in favour of the principle of relativity. Now, of course, if aware of the famous experiment performed by Michelson and Morley one cannot fail to see that Einstein invented his principle of relativity expressly as a way of justifying the observation that the speed of light reflected by mirrors is the same as the speed of light incident upon those mirrors, notwithstanding our Earths motion through space. However, there are amongst us those, including myself, who cannot accept the way in which Einstein brushes aside that reference to electrodynamics. The reason is very simple. It amounts to saying that we do not belong to a non-rotating world to which that principle enunciated by Einstein applies but recognizing that, as with that space craft or even in an Earth laboratory for the brief period needed for the test, we could create a non-rotating test laboratory in which to prove or disprove Einsteins principle of relativity.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
264
On such a basis, that of electrodynamic interaction between electric charge in motion, one surely needs to challenge Einsteins doctrine. I tried some 50 years ago, half a century after the birth of Einsteins theory, only to be ignored but yet emerge from the fray with the knowledge on which this work is based. The physics community is not open to persuasion on this issue, possibly because no one is willing to pass judgement on a subject that they do not understand but assume is understood by their peers and so they stay aloof in their ignorance. That said, I will now explain why I have been motivated to write this Appendix to The Physics of Creation. Its first draft edition was completed in April 2003. It was shortly thereafter that I received a letter dated 15 May 2003 from a stranger to me, a person named S. I. Wells having an address in California, who explained that he had referenced a paper of mine in his own paper entitled Magnetic Interaction Reconsidered, that he had submitted to the American Journal of Physics for publication. It was rejected but the referee comments had implied that the latter portion of the paper posed a puzzle that warranted publication and so resubmission was encouraged. In the event this latter submission was then rejected without consideration on the grounds that we no longer have a Questions & Answers section and thus will not be accepting your manuscript for publication. Now, to me, this is, as they say, par for the course - thou shalt not challenge Einstein! So, what was it that Wells had offered for publication? It was brief but concise. After pointing out that special relativity was developed to preserve the equations of electrodynamics in all inertial frames, which makes it imperative that the principle of relativity applies in all possible situations, Wells draws attention to a seeming paradox. He refers to two equal and like polarity electric charges separated by a straight, rigid and insulated rod, when viewed (a) in the rest frame of the rod and (b) in and relative to a laboratory frame which is in uniform relative motion in any direction neither
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
265
parallel nor perpendicular to the rod. Every physicist should be sufficiently familiar with standard theory governing how charge in motion produces a magnetic field and how that field exerts force on another moving charge, which means that he or she can easily verify that an observer in that rest frame will see that rod at rest, whereas an observer in that moving laboratory frame will see the same rod as subject to a torque which will cause it to turn to alter its orientation in space. So, Einstein says that the rod cannot turn, but standard physics as taught universally says it will turn. Yet the American Journal of Physics, the major U.S. periodical for those who teach physics, decline to publish this observation. One does not have to be a genius to stumble across this crack in the theory of relativity, a system which some refer to as The Einstein Myth, but one must wonder about the integrity of our scientific world, given this situation. I was well aware of this paradox during my university research years over half a century ago, but my research discipline was the electrodynamics that govern the magnetic properties and energy anomalies found in steel as used in electrical power transformers. Challenging Einsteins philosophy was not on my career agenda as a research student. Philosophy is for those who are already established and secure in their way of life. Yet I was intrigued in 1965 when I saw and purchased a newly published book by R. A. R. Tricker entitled Early Electrodynamics (Published by Pergamon Press). A topic similar to that raised by Wells is mentioned in the chapter entitled The Critics by reference to the opinions of H. G. Grassmann (1809-1877). The debate concerned Amperes electrodynamic force law, a law which is never used today but which, curiously enough would still not survive the test imposed by Einsteins principle of relativity. Grassmann pointed out that Amperes law would require the force acting between the two charges to be zero when their motion as
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
266
shared by the rod was inclined at a certain angle to the rod but change from an attraction to a repulsion as the rod turns around whilst having the same translational motion in the electromagnetic frame of reference. Concerning this Tricker states: For Grassmann this is too improbable to be acceptable. Grassmann can bring no experimental evidence whatever to support his view and there is not the slightest reason to suppose that nature was designed to satisfy the particular tastes of anybody. So you see, here is an author who expects proof by experiment, rather than argument based on taste and probability, but somehow Einsteins principle of relativity, which I see as unproven and as a mere philosophical notion, a matter of taste in the sense used above, has governed the progress of energy science (retarding it!) for a century. How can we emerge from this dilemma? The answer amounts to saying that all verifiable and proven electrodynamic technology as harnessed in our power industry is founded on electrodynamic action by electric charges flowing around closed circuits. The electrodynamic law used involves integration of action around such closed paths. Any differences in assumptions concerning those laws can only be tested by experiments involving interaction of electric charges that exhibit properties characteristic of an isolated state that is not smeared into the action of a uniform current flow around a closed circuit. The dipole rod experiment implicit in the argument posed by Wells, if performed, would be such a test, but other such tests are those based on plasma discharges where the charge carriers have different charge/mass ratios and opposite charge polarity. This is the realm of energy anomalies that promise to tap energy from the space environment, as touched upon at the end of chapter 9 of this work.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
267
Einsteins theory has obstructed progress in this field of technology by making it appear that all was well with our understanding of electrodynamics, whereas there are unanswered questions such as that posed by the paradox raised by Wells here in this 21st century, by me in the 20th century, as chapter 9 has shown, and by Grassmann in the 19th century. If only Einstein had conceived his principle in more general physical terms, as opposed to its restricted form! After all, a Galilean system of co-ordinates is an inertial system and one is thereby locked into the physical constraints that accompany inertia. By general here I do not mean the extension adopted by Einstein in moving from his Special Theory of Relativity to his General Theory of Relativity. I will reword Einsteins statement as to the principle of relativity to show you what I mean: Space is a co-ordinate reference system having the electrical properties of a fluid medium in which a kind of crystal structure can form to define such a frame of reference. That crystal structure adapts to the presence of material bodies, locking onto atomic structure, and so shares the motion of such bodies but can dissolve as necessary to merge with the fluid before re-emerging as new structure. If, relative to one such co-ordinate reference system, another such co-ordinate reference system is a uniformly moving co-ordinate system devoid of rotation, then natural phenomena run their course with respect to the second co-ordinate system according to exactly the same general laws as with respect to the first co-ordinate system, but such phenomena are governed only by the local co-ordinate system, a constraint particularly evident in electromagnetic action which takes the local co-ordinate system as its sole frame of reference.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
268
My message here is that Einstein relied on the Galilean coordinate reference system as an inertial frame of reference but should have based his theory on a system of reference that itself had the necessary physical properties to adapt to the local presence of matter. The notion of a universal aether medium gave a physical foundation but provided only one frame of reference, whereas an aether that provides multiple frames of reference nucleated locally by the presence of matter but not overlapping is what is needed. After a century of stubborn adherence to Einsteins doctrine it is unlikely that I shall, in my lifetime, see the physics community changing direction. I can but hope that what I now see as an ongoing quest to tap energy from the aether itself will trigger the reversal of opinion. As it is, however, I can but repeat the quotation that I presented on page 1 of my first publication on this subject, The Theory Gravitation , 1960. It was from pages 387-388 of a 1913 book by N. R. Campbell entitled: Modern Electrical Theory, (Cambridge University Press): If we speak of aethers and not the aether all our experiments prove is that the particular aether with which we are concerned in any case is that which is at rest relatively to the source and may be regarded as forming part of it. This is the simple way out of the difficulties posed by the Michelson-Morley experiment. If from the beginning we had used a plural instead of a singular word to denote the (aether) system .... those difficulties would never have appeared. There has never been a better example of the danger of being deceived by an arbitrary choice of terminology. However, physicists, not recognizing the gratuitous assumptions made in the use of the words the aether, adopted the second alternative; they introduced new assumptions.
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
269
Having read these words, back in the year 1945, as a young university student, I was in no mood to be persuaded in Einsteins favour and, from then on could but study Einsteins theory with a critical eye and a desire to search for the truth as there to be found in the omnipresent aether. I was lucky to see a picture of the aether emerge as secondary spin-off from my theoretical efforts to understand the ferromagnetic properties of the atomic structure of iron. This book and its forerunners duly emerged and now, save for the point I make below, there is little more I can add. I hope a few readers will share my thoughts as we live through the Einstein centenary. That point is a reference to Einsteins technique of transformation, his theory not being one involving a simple and direct logical interpretation of his so-called principle of relativity. It seems that when looking at physical phenomena occurring in one Galilean co-ordinate frame whilst sitting in another such frame, albeit moving uniformly and without rotation relative to the first, one must put on a pair of spectacles having a special prescription. This is necessary in order to distort what one sees to make it conform by looking the same as it would in that first frame whereas in fact it is actually different. That prescription is expressed in mathematical four-dimensional terms, obliging one to perceive the time dimension as a fourth space dimension, a curious notion and best avoided, given that we seek the truths of the real world and not a fantasy world that is mere illusion. Reverting to that problem posed by Wells, as mentioned above, it could well be that a relativist wearing those spectacles formulated according to the mathematics of the Lorentz transformation might be able to avoid thinking there is any torque effect upon that electric dipole, but after close to 100 years one can but gasp and ask: Oh Lord, why have we allowed Einstein to distort our vision of the aether of your Creation?
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
270
INDEX
Aether 10 Aether cooling 126 Aether drift 133 Aether, mass density 73 Aether, plural forms 268 Aether, r/d factor 100 Aether, solid or fluid? 85 Aether spin 90, 139 Aether structure 96 Antimatter 90 Antiproton 51 Babcock 128 Bailey 38, 252 Bailin 235 Betelgeuse 157 Big bang 115 Black holes 115 Blackett 128 Buick 106 Bullard 154 Burton 25, 105 Campbell 268 Cardinal de Polignac 225 Carroll 171 Cavendish 3 Chadwick 172 Chandrasekhar 171 Charge continuum 15 Cheyne 222 Compton electron frequency 79 Continuum 15 Cook 207 Correa 217 Cosmic temperature 75, 133 Coulomb 3 Coulomb interaction 75 Creation, stars and planets 114 Curie temperature 126 Curvature of space 71 Cyclotron resonance 216 Deuteron 164 Dimuon 48 Dirac 79, 125, 230 Doppler effect 121 2 6, 230 E = Mc E-frame of aether 72 Eagles 25, 105, 155 Earnshaw 10 Earnshaw's theorem 10, 11 Earth, creation 145 Earth's magnetism, reversals 159 Eddington 24, 59, 84 Edison 208 Einstein 6, 59, 61, 80, 230, 249 Einstein, centenary 260 Einstein's law of gravitation 66 Electrodyamics, law 188 Electron, magnetic moment 234 Electron, half spin property 187 Electron theory 87
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
271
Electron lifetime 44 Electrron, cavity resoance 239 Energy exclusion zone 227 Expanding universe 121 Fara 222 Fechner 249 Fechner hypothesis 182 Feynman 36 Fine structure constant 24 Fluid crystal 11 Fock 71 Fomalont 59 Four-dimensional space 71 Franklin 3 Free energy 215 G-frame of aether 72 Galileo 226 Gauss 175 Gauss' theorem 81 General theory of relativity 59 Geomagnetism 150 Gerber 61 Grassmann 265 Gravitation constant 15 Gravitation, light deflection 63 Graviton 17 Graviton decay 199 Gyromagnetic ratio 124 Gyromagnetic reaction 183 H-quantum 20, 198 Hawking 226 Heaviside 7 Heisenberg 89, 210 Henderson 58 Hubble constant 26, 116 Hydrogen creation 199
Hydrogen star 243 Hyperon creation 54 Inertia 230 Interaction energy 227 Ionospheric aether 147 Japanese H-quantum 20, 198 Jeans 157 Jupiter 60, 74 Kaufmann 7 Kopeikin 59 Larmor 230 Lattice particles 100 Lattice particles 18 Law of gravity 57 Lifetime dilation 38 Lorberg 255 Lorentz 188 Love 36, 235 Mach's principle 134 Magnetic domains 125 Maxwell 91, 120, 210 McNeall 105 Mercury 61 Meson creation 53 Methernitha 209 Meyer 218 Michell 3 Michelson-Morley 86, 192 Millikan 4 Moon, creation 145 Moon, David 201 Moray 208 Mu-meson 20 Muon, lifetime dilation 252 Muon g-factor 39 Muon/electron mass ratio 37
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
272
Muon lifetime 35 Muon 20, 23, 30 N factor 23 N evaluation 106 Nanjo 198 Narlikar 134 Neumann potential 180 Neutron 163 Neutron lifetime 44 Neutron stars 116, 163 Neutron star, magnetic field 173 Newton 3, 125 Oppenheim 62 Ostlie 171 PAGD technology 216 Perihelion motion 63, 68 Petley 25, 105 Photon 64 Photon unit 94 Photon theory 89 Picasso 38, 252 Pion lifetime 44 Planck 97 Planck's law 87 Planets, creation 144 Pledge 6 Prentice 202 Priestley 3 Proton creation 46 Proton/electron mass ratio 23 Quantum theory 59 Quantum electrodynamics 234 Quasar 60 Quon 34 Quon mass 98 Refractive index of space 71
Relativity, principle 260 Rowe 199 Schrodinger 26, 80 Schuster-Wilson hypothesis 127 Sciama 134 Scott 12 Searle 7 Seelinger 62 Solar system 245 Space domains 90, 126, 132 Speed of light 64 Speed of gravity 57 Spence 216 Star, mass density 141 Star's angular momentum 137 Steiner 160 Sun, gravitational potential 133 Sun, bending of light 68 Sun's energy 124 Superconductivity 198 Supergraviton 166 Supernova 162 Takana 198 Taon 48 Taon mass 53 Tarling 158 Tau lepton 20, 24 Tau particle, lifetime 202 Tesla 208 Thesta-Distatica 209 Thomson 4, 125 Thomson electron 5 Time dilation 250 Tricker 265 Triton 164 Tutt 209
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
273
Uncertainty Principle Units Vacuum spin Van Leeuven Veronnet Water fuel cell Watson
89 2 203 185 210 218 67
Weber Wells Whetham Whittaker Will Wilson Yates
255 264 6 255 77 67, 127 208
HAROLD ASPDEN, 2003
THE PHYSICS OF PERPETUAL MOTION

HAROLD ASPDEN, 2004
HAROLD ASPDEN Energy Science Ltd P.O. Box 35 Southampton SO16 7RB England INTRODUCTION Although scientists in general regard the notion of perpetual motion as being too absurd to contemplate, if we exercise a little common sense based on what those same scientists teach, then perpetual motion is a reality. Once the science student learns that atoms consist of an electrically charged nucleus about which electrons are kept in sustained motion thanks to their interplay with the quantum underworld, that which determines their orbital distance from the nucleus and the angular momentum of their motion, he or she has been introduced to perpetual motion. Every atom whether in us or in surrounding matter embodies the proof that perpetual motion is a reality and stands as evidence showing that if those electrons shed energy as by radiation then somehow that enveloping quantum underworld that we used to call the aether has a way of feeding in energy as needed to sustain that motion. The aether is therefore an energy source and the challenge we face is how to tap into that source before we become wholly dependent upon rain and wind, the sources that provide hydroelectric power and power from windmills. AN INVENTION An historical feature of patent law denies the grant of patents for what are seen by the Patent Examiner to be perpetual motion machines. Wheels that turn for no apparent reason are outlawed. Thus I was not surprised upon reading a short account of the Borman Permanent Magnet Motor that appeared at pp. 22-23 of the December 2003 issue of Space Energy Journal. It explains how, in 1954, an Electrical Engineer named Carl C. Lienau on a visit to California witnessed Lee Bormans motor in operation and was duly impressed. No electric power was supplied to drive the assembly, a set of 8 Alnico magnets mounted on a central rotor disc coupled by a non-slip pulley drive to two smaller rotor discs, each carrying four Alnico magnets, rotating at twice the speed in the opposite direction. The axes of the cylindrical magnets were parallel to the rotor axes and the arrangement was such that, at diametrically opposite positions near the rim of the central rotor disc, pairs of magnets would have a passing face-to-face encounter 8 times per revolution. This means that the powerful magnetic flux of the overlapping magnets would experience a substantial pulsation and, Alnico being a metal alloy that has the high conductivity property of metal, the spin of the magnets at their rotor frequency means that a radial EMF is induced in each magnet, thereby, owing to conduction, displacing a substantial measure of electric charge from the core of the magnet to its cylindrical surface. Then, because that flux pulsation implies pulsating charge deployment, this can be seen as a recipe for importing energy steadily from the aether, as I will explain below after quoting a few words from that account in Space Energy Journal: The machine continued to rotate for 15 minutes before Bowman terminated the operation and inspection by Mr. Lienau, who was much impressed and unable to account for the phenomenon. It is understood that Bowman had applied to patent the device, but was refused because the Patent Office considered it an unpatentable perpetual motion machine. ..... At the time of the demonstration Bowman was 75 years old. He decided, according to one report to have his
device taken apart and after his death to have the parts buried in different locations in California. This was a sad ending, bearing in mind that the Patent Office exists to aid the advance of technology for the benefit of mankind. AN OBSERVATION On the question of energy being fed to us from the aether, one must wonder why scientists have missed something that is so obvious once it is pointed out. Again it is thanks to our discovering that the hydrogen atom has a heavy positively charged nucleus around which a negatively charged electron has motion sustained by a quantum interplay with something hidden in space that we have insight into one of the great mysteries of Nature - the Suns energy source. Just because we discovered that the fusion of hydrogen atoms triggered, one assumes, by temperatures in excess of 100,000,000 degrees can release vast amounts of energy in forming heavier atoms, that does not mean that the Sun is a nuclear furnace. Surely, we should learn something from the teachings of quantum theory dating back some 97 years when Neils Bohr led us to accept that those electrons in hydrogen move in orbit at a radius of 5.29x10-11 cm about the proton nucleus. From this we know for sure that when gravity compacts hydrogen atoms tightly together to reach a mass density of 1.41 gm/cc, based on one atom per cube of side distance equal to the diameter of those orbits, then electrons of adjacent atoms will collide and there will be ionization and so energy radiation. That happens to be the average mass density of the Sun, a telling point! What it really tells us is that, because two free protons are pulled together by gravity at an acceleration rate that is 1836 (the proton/electron mass ratio) times the corresponding action between two electrons then so there will be more protons than electrons inside the body of the Sun, enough to set up a positive core charge and assure equilibrium and uniformity by balance of gravitation attraction and electrostatic repulsion within the body of the Sun. So you see, we look at a Sun that radiates energy owing to those electrons colliding and sustaining its capacity to radiate thanks to the quantum underworld of space, the aether, replenishing the energy to get those electrons back into their Bohr quantized state of motion once they are recaptured by a free proton to reform the hydrogen atom. Really, before we pretend that the Sun owes its energy source to it being a fusion reactor, somehow controlled and not being an unstable hydrogen bomb, we should explain why it does not conform, as explained above in the introduction, with the same physics that governs the atoms that make up our body form. Also, and bearing in mind that the Sun exhibits a magnetic moment as if it were itself a magnet, and further, owing to its ionization, is an electrically conductive medium, do we not see something in common as between the Borman perpetual motion machine and the Sun itself, namely the mystery of their sustained source of energy? ANOTHER INVENTION This brings me to the main message of this contribution. Being professionally skilled in securing the grant of patents in the electro-technological field, I well know how to navigate a patent application to avoid confrontation such as posed by the perpetual motion machine objection. One merely describes what one builds or aims to build and avoid assertion as to how it performs. Even with the Borman machine, set running by an initial manually applied torque, if given enough push to overcome the cogging action of the magnets, plus some, it can be
expected to run under its own inertia for a few moments. It could be argued that it demonstrates something useful, if only as an education tool in the realm of magnetism, and, being a machine and something one can manufacture, it is, if new and not obvious, proper subject matter for a patent. Once the patent is granted it surely could not then be invalidated on the basis that what it covers really is a machine that surprises us by running without power input. At least it would be a fascinating law case for an infringer who sells a workable perpetual motion machine to then challenge the validity of the patent on the basis that it should never have been granted because the law says perpetual motion is impossible. Meanwhile, however, one must avoid the words perpetual motion in making patent applications, but I have to admit failure in dealing with the U.S. Patent Office in a patent application of my own, one concerned with cold fusion. I can but say that I erred in not realizing that the Patent Examiner involved would, in a sense, adopt his own version of the relevant law in regarding cold fusion as synonymous with perpetual motion and so unpatentable. I should not have used the expression cold fusion at a time when so much publicity and vested interest was involved in that realm of invention or, as I later found in securing grant of U.S. Patent No. .... , I should have avoided the problem by writing the specification as if it were directed at a applying technology concerned with thermoelectric power, rather than nuclear power so as to guide it into a different examining sector of the Patent Office. In spite of all this I am currently seeking the grant of a patent in U.K. which is more open in declaring its technical foundation in spite of its objective aimed at tapping energy from the aether and, as the specification has now been published prior to it being subjected to what in U.K. we call substantive examination, I present below the relevant sections of its text. I refer to Patent Application GB 2390941 A as published on January 21st 2004, its initial filing date being March 9th 2002, some three months before I was due to speak on the subject at an Energy Symposium held in Berlin in June of that year. As to the details of the invention claimed they can be inspected on the public record via ........... , my purpose here being to present the case by which I hope to justify the prospects for tapping energy from the aether as a matter of physics. Essentially, the apparatus involved is a combination of two capacitors having concentric cylindrical electrodes such as one finds in Leyden jars. The two inner electrodes are connected together and to a high voltage d.c. source, whereas the two outer electrodes are connected through a primary winding of a high frequency transformer, the winding being earthed at its centre and the secondary winding of the transformer delivering power output. The aim of the circuit design is to set up oscillations of electric charge as between the two capacitors so as to exploit the effect of the aether in enhancing capacitance upon capacitor discharge in comparison with the regular capacitance that applies during the charging stage, whereby excess energy tapped from the aether is delivered as output. The underlying physical principle involved is the same as that exploited, unknowingly one assumes, by the above-mentioned Lee Borman but, knowingly of course, by Mother Nature in creating the Sun and other stars. You must judge for yourself how likely this is, but after reading the remainder of this section which is now quoted verbatim from the Patent Specification: This invention relates to a new and non-conventional means for the generation of electrical power. The energy source is the quantum underworld of space, the aether medium of the vacuum state, long recognized for its ability to allow the storage of electric field energy by reacting as its intrinsic charge is displaced, a process understood by physicists by reference to the research findings of Clerk Maxwell. The current state of the art of electrical power generation does not recognize the possibility of ultimately tapping energy from the aether. Physics is taught on the basis that energy cannot be created or destroyed, inasmuch as it is conserved in all physical processes,
though it can be degraded in its usefulness, as by burning of hydrocarbons and conversion into heat which dissipates as by radiation into outer space. The aether as a source or as an absorber of energy is not deemed to serve any specific role in the physics of energy deployment, it having been dismissed from consideration by invoking the notion of field energy without admitting the specific physical reality of something in space that accounts for the properties involved. Theoretical physicists have, however, come to suspect that space devoid of matter is nevertheless a seething sea of activity subject to sporadic energy fluctuations which can create electron-positron pairs that exist momentarily before decaying back into their quantum underworld. Yet those same physicists deny all possibility that this energy resource of space itself can be exploited to provide useful power on a scale large enough to rival the role played by atomic power plants and fossil fuel generating installations. Curiously, they do subscribe to the belief that one day they may be able to generate power on a viable commercial scale from fusion reactors by processes replicating what they believe sustains the Suns heat output as hydrogen is transmuted into different atomic forms. In contrast with this rather elusive objective, it having proved beyond reach even after half a century of effort, this invention is based on success in generating power by replicating, not the Suns onward energy decay, but rather a process akin to that by which the Sun itself was created from energy drawn from the enveloping aether medium. The invention to be described below has emerged from an in-depth theoretical investigation into the properties of the aether and quite independently of any of the well known claims of published record which feature at the fringe of mainstream scientific literature. A recent and very well presented account of what amounts to a century of relevant energy history is the book The Search for Free Energy by Keith Tutt, published in 2001 by Simon & Schuster (ISBN 0-684-86660-9). Here in this book is a comprehensive background of information concerning the energy devices of several researchers but the references to Nikola Tesla and T. Henry Moray are particularly pertinent to the subject of this invention and, though imposing a limitation on what can be legitimately claimed by this patent application, they serve also as a basis for a very important lesson to those engaging in this field of invention. The lesson is that it is not sufficient to build and demonstrate something that works, if you do not fully understand why what you have devised actually does work. This is especially the case here where one is claiming a source of energy hitherto unknown. The invention to be described below will, in its broadest sense, appear to be quite similar to what Henry Moray is said to have demonstrated in showing that substantial electrical power could seemingly be drawn from the aether using a simple wire antenna strung between two poles. However, as will be seen, the antenna is not needed and the reason is that the energy source is not the radiant emission by some process involving radio wave propagation through the aether, but rather what can best be described as a phase-lock that couples the apparatus with the quantized motion of electric aether charge. There is a technique, to be described below, by which it is possible to exploit this phaselock condition by setting up an energy oscillation involving an apparatus component and its enveloping aether, the result being that energy in an immediately useful electrical form is imported into the apparatus from that aether. The invention draws energy from the aether. To understand why the invention works one needs to understand the process by which the aether stores energy when an electric field is set up across the dielectric separating two capacitor plates. Moreover, one needs to understand the means by which the aether determines the quantum of action, specifically in the form of the Bohr magneton and the unit of angular momentum linked to Plancks constant. It is not sufficient to imagine that electric charge in the aether is displaced from a rest position in a background continuum of opposite charge polarity to which it is attracted by a restoring force. Indeed, one must consider such action to be superimposed on a system of charge
that has an underlying jitter motion, a quantum theory theme associated with the German physicist Heisenberg (Zitter-bewegung, which has the dictionary meaning Circular fluctuation movement, of spin). When these two factors are combined, and the constraint added of there being a phase-lock which keeps that jitter motion in synchronism as between the charges, one finds that the physical theory involved has some very interesting consequences. One of these consequences is that a spherical or cylindrical volume of aether, if spinning bodily about a central axis, will acquire a magnetic moment and set up an electric field inside that sphere or cylinder that is directed radially with respect to the spin axis. A summary analysis is presented in the Appendix to this specification, being in part a quotation from pages 31-33 of a booklet entitled The Theory of Gravitation which the Applicant of this invention, Dr. Harold Aspden, authored in 1959 and duly published early in 1960. The induction of electric charge by aether spin was there shown to give a physical basis, both qualitative and quantitative, for the geomagnetic moment, the property of body Earth of setting up a magnetic field which created magnetic North and South poles at latitudes offset from the geographic poles, with the geomagnetic polar axis precessing slowly around the Earths spin axis at a rate of several hundred years per revolution. By identifying its source as a rotation of a sphere of aether coextensive with body Earth, a volume of aether relative to which the Earth could have a component of motion even though the aether spin frequency is equal to that of the Earth, this axial tilt of some 17 degrees has a physical explanation. However, that aspect of the aethers role was not seen at the time as offering anything of promise technologically. The physics involved is nevertheless very relevant and directly pertinent to the experiments on which this invention is based, the findings of which would otherwise be quite baffling scientifically. The applicant has, over the 40 or so years since the theory was first published, given a great deal of consideration to the theoretical implication that, just as aether spin can set up electric charge displacement inside coextensive matter, so the setting up of an electric field directed radially with respect to an axis can induce aether spin about that axis and with it develop angular momentum. Indeed, in the authors onward publications on this subject, as, for example, Physics Unified published in 1980 by Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton, England (ISBN 0 85056 0098), it is shown how the onset of the force of gravitation when a disordered aether consolidated into an orderly structured form caused protons to accrete more rapidly that electrons, owing to their higher mutual rate of gravitational acceleration. This created stars with an initial positive charge and the associated aether spin resulted in the stars acquiring their spin states and shedding matter which consolidated into planets which share the angular momentum so generated. The aether with its property of spin as related by its electric charge density according to the formula presented in the Appendix is therefore the key factor if we attempt to account for the creation of the stars which populate our universe. That same formula, however, is equally valid if applied to the circumstance where a radial electric field is set up between the concentric cylindrical electrodes of a capacitor formed around a hollow dielectric cylinder. It tells us how fast the aether within that dielectric will spin. The related theoretical analysis shows that the quantum phase-lock feature of the aether imports from the external aether world an amount of energy equal to that supplied in setting up aether charge displacement, this imported energy being the dynamic energy corresponding to the acquired aether angular momentum. Guided by the argument concerning stellar creation one can see that this aether angular momentum can be transferred to matter and this process also has its energy transfer implications. However, one can wonder what happens if, after setting up a radial electric field in that capacitor having concentric electrodes, the applied voltage is reduced, thereby withdrawing electric field energy from the capacitor. The imported energy present in kinetic energy form as a cylindrical shell of aether spins about the central axis of the capacitor will tend to sustain
electric charge displacement. To conserve energy, since the aether phase-lock cannot force the expulsion of energy by obliging the enveloping aether universe to keep in step, this energy can only be shed by augmenting that released electrostatically. In other words the net result is that an up and down fluctuation of the electric charge condition of the capacitor must give rise to an electric energy output that is, for the lowest dielectric constant (the permittivity of the vacuum), double the input in each cycle of change. One can then envisage an oscillation escalating in energy content powered almost wholly by aether input before one taps into that source of power to draw off energy at a rate consistent with stable operation. This is, of course, a bewildering prediction that no physicist could imagine as being at all possible and yet, given the relevance of the theoretical argument involved, as applied to the phenomenon of geomagnetism and stellar creation, which are supported by strong evidence in that book Physics Unified, once such a notion is conceived it surely has to be put to the test by experiment. This then, after decades of effort before this realization has dawned, is the basis on which the Applicant has only now come to appreciate the amazing technological possibilities that lie before us and is asserting by this patent specification that energy can in fact be tapped from the aether on a commercially viable scale. Given that aether theory indicates that the special form of capacitor described above will, if subject to an oscillatory charge condition, generate an excess of energy, a question to consider is why such a phenomenon has not manifested itself in bench-type experiments performed in numerous electrical laboratories over the past one hundred years. Ostensibly the implication is that the capacitor will exhibit a negative resistance if used with an inductor as a component in what would become a self-resonating circuit. The answer to this may be that if such a phenomenon has occurred it has passed unnoticed or been regarded as spurious or noise-related, being something connected with radio interference etc. Alternatively, and as a function of the size and scale of the apparatus, the effect may have lacked an exciting trigger needed to overcome an energy threshold set by such factors as circuit contact resistance or contact potentials as well as the basic resistance of the inductors which, with the capacitors, form the resonant circuit. Note that, even for a capacitor of quite large physical dimensions, having regard to its accommodation on top of a laboratory bench, the actual capacitance is necessarily quite small, being of the order of a billionth of a farad. This means that a capacitor charge fluctuation of the order of a volt would only imply energy fluctuations that are of the order of a billionth of a joule per cycle. The situation is quite different if, perchance a d.c. bias voltage of, say, 5,000 volts is applied to the capacitor. Then a small superimposed voltage fluctuation makes the related energy fluctuations very much larger with much greater prospect of an escalating self-resonance being triggered. With this in mind the applicant perceived a possible prior art link with the experimental claims reported by Dr. Moray who, in 1929 is said (see pages 46-50 of the above-referenced recently-published book by Keith Tutt) to have powered six 100 watt light bulbs plus a standard 575 watt electric flat iron, merely by providing an earth connection and coupling an input lead to an overhead wire antenna. The apparatus involved had no other source of input power but included a special arrangement of capacitors and presumably some kind of high frequency inductor/transformer unit. In spite of the attention given to the Moray demonstrations it seems that the secrets involved in the design and construction of the apparatus remain unknown and so cannot feature in the prior art of published record. Nor, indeed, can the anecdotal evidence of Morays efforts serve to show that the subject invention has been put to prior use. The technology as to how to replicate the Moray device, always assuming it did perform as claimed, has therefore to be
rediscovered and, indeed, given that there is reference to his detectors incorporating some special substance which was referred to as Swedish stone, possibly the dielectric he used in his capacitor construction, there is a considerable mystery to unravel. More to the point, however, one is led to believe that Moray was implying that the energy he was tapping was radiant energy drawn from the aether, with that antenna featuring prominently because, without it being connected, the energy output fell to zero. However, as he surely may well himself have known, one just cannot draw power on such a scale from a simple overhead wire strung between two poles and so, without know how, he would have suspected that the energy inflow was coming into his capacitors via the action of that mystery substance he called Swedish Stone. The applicant here suggests that, based on an insight into the quantum workings of the aether medium as outlined above, the curious discovery demonstrated decades ago by Dr. Moray may have been attributable to setting up an oscillation in a resonant circuit including a concentric cylindrical electrode capacitor which had a voltage bias of the order of a thousand and more volts fed from a connection to that overhead antenna but drawing no significant current from that antenna other than enough to prime his capacitor with charge and stimulate a high frequency fluctuation which could initiate an escalating circuit oscillation tapping aether energy from the aether spin induced in the capacitor dielectric. This is speculation, but it is sufficient to justify the Applicants interest in constructing a capacitor and seeking to verify the assumptions just made. Notwithstanding the reference above to Dr. Moray and the note below concerning Nikola Tesla, what it leads to is new invention by virtue of full disclosure of details of operation and manufacture of something hitherto unknown, the actual means by which to harness a source of energy latent in the aether medium and deemed by those familiar with state of the art knowledge to be beyond mans reach. Furthermore, there are supplementary inventive features of a special nature because of the way the subject invention exchanges energy between two capacitors and also because the optimization of aether power output from the capacitors is found to be a function of the orientation of the capacitor axes relative to the cosmic background owing to the Earths rotation. It seems here appropriate to mention something described by Nikola Tesla in his U.S. Patent No. 685,958. This was filed on 21 March 1901 and granted on 5 November 1901. It was entitled: Apparatus for the Utilization of Radiant Energy. By installing two metal plates, one high above the ground and the other at ground level, with wires connecting the plates to separate electrodes of a capacitor, it was stated that the capacitor became charged to a very high potential, the energy input being that radiated to Earth from outer space. This may well have motivated the efforts of Henry Moray, but, so far as this Applicants invention is concerned, no such input from overhead components is necessary as a quite different energy source is at work, namely the zero-point vacuum energy activity of our quantum underworld. APPENDIX Extract from pp. 30-31 of The Theory of Gravitation, 1960 printed publication by the Applicant. Note that the earlier pages explained that the aether comprises a system of electric particles in a cubic crystal-like distribution set in a uniform background continuum of opposite charge polarity, the particle system and the continuum both sharing a common circular orbital motion of radius r and the relative velocity between the particles and continuum being the speed of light. The Effect of Aether Rotation Consider what happens when a large volume of the aether is rotating bodily. The continuum and particle system rotate together. There will be no resultant magnetic moment
unless the particle distribution is disturbed. An evident disturbance is the centrifugal effect arising from aether rotation, but for the angular velocities of magnitude found in the solar system this effect is of negligible consequence. A much more important effect arises from the synchronizing interaction between particles in the rotating volume. This requires that the particles shall move about their neutral points at the same angular velocity. Thus if a particle is to have a velocity component V directed in the plane of its orbit, whilst retaining a mean velocity c/2, its speed along its orbit must be of the form c/2+Vcos, where is the angle subtended by a line joining the particle and the centre of its orbit relative to a fixed reference datum in the inertial frame. To satisfy the above requirement the cntre of the orbit cannot be the neutral point. Evidently the particle is distant from this neutral point by r+(2Vr/c)cos. As V is much less than c the effect of this is that the particle is moving around a circular orbit whose centre has been displaced a distance 2Vr/c perpendicular to V in the plane of the orbit. If V is much less than jxcosA, where j is the angular velocity at which the aether rotates, x is the distance of the aether particle from the axis of rotation, and A is the angle of tilt of the axis to the common axial direction of the aether particle system, this displacement distance is 2(jxr/c)cosA. Consider a disc-like section of the rotating aether of radius x and unit thickness. Then, the effective charge displacement arising from the effective physical displacement of the particles is 2x(2xr/c)cosA. The disc has acquired a uniform charge density of 4(r/c)cosA esu/cc. The polarity of this charge depends upon the direction of rotation of the aether. When evaluated from the aether data already presented the charge density is found to be: 4.781 cosA esu/cc. This charge density represents a charge component which rotates with the aether. Calculation of the Geomagnetic Moment For Earth, is 7.26 10-5 rad/sec and A is 23.5o. Thus the earths charge density is, from the above expression, 0.000319 esu/cc. The rotation of this charge gives rise to a magnetic moment of: (0.000319)(4/15)R5/c where R is here the radius of the earths aether. If R is greater than the earth radius (6.378 108 cm) by a small factor k, the earths theoretical magnetic moment becomes (1 + 5k)6.8 1025 emu. This may be compared with the measured value of the earths magnetic moment of 8.06 1025 emu. An upper limit of 0.035 is imposed on k, suggesting the earths aether terminates at a mean height of about 140 miles above the earths surface. This suggests that the ionosphere may be a phenomenon arising at the aether boundary. [End of quotation] Footnote: The term used in the above Appendix denotes charge density of the positive charge continuum which provides the background medium of the aether, this being neutralized overall by the discrete charge forms which define the structure assuring the synchronized state of motion that characterizes the aethers role as a regulator in quantum physics. FIFTY YEARS ON Fifty years on from now it seems possible, as I see it, for the capacitor technology discussed above to be the worlds primary source of electrical power. Each cubic foot of space in what I may describe as the Capacitor Power House could account for the generation of 10 kw of power delivered as 50,000 V d.c. output, based a charge oscillation frequency of the order of 100,000 Hz.
This, however, assumes that history will not repeat itself, bearing in mind that the year 2004 is fifty years on from that 1954 demonstration of Lee Bormans machine, which is now dead and buried and virtually forgotten, not to mention the ghost stories, for such they may seem, that keep our interest in Tesla and Moray alive. For my part, I can only speak from my experience, based on the fifty years I have lived since being awarded my Ph.D. in that year 1954 for research on magnetism in connection with an energy loss anomaly that affects power transformers. By my research I discovered that I could trace factors affecting the anomaly and enhancing it so that as much as a factor of 6 represented the ratio of the actual loss to the value which electrical theory predicted as eddycurrent loss. I could not really fathom the true cause at the time, because, in proper scientific spirit I had been well educated into believing that perpetual motion is impossible and accepting the laws of thermodynamics. It did not occur to me that much of the heat I was generating in the iron cores I was using could actually be regenerating electricity in a way which defied the Carnot criterion. I now know that heat in its passage outwards through the magnetic field in a transformer core lamination was inducing an EMF which caused current to flow that was effective in augmenting the applied magnetizing field. In effect, under the specific control conditions I was using, this elevated the effective magnetic permeability of the core almost to the point of instability, making it so large that the eddy-currents induced were governed by an enormous amount of so-called skin effect, the flux density being greatly distorted across the core cross-section. This means excess loss - all because heat energy has a way of converting back into electricity, in defiance of the second law of thermodynamics. 30 years on from my early university research years I retired from my professional vocation in industry and resumed my academic research, having in those years been ever active on my hobby interest in theoretical physics, though lacking enlightenment as to what has now come to be known as free energy. However, I then engaged on certain experimental projects and found, with time, that I was drawn into the free energy fray, magnetism being the route I was exploring, but by initial contact with others I was diverted into a thermodynamic project and distracted by the advent of cold fusion all about the same time 1988-1989, not to mention warm superconductivity, which I saw as another story of heat energy regenerating electricity and reaching a breakthrough threshold in enhancing current flow. It was that thermodynamic diversion that gave me the answer I needed to satisfy the hangover problem from my Ph.D. research, whereas the magnetic theme led me on to motor research, including a homopolar type of motor, the latter revealing an anomaly that has bearing upon something I wish to tell you that bears upon the capacitor power generation theme. Now, much but not all of these efforts have been reported in a series of Energy Science Reports that I published. They all may be read by accessing my website www.aspden.org in which I plan to concentrate records of my work. There is even one such Report, No. 10 in the series, that may seem a misfit in the collection. It is entitled Cyclotron Resonance in Human Body Cells. It bears upon the claims that overhead power lines can affect the health of those who live nearby, a theme which has now diverted into concern about the use of mobile phones. I mention it here because scientists find it hard to accept that 50Hz or 60 Hz electromagnetic radiation can be harmful, whereas they are open minded on high frequency radiation. The overhead power line concern can be met by increasing the use of d.c. transmission, seen anyway as more economic for high voltage transmission. So if, as I believe, the ultimate in power generation is the capacitor technology discussed above, then power houses operating with wellspaced power lines at a 100,000 Hz frequency might arouse concern for those who live nearby, whereas its d.c. conversion for transmission would overcome the more general concern.
In summary, therefore, there is much that I have to relate in my onward account of the topic raised here, essentially the details of two experiments that help to confirm what I have proposed, and I shall report on these in the near future. *********
Aether Science Papers (Contents)

Preliminary Note
The book 'Aether Science Papers' was published in 1996. For order information see Aether Science Papers. The 14 papers, reproduced in A4 page size from the scientific periodicals in which they were first published, constitute the main section of the book. The front section of the book is a 68 page commentary entitled 'The Creative Vacuum'. In view of the importance of making scientists aware of this work, it has now been decided to publish these opening 68 pages here in these Web pages and to include the full text of the 14 papers in files having pdf format which can be inspected by Adobe Acrobat reader.
CONTENTS
Announcement Gravitation - A New Riddle About the Title The Aetherial Role of Fermat's Last Theorem Eddington's Unification of the Constants The Challenge Introducing the Creative Vacuum Aether Power Generation Unification - The Time Factor Physical Reason Atomic Spectra and the Moving Atom An Excursion into Quantum Electrodynamics Some Critical Remarks Epilogue Bibliography
The back cover of the book presents the background to the work. Back Cover
file:///C|/mp3/a/0000.htm25.4.2005 22:31:41
Aether Science Papers: Part I: The Creative Vacuum

ANNOUNCEMENT
Very soon now the world at large will need to face up to the discovery of new ways in which we can generate energy that has no pollution risk. The source of that energy is so abundant that future generations will only need to fear the hangover risks inherited from the passing of the nuclear age and our era of hydrocarbon combustion. The source of the energy that will power our future is not a new source. It is as old as Creation, because we will tap the energy that fills space. It was the shedding of some of that energy that gave birth to the particles of matter, protons and electrons, which combined to form the stellar universe. The secret giving us access to this sea of energy is connected with the problem that Einstein could never solve, the link between gravitation and magnetism. He could not solve it because he took the wrong direction in 'time'. He obliterated 'universal time' by saying that the rate of time varies according to our own individual viewpoints and so deprived us of our direct vision of the common 'clock' which regulates everything, including gravitation. In fact, in space, there is electricity which we perceive, in its overall picture, as neutral and electrically balanced, but which is charged with life and motion. All that electricity is moving in a rhythmic dance, in unison, as if it were part of an enormous all-pervading clock mechanism which keeps perfect time on a universal scale. Using a term familiar to scientists the electric charge in motion in what we see as the vacuum is 'phase-locked'. This is what gives basis to quantum theory and wave mechanics and what assures order, rather than chaos, order which involves a dynamic mass balancing act resulting in gravity and a regenerative process which can package energy spread throughout all space and deliver it to us on demand. It is this regenerative property which allows spent energy, energy wasted as heat by radiation dissipated into space, to be put into an orderly state out there, whether in near or outer space, and this sets up the mechanisms by which protons and electrons can be created. Those 'mechanisms' are those that we describe in physics in terms of quantum electrodynamics, but the essential point I wish to make in this 'announcement' is that the 'phase-lock' property of space is something we can exploit. When we contrive to set up an electric field within, and radial from, the axis of a cylindrical or spherical form, we find that the energy we supply is matched by an equal contribution from the aether filling that vacuum in space. We can use that energy! Part 1 of this work is a commentary and, when read by reference to Part 2, the collection of fourteen scientific papers appended, it introduces this story from the viewpoint of fundamental physics. Separately, by a series of 'Energy Science Reports', backed by a collection of patents, the story will be told from the practical viewpoint of the engineer and it will be the latter work which describes the technology which we now know can deliver power
from that vacuum.

GRAVITATION - A NEW RIDDLE

The fourteen scientific papers just mentioned are presented unamended and in the form in which they were published in the periodicals, Hadronic Journal and Physics Essays. They provide a theoretical account which will show that the 20th century did yield a definitive answer to the riddle of gravitation, together with the long-sought Unified Field Theory. However we will enter the 21st century confronting a new riddle, that of devising a way in which to use this knowledge to build a machine able to control gravity in some way. That is a real challenge. The author may not live long enough to see the arrival of that technology, but wishes to go on record here for pointing researchers in one possible direction. The task is to devise a composite metal structure which, under appropriate field control, develops resonant gravitational interactions between its innermost atomic electrons and the gravity field. The resonance frequency is the Compton electron frequency and the technology will need to exploit a resonance, probably with the fifth harmonic frequency of electrons in the K shell of the atoms. As a clue take note that, if a metal were to have a propensity to be active in the supergravitational or antigravitational sense, it might have a smaller latent heat of fusion in relation to its melting point temperature than applies to normal metals. Then make a selection from known metal elements to determine which have a melting point above 1,000oC combined with a latent heat of fusion below 80 J/gm. You will find that there are four such elements, neodymium, samarium, gold and uranium. Neodymium and samarium sit either side of promethium in the periodic table, promethium being completely 'missing' from natural Earth crust abundance data, possibly owing to its abnormal supergravitational properties. I observe that an electron of atomic number 137 would have a first harmonic resonance with the gravity frequency, if it were to exist, but an atomic number Z of 61 (promethium) applies to the fifth harmonic and Z=79 (gold) applies to the third harmonic. The electrons in gold atoms, however, do not interact with the underlying quantum medium so as to produce a dominant harmonic perturbation, whereas those in promethium are strongly affected. The right combination of neodymium (Z=60) and samarium (Z=62), which form, incidentally, the most powerful magnets known, could, given a special field control, well develop powerful anomalous gravitational forces according to that governing control. Anyone interested in the prospect of such a technology should pay special attention to the theory
file:///C|/mp3/a/0101.htm (1 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:42
disclosed in the fourth of the fourteen papers. Do not overlook the Epilogue added at the end of this commentary on page 60.
file:///C|/mp3/a/0101.htm (2 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:42

ABOUT THE TITLE

The 'aether' is a word which says that there is no such thing as empty space. To say there is no aether is therefore to assert that space can be truly empty, meaning it contains nothing of an electrical character, it now being a well established fact that there is nothing having a physical existence that lacks electrical properties. If a scientist expresses doubt by reference to the 'neutron', I say that the neutron has magnetic properties which are seated in the motion of electric charge. Otherwise, you need to explain why it has a magnetic moment. If that scientist then mentions the 'neutrino', then I say that the 'neutrino' was only a notion, a figment of imagination invented as a devious way of declaring that the aether could absorb or shed energy and momentum without admitting that the aether exists. If that scientist says that the consensus opinion of professors of physics who deny the reality of the aether can surely not be discarded, then I ask "Why not?" and can but point to a report on page 12, 6 May 1996 issue, of The Times newspaper in U.K. Science correspondent Nigel Hawkes wrote under a heading 'The possibility of getting something for nothing': "A physicist at Cambridge University has produced a new and daring explanation for an old puzzle. If she is right, it could be the first convincing evidence that it is possible to get something from nothing. The question Claudia Eberlein addresses in a forthcoming issue of Physical Review Letters is that of sonoluminescence. If you expose water to a blast of ultrasound, you get a flash of light. This is deeply puzzling, because visible light has so much more energy than sound that the energy of the sound has somehow to be boosted by a trillionfold. The wavelength of the light emitted implies that the source is at a temperature of tens of thousands of degrees C. Ms Eberlein suggests that the emission of light is a quantum vacuum effect - energy given off by the vacuum. Quantum theory says that there is in reality no such thing as a vacuum and that empty space teems with 'virtual partices' including photons which flit in and out of existence. The theory is open to test. If it turns out to be right, her explanation will be a major coup, the first observable manifestation of quantum vacuum radiaton."
The energetic vacuum is, therefore, a live issue. The 'aether' is a reality and I believe that it can, like a fluid crystal, form structure and dissolve that structure, as it latches onto material substance, but if that substance vibrates excessively then even the aether is confounded and, in its confusion, it sheds
file:///C|/mp3/a/0202.htm (1 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:42
energy! I have, accordingly, chosen the title Aether Science Papers with deliberation, knowing that, in the end, the 'aether', per se, will have to be recognized, even though that will confound the nonbelievers who constitute the modern generation of physicists.
file:///C|/mp3/a/0202.htm (2 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:42

THE AETHEREAL ROLE OF FERMAT'S LAST THEOREM

As we approach the end of the 20th century we should pause to examine our achievements in science and technology in the past 100 years. They are indeed remarkable and there is reason to wonder whether there is much left to conquer as we enter the 21st century. After all, the discovery of new territory in a geographic sense came to an end once exploration had completed the survey of the Earth's surface, so one day soon science, at least physical science, should reach its zenith. We will then still have to ponder on our incomplete knowledge of space that we cannot easily explore and still need to confront the few never-to-be solved mysteries that science has bequeathed to us even from centuries past. To be sure there is much for us yet to discover in the medical and biochemical field, but physics should by now have yielded the answers to all the secrets that Nature is willing to reveal. We will never understand what lies beyond our comprehension, such as why the universe exists and what there is beyond its bounds in the context of time and space. Indeed, whatever we might foresee in the long range future of the universe, is not really relevant to mankind, because it seems probable that, on a more limited time scale, our planet is destined to encounter catastrophy sufficient to terminate human and animal life on Earth. So let us take stock and reflect a little on what the transition to a new millenium can mean for physical science. Yes, indeed, there are very few challenges now left to tax the mind of a true physicist. However, in saying this, I, as author, am speaking from my own knowledge as a physicist and each of us has our own different and limited perception. I am all too conscious of the fact that, if the scientific community on Earth were to be eradicated and all the books on science were to be destroyed, then, even though the human race might survive, so science as we know it would have to evolve again from nothing. It would then take several more centuries, perhaps another millenium, to bring us back to where we are today. However, would it really matter and would science develop in the same way as our history indicates? Would we have another Newton and another Einstein? Surely, there would be another Pythagoras! The Pythagoras theorem has a unique quality. It is a survivor, a fact of science on which one can build and, though taught as mathematics, one can even wonder whether it is a statement in physics. Once a surviving remnant of mankind can reason sufficiently to rediscover and find interest in the
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (1 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
theorem of Pythagoras then science, including physical science, has been reborn. Thinking along such lines might seem to be pure fantasy, but let me make my point a little differently. Suppose that I were to say that I know how to formulate the Unified Field Theory and how to explain the true nature of gravitation and certain other still unsolved fundametal issues in physics. Suppose I were to die, as is inevitable, and my writings on these subjects were to be ignored, as seems not unlikely. Then how would that impact the world at large? It would not even be noticed. Nor, I submit, would the loss of much of the knowledge that takes up space on our university library bookshelves. The simple truth is that mankind in general is not concerned with the understanding of the kind of physics or mathematics that fills the minds of many of our university professors. However, technology has become important to our daily lives and there are certain basic teachings that physics in its applied form does contribute to that spectrum of activity, so I must not decry what physics at its applied level does offer to our well being. The major problem ahead of us in the 21st century is the need to discover a new and abundant non-polluting source of energy. I am convinced that this is a problem that could easily have been avoided if some aspects of the 20th century could be erased from our memories. We have ventured into the realm of nuclear power whereas we should have been 'burning the midnight oil' in studious endeavour and probing the energy secrets of the aether. We erred because Einstein outlawed the aether, closing off access to the power source which created the universe. We erred by adopting Einstein's belief in a mathematically abstruse philosophy of so-called four-space, a four dimensional distortion of reality, a virtual world that has become a drug to which theoretical physicists have now become addicted. Einstein took us into a mental world which had no Pythagoras. The two space dimensions of a flat surface on which one can draw a triangle with two sides and a hypotenuse were replaced, not by the three-dimensional space of the curved surface of the Earth we inhabit, but by an illusory scheme we cannot picture in our mind's eye. We are even being told today that, thanks to Einstein, we can look forward to 'time travel' as we exit through 'worm holes' in a 'time warp' to leap into the past and perhaps into the future. That surely tells us that Einstein's theory is a drug we can best do without! Yet, in their hearts, all of those Einstein-drug-addicted theoreticians must know that they have draped the universe in a web so fine that it cannot be seen or felt or serve any useful purpose. Does it really need a child to cry out: "The Emperor wears no clothes?" Does it not suffice, after 80 years since Einstein enunciated his General Theory of Relativity, for us to ask what it does for mankind? Why would God create four-dimensional space and give us a perception of it in three dimensions? Why, even, in applying General Relativity, do we always need to transform its results back into three dimensions to give them meaning? So, as I say above, if we could erase all this from science as we know it, the world would be unaffected and a new generation of physicists could begin anew in developing a theory which says
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (2 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
that the universe was created from energy shed by the aether. After all, if something is created there has to be something serving as a source for what is created. In saying this I am reminded that Sir Edmund Whittaker, author of 'A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity', quoted Spinoza to introduce his work as 'The intellectual love of God'. This was a way of saying that to understand the aether is to understand the Creator. The purpose of this work is to show that the 20th century did, in fact, provide most of the answers to the primary unsolved problems of fundamental physics, including discovering that Holy Grail we call the 'Unified Field Theory'. Sadly, however, that drug-addicted community of relativists which regards such theory as their private province has refused to listen to those not sharing their addiction and so I am seeking to interest those outside that community who have retained their senses and their sanity. It is the author's intention to show elsewhere, under the title of 'Energy Science Reports', that the 20th century has also delivered a solution to the impending energy crisis by the discovery of ways of extracting energy from the aether. This touches upon the beliefs of a more practical scientific community, but one responsive to what can be demonstrated, whereas this work is strictly concerned with reason and theory, something far more difficult to project into the minds of others than is the reality of the new energy scene. This work describes that aether and its creative role. It may be that if this account is ignored by the scientific community then it may take several centuries before some future scientist rediscovers what is here presented. Take note that even knowing that someone once did prove something in scientific history does not make the task of rediscovery any easier. Witness the centuries of effort in trying to solve the problem of Fermat's Last Theorem. This was Pythagoras converted to a power higher than 2, with integer sides to a notional 'triangle', the impossible dream! Fermat assured us that he could actually prove it was impossible but his secret was somehow lost. Modern opinion, today, is that Fermat may have been deceived in thinking he had proved his theorem. Very probably that is valid opinion, because if there were a simple proof it would, undoubtedly, have been discovered by now. As will be seen below I do have reason for connecting an aspect of the aether problem with Fermat's Last Theorem, but first note that in 1995 it was announced that, after centuries of effort, a Professor of Mathematics, Andrew Wiles, at Princeton had at long last discovered a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. It was this reference to Princeton, the university where Einstein had spent many years as a professor, that aroused my interest. I knew how to connect Fermat's Last Theorem with the nature of electricity and thereby introduce the aether in a way that could be a challenge to Einstein's theory. With my Cambridge background and my anti-Einstein disposition, I then thought of introducing this theme in this work. It was also the memory I had from 1981 when my wife and I passed through Princeton on our way south for a weekend in colonial Williamsburg. This was before going back north to attend a
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (3 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
conference on fundamental physical constants at the Bureau of Standards at Gaithersburg near Washington D.C. My wife popped into the university bookstore at Princeton and persuaded them to stock my book 'Physics Unified', published just a few months earlier. How long, I wondered, would the book be reordered, once the relativistic community on the teaching staff woke up to what their students might see in my book. Indeed, it took a while before the inevitable happened and orders stopped, but a similar venture at the university bookstore at Stanford in California has led to a sustained inflow of orders for stock, even to this day. I had, incidentally, already seen a brief mention of Andrew Wiles for his achievement in solving Fermat's Last Theorem in the pages of the Michaelmas Term 1995 issue of CAM, the University of Cambridge Alumni Magazine. There it was explained how, according to John Coates, Sadleirian Professor of Mathematics, "Cambridge has always produced some of the most original and gifted mathematical minds in the world." The report declared that 'notable amongst them is number theorist Andrew Wiles who sparked worldwide press interest when he cracked one of the great conundrums in all mathematics: Fermat's Last Theorem'. It went on to quote Fermat as noting on a Greek mathematical text found after his death in 1665: "I have a truly marvellous demonstration of this proposition which the margin is too narrow to contain." Then the report further declared "Today's scholars doubt that he had. But, says Coates, over the centuries pure mathematicians have developed deep mathematical ideas trying to resolve the problem", followed by "I did not expect to see it happen in my lifetime".
It was later reported by Marcus du Sautoy in the British newspaper THE TIMES on Monday April 8th 1996 that Andrew Wiles, 'for his solution of Fermat's Last Theorem was rewarded in the Knesset (Israel's parliament) with one of mathematics' highest accolades, the Wolf prize worth $100,000, which he shares with his colleague at Princeton, Robert Langlands.' The headline caption of that report read: 'The solving of a famous condundrum will lead to new challenges. Is this solution the end of maths?' Well, Marcus du Sautoy, it may not be the end of mathematics but it might well become the beginning of a new age in physics as we see its scope for uprooting Einstein's theories. The event described is a reminder that Albert Einstein was offered the Presidency of the State of Israel, whilst scientists at large still seek that Holy Grail, their Unified Field Theory which eluded Einstein. Curiously, there was something in Marcus du Sautoy's report that reveals an extrasensory perception because I had already written the text which appears ahead on pages 12 and 49. He suggested that the next challenge would concern the 'Riemann Hypothesis' concerning prime numbers. "Those numbers are in some sense the harmonics of the 'Riemann zeta function'. It is these harmonics which tell you all about prime numbers. Riemann conjectured what these harmonics look like. If true, it could imply that the music of the primes is far from being just noise." Well, true or false, the harmonics of the primes do feature in this author's theory as outlined ahead,
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (4 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
but I did not know I was treading the holy ground of the mathematician when I confronted the electrodynamic resonances in my study of the subject. I still think that the discipline of mathematics is a tool designed to help us to understand Nature, rather than to fashion it by shaping it to fit what we want to believe. The challenge ahead is not one to be classified as mathematics. Curiously, one senses history beginning to repeat itself, because it was the Riemann tensor which was applied to underpin the mathematics of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. My attack using 'the music of the primes' will be aimed at proving the aether exists and that the concert hall in which Nature plays that music is one having three space dimensions. To migrate from the numerology of Fermat's Last Theorem to the physics of electrical phenomena we need now to consider physical dimensions and how we incorporate electrical phenomena in this system of dimensions. The standard physical dimensions used when expressing measured values are mass M, length L and time T plus something that has an electrical connection, the dielectric constant k. To bridge the gap between inertia and electricity it is not mass that has primary significance, but energy E, inasmuch as the inertia of any electric charge is the property by which it conserves its energy to avoid continuous (non-quantum) loss by radiation when accelerated. See my paper in International Journal of Theoretical Physics, v. 15, p. 631, 1976 or see section 7 of the last of the fourteen appended papers. This introduces us to the problem of understanding the true nature of electricity and in particular why it comes in positive and negative forms. The answer is similar to there being odd and even numbers. They represent alternate states in a sequence. In the binary number system we see the last digit as either 1 or 0, this being the odd or even condition. In electricity we have (+) or (-) as the polarity of electric charge which I envisage as having spherical form. There is no zero charge state at the truly fundamental level because that only arises where electric particles combine into a neutral aggregation. It is, however, possible for two charges, a particle and its antiparticle, to annihilate one another and shed energy, a quantum event leaving no electrical form or normal electromagnetic wave that we can trace, which is why physicists invented the 'neutrino', but the root question we face is 'what attribute determines whether a charge is positive or negative?' Mass M has dimensions EL-2T2 and it is appropriate to seek to explain all phenomena in terms of E, L and T as the primary physical dimensions and, as we are probing fundamental physics rather than applied physics, to use the esu system in which the dielectric constant k of the vacuum medium is unity. Thinking in terms of energy E, length L and time T, the way forward is to regard an electric charge as a package of energy E which occupies a volume of space L3 but oscillates at a frequency 1/ T by exchanging some of that volume with a similar package of energy, albeit also with energy transfer to and fro between them. This means that there will be two types of charge, or rather states, which differ in character only according to the instant at which we observe them. One will be expanding and the other will be contracting. One, the positive charge, will be in 'phase' with whatever charge form we take as our positive reference and the other at the same moment will be in anti-phase and so be a negative charge. Do note here that Einstein's declaration that space and time were intermeshed precluded him from
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (5 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
ever accepting the concept of instantaneous action at a distance, thereby excluding the synchrony and phase-locked oscillations which we shall use as the key to understanding electric charge polarity. Einstein lost his way with the first step he took on his path of relativity. We, following a different path, can now, if we wish to go to really fundamental levels, explore how electric particles develop into different families, the conservation of energy and the space they occupy being key features of the transmutation process. That will lead us automatically to the point where we see how to solve the problem of linking gravitation and electrical action. The task in sight is no less than that of meeting the challenge posed by Unified Field Theory, but from there we can move even further ahead and come to terms with the very nature of electricity. Fermat's Last Theorem can play a role in this pursuit. When an electric charge is compressed into a sphere of radius a the charge occupies a volume of space 4(pi)a3/3 and it has, if under uniform pressure within the sphere, an energy E inversely proportional to a. Now, given the hypothesis that charge polarity depends upon the phase of an oscillation under conditions where volume of space occupied by charge is conserved, we see that a group of particles in close proximity can only change form subject to the combined volume (pi)a3 being constant. In energy terms this means that the summation of (1/E)3 is constant, so if two fundamental particles could merge to become one single particle, which adopts one or other charge polarity then, using x,y z as their energy parameters: x-3 + y-3 = z-3 If this had an integer solution then, by multiplying throughout by x3y3z3, we could use the numbers yz,xz and xy of that solution as an integer solution to a Fermat equation for which n=3. This is impossible and so, if we were to assume that the energy quantities really do comprise integer multiples of a basic energy quantum and the space taken up by the particles is conserved, the merger of two such electrical forms vibrating in anti-phase can never result in the creation of a single particle of unitary charge. We know this without appeal to empirical fact concerning how charges of different polarities are seen to interact. In effect, we have given meaning to the polarity of electrical charge by logical argument based on the physical dimensions E, L and T and the use of Fermat's Last Theorem. So far as this author is aware this is the only application of Fermat's Last Theorem to a truly physical problem. It does, however, open the question of whether, if one searches to find integer solutions to equations such as: xn + yn = zn + wn or: xn + yn + zn = wn for n equal to -3, such solutions will be found which bear upon the issue of the hypothetical fundamental quantum of energy.
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (6 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
To satisfy simple equations of the above form, such an energy quantum would, of course, be extremely small in relation to the mass energy of the electron and we would then need to see the neutrino as comprising large quantities of such quanta. However, since the neutrino is surely a figment of imagination, just something invented as a `bookkeeping' exercise to keep the energy and momentum balance as between matter and aether, the aether itself becomes the storehouse for energy which, in its ultimate form, may well be quantized in units of the notional energy quantum. Unless we pursue this possibility we cannot but wonder whether an avenue of science remains unexplored, and it may well be that there is no integer solution to these equations which has any special significance. It is to be noted that two of the appended papers use the following equation: x-3 + y-3 = Nz-3 with N=5 expressing the merger of 5 muons to form a kaon, but that did not extend to a search for the fundamental energy quantum. [Hadronic Journal, v.9, p.137, 1986] and [Hadronic Journal, v.12, p.101, 1989]. These are the second and eighth of the appended papers. Note that the equation as used in those papers has a special meaning in that the kaon was portrayed as a particle oscillating constantly between two states, spending half of the time in each state, one being that of a particle of unitary composition (x) and the other being that of a three-particle form, (x) plus two (y), so that on average it comprised simply a single (x) and a single (y) form. With N=6 the latter equation does have integer solutions, as one sees reported by Mike Mudge in Personal Computer World, p. 614, April 1995. Values x=357, y=777 and z=629, satisfy the equality, but these do not relate in any way helpful in our search for the fundamental energy quantum. Solutions, if any, for N=2 are of primary interest. The idea that conservation of three-dimensional space is the determining factor governing the properties of a fundamental electric charge, whereas the phase of the pulsating state of this space volume determines the charge polarity, may seem quite revolutionary. Physicists have, it seems, spent less time pondering the question of why electric charge comes in negative and positive forms than they have in hypothesizing about the imaginary notions of negative mass, negative energy and negative time. Concern about the nature of electric charge proper, rather than worrying about the speed of light, is important because it provides a more appropriate line of demarcation between the features of aether theory and relativity. Historically, the investigations of C. A. Bjerknes (c. 1877) on spheres pulsating in antiphase in an enveloping medium to set up mutually attractive or repulsive forces give us a lead. See references on p. 284 of Sir Edmund Whittaker's 'A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity: The Classical Theories' (Nelson, 1951). This, therefore, is this author's justification for arguing that Fermat's Last Theorem has real relevance to physics. It concerns the physics of three space dimensions and three physical dimensions, such as energy, length and time. The three dimensional world is the real world which the true scientist should be exploring, not the imaginary mathematical jungle which followers of Einstein have adopted.
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (7 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43
file:///C|/mp3/a/0309.htm (8 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:43

EDDINGTON'S UNIFICATION OF THE CONSTANTS

One cannot build on Einstein's foundations but one can at least take stock of Eddington's efforts and proceed from there. Eddington had the good sense to see that the clues which Nature provided to guide us forward in our search for the truth were those coded in the dimensionless numbers which link the truly fundamental constants. We will, very briefly, review that theme as it provides the platform on which much of the work here described was structured. Sir Arthur Eddington in New Pathways in Science (see p. 232), published in 1935 by Cambridge University Press, declared that the seven primitive constants of physics, e, m, M, h, c, G and , could be reduced to three (cf. the three dimensions E, L, T) by discovering what determines the value of four purely numerical ratios: (i) M/m .. (ii) hc/2e2 .. (iii) e2/GMm (iv) .. (2c/h) (Mm/) Eddington's own thoughts on how to derive these ratios theoretically have not stood the test of time. He relied too much on what were apparently numerical coincidences and his theory could not adapt to later data found as precision measurement techniques improved. In contrast the theory which I present in the appended papers stands up extremely well, as can be expected for a theory that has really hit upon the truths of Nature's creative mechanisms. As summarized below, the appended papers cover the first three of Eddington's ratios, but the cosmical constant has a curious definition and may prove to have no real significance owing to the vagueness of the natural radius of curvature of space-time'. I would substitute the Hubble constant as the seventh primitive constant and I point out that this also can be deduced theoretically by developing the particle creation theme leading to the M/m evaluation. [Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252, 1984]. The Hubble constant arises owing to an action occurring throughout space as the aether attempts to create matter in the form of protons and electrons, but succeeds sporadically and then usually only transiently as the particles have a momentary existence. What amounts to 'missing matter' results in that this quasi-matter exists fleetingly thoughout all space and its very presence attenuates the frequency of electromagnetic waves in transit from the stars. The aether has a non-dispersive property in this connection, because it really has two dynamic systems which keep in balance in a rather special way, as discussed in the paper just referenced. My objective in this work is not to be drawn into contention with Big Bang theory. I prefer here to
file:///C|/mp3/a/1013.htm (1 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:44
avoid the field which cosmologists find so delightful, as they harness Einstein's philosophy to describe events they can only imagine. Enough is said on that subject on page 30 ahead and in the papers at the end of this work. Instead I intend here to concentrate attention more upon the first three of Eddington's ratios. The way in which protons can be created from activity involving muons is the subject of three papers, two of which are appended. [Nuovo Cimento, 30A, 235, 1975, Hadronic Journal, 11, 169, 1988 and Physics Essays, 1, 72, 1988]. The very close value 1836.152 of M/m, the proton/electron mass ratio, is derived theoretically but its 'fine-tuning' to even greater precision in terms of a fundamental energy quantum can become an interesting possibility in the light of our introduction. The theoretical derivation of the dimensionless fine-structure constant giving hc/2e2 as 137.0359 is also of published record, as based on the same theoretical principles, which involve an adaptive 'fluid crystal' interpretation of the structured form of the aether. [Physics Letters, 41A, 423, 1972]. However, the summary derivation of this ratio also features in the papers appended. This author's unification of gravitational and electrical action implicit in the third of Eddington's ratios is already of published record and affords the formulae: G = (4e/m)g4(108)3 (g/)3 - 3(/g) = 1 = (3)7/12(M/m) M/m is the proton/electron mass ratio. is the mass of the tau lepton in relation to the electron. [Hadronic Journal, 9, 153, 1986]. The reader is invited to substitute the measured values of the electron charge to mass ratio e/m and the measured value of the proton-electron mass ratio in these equations to deduce and then g, the graviton-electron mass ratio, to then discover that the equations really do give the correct value of G, the constant of gravitation. Clearly, the numerical ratio e2/GMm has therefore been deduced theoretically, meeting fully the objective set by Sir Arthur Eddington. However, there is a spin-off discovery here, because this theory has yielded a measure of the mass of the tau lepton, otherwise known as the taon. Inspection of the tables of data applicable to physical constants will show that this super-heavy electron, the taon, is the big brother in the electron family, the muon being the middle brother, otherwise known as the heavy electron. Now, I cannot, in the limited extent of this work, discuss all my published papers, but I know that there will be those who are ready to criticize what I am saying and they may pounce on the fact that the taon-electron mass ratio calculated from the above equations, using M/m as 1836.152, is 3485.21, which is a taon mass-energy of 1780.94 MeV. As can be seen from that 1986 paper of mine, just referenced (the third in the papers appended), I was, at the time that paper was written, confronting the prospect of this taon mass-energy quantity being higher than my theory indicated. In the event, referring to Physical Review D50 (August 1994), I find that the taon is now stated to have a massenergy of 1777.1 MeV with an uncertainty of approximately 0.5 MeV. So I am in error somewhat on this question of the mass of the super-heavy electron. However, as can
file:///C|/mp3/a/1013.htm (2 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:44
be seen from the papers ahead I had a similar situation with the muon, in that my theory said that the muon-electron mass ratio should be 206.3329, whereas the actual muon-electron mass ratio is somewhat greater as 206.7683. The reason for this was fully explained as attributable to the real muon having two electron-sized companions. It needs three particles cooperating in a conservative manner, in space volume terms and energy terms, to assure a quasi-stability. [Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 37, 210 (1983) and 38, 342 (1983)]. In the sub-quantum energy activity in the aether the primary role is played by the virtual muon family which comprises a mixture of energy quanta of 205 and 207 electron rest-mass units . We find that the real muon, the one which shows itself in cosmic radiation and in high energy particle decay, is nucleated by the higher 207 form. Now I have, above, mentioned the 'harmonics of the primes', having in mind the wave resonances and standing wave effects that can control the deployment of energy in particle groups. Such effects have been recognized in my researches in connection with the proton and neutral pion, as mentioned below. Also, in 1972, I had adopted the odd integer space volume quantization to derive the finestructure constant [Physics Letters, 41A, 423 (1972)]. Later, the evidence pointed to the wave resonance as well, so that in 1983 I did explain why the 'aether' muon or 'virtual' muon, being a bare muon, had a mass slightly below that of the real muon, the one having a electron retinue. Referenced on the integer mass ratio 207, the applicable formula, to a first approximation is: m/m = 207 + 2 - (9/4)(207)/(207+ 3) which is 206.7687. The second Lett. Nuovo Cimento paper referenced above gave reason for 'tuning' this to a slightly lower value, bringing it into perfect accord with the measured value of 206.7683. What I now declare as being extra proof and vindication of my research in arguing in support of the wave resonances just mentioned, is the fact that the real taon should replicate the muon situation by having a retinue of two virtual muons, whereas the muon had a retinue of two virtual leptons of electron size. The number 207 can be replaced by 17, at least to a first approximation, because the taon is that much more massive than the muon. Accordingly 17 can replace 207 in the above equation to give: m /m = 17 + 2 - (9/4)(17)/(17+ 3) which is 4.43 Mev below the value of m corresponding to the factor 17, if m /m is 205. So the 1780.94 MeV estimate of the virtual taon mass indicates a `real' taon mass of 1776.51 MeV, whereas the value, as now reported, is 1777.1 +/- 0.5 Mev. Whilst on this theme of wave resonance governing particle mass, I feel it appropriate to mention the harmonic resonance which determined the value of the neutral pion mass. As can be seen by reference to the eleventh appended paper [Physics Essays, 2, 360 (1989)], in determining the mass of the neutral pion in relation to that of the electron, a governing resonance involves the prime number 1619. [This is the ratio A:2C of Table II on p. 365 of that paper.] When I wrote that paper I did not know that the neutral pion had a measured mass-energy of 134.9764 +/- 0.0006 MeV. Yet, in presenting the paper I gave reason for this mass-energy being either 134.976 MeV or 134.960 Mev, according to whether the component charges involved are well spaced apart or are in contact. Evidently, experiment tells us that they are well-spaced, but here is a very good example of the power of my theory.
file:///C|/mp3/a/1013.htm (3 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:44
The neutral pion is not foremost in importance amongst the many fundamental particles, but it does present an awesome example of the wave resonance effect. As scrunity of Table II in the paper will show, it would really upset the resonance proposition if the mass indicated was not in agreement with experiment, but it is pleasing to see that my theory is supported in a truly remarkable way. I just hope that the reader can come to appreciate what I am saying and so share my enjoyment at having deciphered the physics of Nature's handiwork in this particular particle situation. As to the 'harmonics of the primes', the best example in the papers appended is the seventh appended paper [Hadronic Journal, 11, 169 (1988)]. The numbers 23, 41 and 1153 are all prime. They relate to the properties of the proton and I can but declare my delight at having deciphered the secrets of the proton as codified in the limited but highly precise numerical data which those highly skilled in precision measurement have afforded. Sir Arthur Eddington could not have imagined what would prove to be possible once the quantities in which he was interested had been measured to a precision below the part per million level. The numbers do not explain anything, but as they extend in their limits of precision they make the task of explanation all the more formidable. It is only if one has the right interpretation of them in physical terms that one can hope to derive theoretical values which match up to those observed. However, once on track, one knows one has discovered the governing truths and it certainly gives one confidence in spreading the theoretical investigation across the myriad of particle forms that Nature produces. How else can it be that the substance of the papers which are appended could have emerged so readily? One cannot sit down and ìnvent' realistic physical ways of deciphering the particle spectrum, just by willful determination. One can, however, if given one point of entry that is wellfounded, build on that and hope to find that it does, of itself, build a particle spectrum that fits the one observed. This has proved to be the case. It has not involved use of Einstein's theory, which tells us something we should not fail to heed, but that was not how I entered into these studies. In simple truth, I wanted to understand how energy was stored by magnetic induction and I did not believe that the route to that understanding could in any way ignore the reality of the presence of the aether. To me, mathematical symbols, though useful if one can picture something tangible that they represent, are meaningless if devoid of substantive reality. The aether is real and it deserves respect!
file:///C|/mp3/a/1013.htm (4 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:44

THE CHALLENGE
I propose next to turn my attention to a problem in physics, one well within the scope of the knowledge I gleaned from my school studies. This is a challenging question in Newtonian mechanics. One of the lessons of history is that one should not 'put the cart before the horse'. That lesson dates from the era before we discovered electricity. Electrical technology changed things around. We can now, if we wish, transport the horse using electrically powered vehicles. When Newton enuciated his laws of motion he had no way of predicting the way in which electrodynamic forces would affect his dynamical findings in mechanics. Seen in retrospect, it is now evident that, in prescribing his third law, Newton has put the cart before the horse. The 'cart' is the assertion that action and reaction between any two particles are always in balance. The 'horse' is the rule, Newton's rule, which declares that when two particles emerge from a collision then, if there is no loss of energy, the receding particles have a relative velocity that is equal but opposite to their relative velocity at the moment just before impact. Electrodynamics concerns electric charges in motion and the electric energy potential attributable to charge interaction is a function of the relative position of those electric charges. It is therefore a logical physical consequence that, to the extent that motion affects energy in a charge interaction, that energy must depend upon the square of the relative velocity. When we work out the square root of that energy at impact we find, as we know from simple mathematics, that there are two solutions, just as -1 or +1 is the square root of 1. Since all ponderable matter comprises nothing other than charged particles, this is really why two particles separate after collision with their relative velocities reversed. Newton derived his 'rule' by declaring that action and reaction are equal and that energy is conserved in the collision between two particles. He could equally have deduced that if two colliding particles separate with their relative velocities reversed, then, assuming that energy is conserved, action and reaction are equal and opposite. The fact that the masses of the particles may be different does not affect this argument and so one might think that, since the answer comes out the same, it matters not whether the cart or the horse has the forward position. However, imagine now that you, the reader, are sitting in a classroom, paying careful attention. The teacher aims to show why the principle of conservation of momentum applies to a body which is a conglomerate of numerous component particles, all in motion. The teacher explains that because the law of action and reaction governs how each and everyone of those particles interacts individually with each and every other such particle, then one can sum all the forces and their moments about any axis to prove that net momentum, whether angular or linear, is conserved and is independent of
file:///C|/mp3/a/1417.htm (1 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:45
internal interactions within that conglomerate body. As a student you do not question this, because the teacher has ensured that the syllabus followed introduces you to the basics of mechanics before you learn anything about electromagnetism. However, what would be the scenario if the teacher made a mistake and did put the cart before the horse by teaching electrical principles before teaching mechanics? You would have learnt that when an electrical charge is in motion in a magnetic field it experiences a force owing to that motion, a force directed at right angles to the motion. You would have learnt also that when an electric charge is in motion it sets up a circular magnetic field in a plane at right angles to its motion and centred on the axis of that motion. So, if two charges travel together at the same velocity, side-by-side, they will, by symmetry, set up a balanced action and reaction. However, what if these two charges are moving together but one is somewhat ahead of the other? Then those forces acting on the charges cannot be directed along the line drawn between them. They will be directed in opposite directions and have the same magnitude, but as they are not acting in a common line drawn between the charges they must cooperate to produce an out-of-balance couple. So, armed with what you have been taught about the forces between electric charges in motion, you now come to learn about Newton's laws. The teacher says that action and reaction are equal and opposite between each particle of a pair in the conglomerate body and is about to go on from there to justify the principle of conservation of momentum for the body as a whole. You put your hand up and ask the obvious question. "What if the particles forming that body are electric particles? Will not that affect the assumption we are making about action and reaction being equal and opposite?" Now, here, your teacher has a problem. If he or she is well read then what will come to mind is the rather complicated law of electrodynamics that was formulated by Ampere expressly to ensure that action and reaction are equal as between two electric charges in motion. However, the teacher knows that that force law is never used in practice. The Lorentz force law, which is supported by Einstein's theory, is the one we use, but what the teacher will most probably not know is that Lorentz's law has been disproved experimentally [122]. The question really at issue is whether that body could, owing to its internal electrodynamic interactions ever begin to rotate of its own accord or perhaps propel itself in a linear direction, without there being any applied external force. Your teacher will then, no doubt, insist that you must learn Newton's laws, which forbid that possibility. You, on the other hand, will still be asking yourself how Newton could command authority on the issue, even though he could not have taken account of the electrodynamic issue. Meanwhile, your teacher might later ponder the question of why Ampere bothered to formulate his law of electrodynamics if Newtonian law gave a sufficient explanation. I say, he or she might have such thoughts, but I know that, almost certainly, the thought will be that 'experience' shows that we can get by without worrying about such problems. Yet, I also know that we can, if we so choose, live through another century without understanding gravitation and its unifying link with electromagnetism. Teachers are supposed to know the answers to such questions but this is a subject they never mastered. In later life, after leaving school, one sees, if one bothers to look, that this same problem has remained an active issue without ever being resolved. It remains unresolved, but teachers, even those who lecture on physics at university, do not go out of their way to draw this scientific inconsistency to the attention of their students. Indeed, one sometimes sees evidence of an even
file:///C|/mp3/a/1417.htm (2 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:45
worse scenario, where the problem is recognized but the teacher assumes that it has all be solved by Einstein's theory, notwithstanding the fact that Einstein struggled to his dying day to forge that unifying link that could bring electrodynamics and gravitation together. Newton was concerned about the force of gravity and, to this day, scientists of the highest calibre still strive to find that connection between gravitation and electrodynamics. They occasionally hear of claims by individual 'crackpot' researchers who assert that they can build electrical or magnetic machines which deliver more power output that input. This is contrary to Newton's laws, because action and reaction are always said to be equal and opposite. Yet the Lorentz force law which was 'confirmed' by Einstein's theory is a law which, as applied between two electrical particles in motion, does not itself conform with that law of action and reaction. It is here that we see the farce that underlies all attempts to merge Einstein's gravitational theory and electromagnetism into a common unified field system. Indeed, there is something wrong deep down in the foundations of the problem. The true law of electrodynamics, one which does conform with gravitational theory, is the subject of reference [1], but see also the sixth of the appended papers. Scientists declare that when the forces predicted by the Lorentz force law are integrated for a complete system then the overall result is a balanced action and reaction. However, they are not then dealing with basic principles as applied to discrete interactions between elements of matter but are asserting overriding constraints of their own choosing and this amounts to insisting that Newtonian philosophy has the last word. One could say "So be it" if the hoped-for unification of the gravitational field and the electrodynamic field was already an established fact, but it is not. Also one cannot escape being left with that dominating problem of wondering about the attractive forces involved in the formation of the stars and how energy ever converged into matter to create it in the first place and set things in motion. If there were a force out-of-balance, a possible breach of the principle of conservation of linear momentum that could occur under certain very special and exceptional circumstances, then one could see a way forward and make some sense out of the current nonsense which is limiting our field of enquiry. Once the aether yields energy so it must assert force on matter. Newton would say that that is an èxternally applied' force, but yet it could be a force developed within matter, inasmuch as aether fills all space, even the space between the electrons in atoms. So here is another rather subtle point that gets glossed over in the teaching of physics. In this situation, the teachers close ranks and refuse to refer to the aether. It does not exist, because Einstein's theory does not require it! It does not exist because it was thought to regulate the finite speed of light but experiment shows that the speed of light in vacuo is referenced on something sharing the Earth's translational motion through space, though not the Earth's rotation. So, assuming that the aether moves through the Earth, there can be no aether! Well, that is hardly logical. Indeed, it is as illogical as an argument which says that we think there are green men on Earth, but we can find no green men, so there are no men on our green Earth! There is, indeed, an aether, if only defined as that which feeds energy to sustain the creation of matter, and one can be sure that much of what now remains unexplained in physics has its explanation rooted in that mysterious aether which physicists have turned away from. To say
file:///C|/mp3/a/1417.htm (3 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:45
otherwise and declare that the aether does not exist is like knowing that all the answers are in a textbook but refusing to open the book because to read such a book goes against one's principles. The aether is an energetic medium which reacts to actions set up by the flow of electric current in wires. It is like a bank that accepts money on deposit. It accepts and disperses the energy we label as that stored by magnetic induction. It disperses that energy just as a bank uses money on deposit by dispersing it to borrowers, but it has reserves of energy just as the bank has reserves of money, and the aether allows us to withdraw on demand the energy we have put on deposit. Take away the aether and you take away the whole basis of magnetic induction in electrical technology. It is like taking away the banking system and letting money float around freely in the community. Scientists have adopted a way of interpreting electrical phenomena by supposing that electric particles in matter, migrant photons and the mysterious neutrinos are all that one needs to consider. In that philosophy, however, there is no creative source yielding new charges and nowhere to give energy a resting place when the particles are eventually annihilated. Now, it may seem to the reader that, in challenging the foundations of Newtonian mechanics by bringing in my concerns about electrodynamic interactions, I am mischievously trying to shake the very foundations of physics. I am not, but I am intent on moving forward and solving the unification problem and to do this I must insist on the adoption of the correct formulation of the law of electrodynamics. To advance to that I will presently, in the pages ahead, make a quantum leap, a leap that takes me back to the physics of my last school year, some 51 years ago, when I heard about the Bohr model of the atom. The reader will see from such reminder of one's schooling and pre-university education that I am deliberately stressing how easy it is to see where science has gone off track. We need to be very sure of the basics of our subject and look very closely at the groundwork on which we later build. There is now ample evidence which confirms my own long standing conviction that if the mass ratio as between two interacting electric charges in motion is not unity, as it has been for all the chosen experiments giving us the basic empirical foundations of the subject, then the law of action and reaction can be breached [49].
file:///C|/mp3/a/1417.htm (4 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:45

INTRODUCING THE CREATIVE VACUUM

As the reader will now understand, this monograph provides a documentary record pertaining to Unified Field Theory. It summarizes research by the author spanning 40 years from the mid 1950s when the theory was first conceived. It has been ignored by the scientific community because it is seen as a contradiction of the Einstein four-space doctrine. Einstein died in 1955, having failed in his lifelong quest to discover how to unify gravitation and electromagnetism. Yet, Einstein's followers have not, in the 41 years thereafter, been able to succeed where Einstein failed and so the scientific community sits and waits, hoping that the Unified Field Theory will one day be discovered. It is the common belief of theoretical physicists that there has to be a way of understanding the force of gravitation in terms of electromagnetic action. The challenge is to discover the unifying link by which the electromagnetic field theory and gravitational field theory merge to have a causal physical connection that we can understand. This author, now 68 years of age, is acutely conscious of the fact that those scientists who do see it as their exclusive right to search for the Unified Field Theory will never abandon beliefs rooted in Einstein's theory. This monograph, therefore, is this author's final effort to present his theory as a formal collection of the key published papers, all of which have passed the test of referee scrutiny, but yet they are unlikely to be found in the standard periodical stock of a typical university library. The papers all fail the test of conformity with the Einstein model of four-space, but all offer a meritorious solution to problems which are far outside the scope of Einstein's theory. The author's papers that are of record in the mainstream periodicals are also listed for reference, but this collection of fourteen prior published papers suffices as a concise summary record which will allow physicists, who are so minded, to understand and appreciate what is here presented, most assuredly the ultimate theory of the unified field. It was in 1980 that the author did succeed in breaking through the referee barrier of the Institute of Physics in U.K. by styling a paper on the subject putting all the emphasis on its rigorous mathematical foundation. The Einstein gravitational field equation of his General Theory of Relativity was derived without using any of Einstein's arguments and solely from the consideration of how energy deploys in the field separating two interacting bodies. Analogous papers on the spatial deployment of energy in the electromagnetic interaction and the Coulomb electrostatic interaction were also published elsewhere in the mainstream literature and at about the same time. An adequate discussion of and reference to these three contributions appears in
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (1 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
the last of the fourteen papers appended in Part 2. That paper, entitled 'Retardation in the Coulomb Potential', though published in 1995, is really only a summary review paper of earlier work, but it offers the reader a cogent introduction and it is recommended that it should be read first. The author is gratified by the fact that the first reprint copy of the paper read by an academic colleague, whose contribution to electromagnetism earned him an Sc.D. degree from Cambridge, was acknowledged with a note saying that it was "brilliant". This has encouraged the author to make this final bid to interest the scientific community in what is a very comprehensive unification of field theory. It is a theory which should not be ignored because, though, to be sure, critics will inevitably feel uncomfortable about accepting much that is proposed, that discomfort will stem primarily from the irritation of having to revise what they have come to believe. The merit of the theory offered lies in the powerful cohesion of its foundations and the ultimate test that it affords precise quantitative values for the fundamental dimensionless constants of physics. Science cannot stay forever in a stalemate condition, where Einstein's General Theory of Relativity stands apart from quantum theory and wave mechanics, never to be united but always living in hope. Unified field theory should not be seen as the quest to link these two disciplines, but rather as the quest to discover the causal physical connection between magnetism as rooted in quantum activity and gravitation as also rooted in the same activity! The title 'The Creative Vacuum' for this introductory text has been chosen because it aptly describes the function of the vacuum medium. It is an orderly composition of electrical charge, neutral overall, but active as a sea of energy. It constantly strives to create matter in the form of protons and electrons, but is subject to equilibrium and the latter is only upset when matter already created decays to lose its mass and so its energy. That energy is then subjected to regenerative effects, owing to the jitter motion which prevails throughout that vacuum medium. The theory is founded on the understanding of magnetic induction and how the vacuum medium stores and returns the energy associated with the magnetic field. This is rooted in quantum mechanics, the mechanics of the vacuum itself. The aether has a jitter, a so-called Zitterbewegung. The need for its dynamic jitter to be balanced leads to the gravitational feature. The theory offers a full qualitative account backed by quantitative evidence, because, as already indicated, it gives precise values for the relevant dimensionless constants which incorporate the constant of gravitation, Planck's constant and the proton-electron mass ratio. If you, the reader, wonder why a theory having such scope and importance is not already well known and copiously referenced in the standard scientific literature, then in that you begin to share this author's own thoughts. There is something wrong with a system that encourages scientific endeavour and encapsulates it in numerous scientific papers which are then well and truly buried, not always on the shelves of university library archives. I will here indulge in a little digression on this subject, but I shall eventually come back to the main theme. The problem just mentioned is, of course, the escalation of the university system with the need for academic staff, also escalating in numbers, to add the weight of their own contributions to the growing piles of information, with the result that, as with the proverbial 'black hole', the system has
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (2 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
collapsed and now offers very little enlightenment. There is so much incentive academically urging academics to contribute papers to conferences and to periodicals that there is little of real merit being added. For example, if Einstein's theory really did explain gravitation, why are so many thousands of papers still being written, all trying to develop the theory of gravitation? Much the same applies to magnetism, where the concept of 'spin' has some special meaning, but one wonders precisely what it can be. It seems to me that the fundamentals of a subject are not understood but yet scientists persist in probing the periphery of their subject whilst repelling intruders who offer something of fundamental significance. Not long ago, I had wanted to look up one of my own papers in the bound periodical collection of my local university. I found that the librarians had cleared the shelves of journals published before 1970. Upon enquiry I was informed that I was not the only person to ask what had happened to the earlier works of reference. The librarian was surprised, especially as he had just had the same enquiry about the chemical journals from another staff member. He explained that in science and technology anything dated before 1970 was deemed to be outmoded and of little interest. To him, it seemed that the pace of development was such that only the work of the past twenty or so years was worth remembering. I would need to go to another repository where the old archives had been buried if I wished to trace what I had contributed to science before 1970. Now, it might not be appreciated by everyone, but when, as a scientist, you contribute to knowledge by securing publication of a peer-reviewed paper, and you are told that your work has been 'buried' along with other papers of the same vintage, it is as if you have become a ghost and are searching for your own grave in a cemetry. There is so much being published in science that we have reached a state of chaos, which puts us in a situation where we need to fight to be heard, and there are those amongst us who see no point in engaging in that struggle. I will now, for a moment, stand back from that ongoing contest to mention that 1996, the year in which I am now writing, is the fourth centenary of the birth of the person who introduced the aether into science, by postulating that it had mechanical properties. Since we are concerned with the 'creative vacuum' or the àether' it is appropriate to remember Rene Descartes. Descartes assumed that the aether comprises particles that are continually in motion, but as there is no empty space, he inferred that those particles are continually moving into places vacated by other aether particles which are themselves in motion. Overall, the motion was that of vortices as the particles were all part of a great machine, but one which we can now examine at a microscopic quantum level and see as a kind of universal clock mechanism. Sadly, however, towards the end of the 19th century, the mechanistic aether seems to have lost favour, because the aether came to be viewed, not as a clock which kept everything in the universe together in a rhythmic dance, but rather only as a 'sea' rippled by light waves. The luminiferous aether concept became the dominant consideration. The aether was not deemed to be the bonding agency which wedded all matter in the universe together in an energy machine. Electromagnetic waves and their finite speed were seen as the signature that proved the aether existed and, once that signature became blurred, there were those who broke away from the aether faith. It was in the early part of the 20th century that a French astronomer, Alexandre Veronnet [123], made
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (3 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
a bid to arouse interest in an 'etheron' particle picture of the aether, bringing the Bohr magneton into that 'clock mechanism', but wave mechanics had a different style of presentation and the aether began to sink into its own sea of oblivion. Einstein was the champion who led the aether dissenters. As philosopher Bertrand Russell explained: "Empty space, to Descartes, is as absurd as happiness without a sentient being who is happy. Leibnitz, on somewhat different grounds, also believed in the plenum, but he maintained that space is merely a system of relations. On this subject there was a famous controversy between him and Newton. The controversy remained undecided until the time of Einstein, whose theory gave the victory to Leibnitz." (Quoted from:) History of Western Philosophy, 1961 Edition, Published by Allen & Unwin, page 87.
Well, I now submit here that the controversy is far from over. Space is not merely a system of 'relations'. It is a real mechanism, albeit one that is, as is all matter, rooted in the electrical form of the constituent aether particles. The way forward from the Einstein diversion requires that we heed what another British philosopher had to say about Einstein's theory. "The effects of rotation are among the most widespread phenomena of the apparent world, exemplified in the most gigantic nebulae and in the minutest molecules. The most obvious fact about rotational effects is their apparent disconnection from outlying phenomena. Rotation is the stronghold of those who believe that in some sense there is an absolute space to provide a framework of dynamical axes. Newton cited it in support of this doctrine. The Einstein theory in explaining gravitation has made rotation an entire mystery." (Quoted from:)p.356 of The Principle of Relativity in the book Alfred North Whitehead: An Anthology, published by Cambridge University Press, 1953.
So I assert that we must look to 'rotation' to see how we can revive belief in the aether, and I note that vortices and rotation are complementary aspects of the universal mechanism that is tuned to the spirit of Descartes. Can the aether spin? If those 'vortices' or those aether particles describing minute circular orbital motion, as part of that universal clock we call the aether, can store energy, as by expanding their orbits so as to move faster, then we have territory to explore. If, further, those aether particles can, by analogy with matter, group together to form structure, but by keeping their mutual spacing, then we have the makings of a dimensionless physical constant connected with both energy quanta and that aether. That gives us a larger aether form that we can explore in terms of spin, a form which might set up pulsating ripples as surrounding aether is disturbed by that structural rotation. This suggests a route to the photon, linked to the theoretical
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (4 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
derivation of the fine-structure constant, the latter comprising Planck's constant, the fundamental unitary electric charge and the speed of light. On a larger scale, maybe large spherically formed expanses of aether can be set in rotation, as with body Earth or the Sun, all leading to interesting properties revealing the role of the aether. On an intermediate scale, there are other possible spin forms of aether. Remember that we can move through the aether, as if it does not exist, and so aether in spin can move through a solid wall to transport its action from one side of that wall to the other. Yes, there is evidence of that to be seen in the thunderball phenomenon, which becomes a candidate for research enquiry into the aether. There are the mysteries connected with atmospheric electrical phenomena and invariably there is something spinning, as in the funnel of a tornado. Indeed, observers have seen the tornado travel one way when the prevailing wind direction was in the opposite direction! Rotation, therefore, offers the logical entry point for a fascinating study of the aether. My main aim here is to interest the reader in my theory as a whole, but that can only be by individual study of my many published papers and other writings on the subject. The appended papers and bibliographic listing are, therefore, the main contribution I make in presenting this work, but I need to encourage you, the reader, to make that effort. So I will digress a little more. In 1977 I was invited to explain my aether theory to the students and staff of the Physics Department at Cardiff University in Wales. One simple diagram I presented at that Cardiff meeting and which appeared in the lecture paper [113] of that occasion is reproduced by the following dimensional expressions: charge density : .... M1/2L-3/2T-1k1/2 angular velocity : ........... T-1 mass density : .......... ML-3 (2/2): ........... k My argument was that the aether contains electric charge, as needed to sustain displacement according to Maxwell's theory. Charge has the dimensions of mass M, length L, and time T, taken together with the electrical dimension of the dielectric constant k. The question at issue was that of understanding how, if the aether could develop spherical pockets that could rotate inside enveloping aether, its angular rotation or spin would relate to electric charge. If I assumed that a uniform charge density would be induced in proportion to the angular velocity of vacuum spin I found that the aether would need to exhibit a uniform mass density to keep the dimensions in balance. In fact, I developed the relationship between vacuum spin, the radial electric field and the angular momentum of aether spin, together with their energy connection. I was aiming at the objective of showing that the energy added owing to that rotation would be both the electric field energy stored by charge displacement and an equal amount of kinetic energy. The easiest way in which to explain this vacuum spin' induction is to imagine that all space exhibits a quantum activity as if everywhere there is electric charge keeping in universal phase in minute orbital loop motion at the same frequency. Here we need to picture large spheres of aether as capable of spin at an angular frequency and see every charge in that aether as a quantum unit having a microcosmic orbital spin motion at a very high frequency compared with . This high frequency is the Compton
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (5 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
electron frequency (/2) and it corresponds to the photon energy needed to create an electron. Quantum mechanics involves linear harmonic oscillations and that tells us that the controlling medium has a linear restoring force rate when displaced. An electric charge e in the aether, as needed in Maxwell's displacement theory, complies with a force rate of 4Ne2, where there are N charges e in unit volume of space, all neutralized overall by a universally-constant density of background charge of opposite polarity. Here I use the c.g.s system of units, in which an electric field of strength E stores energy density E2/8 in vacuum of unit dielectric constant, owing to Ee being equal to 4Ne2x, where x is displacement distance. Energy density is N times (4Ne2x)(x/2), which is E2/8. This restoring force rate determines the jitter frequency of the vacuum state by the equation: 8N2e2 = ()2 where is the effective mass density of the e charges, which is proportional to N. In the equation 8 has replaced 4 because, to assure dynamic balance, the orbital radius of the motion is half of the displacement, which spans the orbit diameter. Now consider the superimposed effect in a sphere of aether which spins at the angular frequency . If the spin is in the same sense (parallel axes of spin) as the quantized orbital motion, then to keep the phase-lock as between enveloping aether and aether in spin, the above equation becomes: 8(N-N)e2 = (/N)(-)2 where /N is constant. From these two equations we can deduce the relationship: N/N = 2/ approximately This means that N charges e per unit volume of that aether sphere are displaced from it owing to spin . Conversely, if we can feed electrostatic energy into that sphere to displace that amount of charge, the phase-lock asserted by the external aether will promote the spin at &oemga;. Or, if we can get the aether sphere to spin by other means, the phase-lock asserted by the external aether will promote charge induction. Once the external aether has to assert itself to hold that phase-lock as between different regions of aether, it does work and that is our 'free energy' input! Suppose we can contain some positive ions into a small sphere. The aether will see this as producing a radial electric field from the centre of that sphere and it will develop a charge displacement to neutralize that core charge and effectively transfer the charge effect to the surface of the sphere. Now, this means that N has been changed in that sphere and so the natural frequency of quantum jitter will change. The aether charges lying outside that sphere will, however, not allow this loss of synchronism and very powerful electrostatic forces are asserted to ensure that the synchronism holds. The vast amount of energy sustaining the quantum jitter at the Compton electron frequency in the aether of enveloping space will be pooled with the rotating aether sphere to keep that state of synchronism. The relative frequency is what is held constant. Thus, if N increases in the sphere to cause the local value of to increase, then the offset of , will assure that synchronous condition. In other words, rotation at follows as a consequence of the phase-lock constraint. This imports energy from the aether. Owing to the linear harmonic motion properties of the quantum world, there is equipartition of energy in the sense that for every unit of electric field energy stored there is an equal unit of kinetic
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (6 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
energy stored. Therefore, by adding one joule of energy in one pulsation of the 'vacuum spin' state we receive 'gratis' one further unit of energy drawing on the universal energy priming of the aether activity at that jitter angular frequency . It has therefore become an interesting task, technologically, to reiterate this action at a rapid pulse rate, given that we can, in fact, set up that priming radial electric field or the spin in an effective way. This is what now takes this aether subject from the realm of oblivion and, without stopping in the arena of philosophical debate, progressing directly into the field of technology, where the aether can be seen to serve us as an energy source. As long ago as 1960 I published my first account of this 'vacuum spin' induction theory [107] and evaluated the spin charge density in relation to spin angular frequency . The formula gave the charge density as 4.781 esu/cc per rad/s of spin (page 32 of that reference). In terms of coulombs, one micro-coulomb per cc would correspond to aether spin at 6,000 rpm. I note that ten micro-coulombs per cc. squeezed into a sphere of 10 cm. diameter corresponds to an energy density of the order of 109 J/m3. In my 1977 lecture paper [113] I explained how the Sun was created by gravitational attraction between protons setting up a positive core charge which produced a radial electric field. That charge had the density of G times the 1.4 gm per cc mass density of the Sun. Put G as 6.67x10-8 in c.g.s units and one obtains 3.6x10-4 esu/cc, which develops a vacuum spin of 7.5x10-5 rad/s or one revolution every 23 hours. If the whole angular momentum of the solar system as it is today were to be put back into the Sun, then, as that paper [113] shows, the Sun would spin at 8.3x10-5 rad/s or one revolution every 21 hours. My 1980 book Physics Unified [112] put on record a more formal account. This is close enough to explain how the solar system got its angular momentum from the phaselocked aether and support the proposition that energy can be shed by this 'vacuum spin' activity of the aether and transferred to matter. Our experiments can tap the aether energy in the same way, simply by setting up a radial electric field inside a conductive medium that can sustain the build up of the charge displacement. In 1983 I presented the theory of 'vacuum spin' at a conference held by the U.K. Institute of Physics at Oxford University. See pages 179-184 of reference [29]. I explained how the known facts about the energy density of thunderballs pointed to an aether in which there could be energy storage by spin. I referred to Altschuler et al. of the High Altitude Lab. in Boulder, Colorado (1970) and their suggestion in Nature [114] that thunderballs might be nuclear powered because they all had an energy density in the range 2 to 5x109 J/m3. This is the same energy density as mentioned above! My 1983 paper went further because I knew that if the Earth shared its spin with the aether then that would involve two systems each neutralizing one another in electric charge terms but in a way which would still produce a magnetic field. The Earth's magnetic field is seated in the charge displaced in, and rotating with, the Earth, but the vacuum charge involved in that aether spin cannot develop a magnetic field because it is the reference against which magnetic action is measured. From knowledge of the strength of the Earth's magnetism I could calculate the Earth's vacuum spin
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (7 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46
charge and it was found to have a value which would constrain vacuum spin, whether in thunderballs, tornadoes or in certain homopolar motor experiments, to have an energy density estimated as being 2.37x109 J/m3. See page 183 of reference [29]. To understand how it is that we can survive on Earth inside a sea of electricity packed by energy that can intrude upon us, just consider two microbes, one in the space between two parallel plates of a highly charged capacitor and the other sitting inside a sphere in which there is radial displacement of vacuum charge. The first microbe will die from electrification once the voltage between those capacitor plates is high enough. Its constituent positive and negative charges will be pulled in opposite directions and torn from its body. Whether the second microbe survives will depend upon which comes first, the vacuum spin with its radial displacement or the microbe. The electrification involves tearing electric charge from the constituent atoms in any matter within that sphere as charge of one polarity goes to the surface, the ionosphere in the case of body Earth, whereas the positive ions left behind simply move to positions intermediate the centre and the boundary surface of the sphere to cancel the electric field and allow the entering microbe to survive unharmed. We humans actually live in a powerful electrified environment which allows the Earth, by rotating, to set up a magnetic field that arises from an electric charge we cannot sense. Vacuum spin precession is why the magnetic N pole orbits the Earth's N pole.
file:///C|/mp3/a/1825.htm (8 of 8)25.4.2005 22:31:46

AETHER POWER GENERATION

If we can get energy from vacuous space, energy in excess of that we can store by setting up electric or magnetic fields, then that proves there is something in space that stands apart from matter. That 'something' is the aether. Anyone who has seen the television showing of the power of the tornado and the whirling funnel that provides a channel for a succession of lightning discharges must suspect that something abnormal is feeding energy into that funnel. Rotational wind speeds of 420km/hr are recorded in the cylindrical funnels which are said to be up to 180m in diameter. Of course, we do know that whirlwinds form by natural movement of air in the atmospheric activity, but something special happens when lightning occurs as it seems to add speed to the rotary motion and confine it into a narrow funnel, whereas increased rotational speed with diminished radius of motion should promote flow radially outwards by centrifugal action. Now, I pose a simple question. What can it be that determines the radius of that tornado funnel? Indeed, what can it be that determines the radius of the thunderball? Ignoring the problem of where the energy comes from and how there is a containment and a quasi-stable state, what is it that determines the radius of the cylindrical form we see in the tornado or the spherical form we see in the thunderball? I gave the answer in that 1983 lecture of mine at the Oxford conference mentioned above [29]. The limit is set by a 'virtual' electric field strength needing to be no greater than that prevailing at the Earth's surface owing to the Earth's rotation. By 'virtual' I mean the effective fields induced by aether spin. In the thunderball there are two aether spins, a spin of an aether sphere within the spin of a much larger aether sphere. These fields are cancelled by charge displacement in matter and we cannot sense them as fields unless the speed of rotation changes. Then we get ionization. Just as ionization was involved in setting up the spin state, so ionization occurs as the spin state decays. However, there is an energy gain in this cycle of events, as already indicated. When I gave my 1983 lecture I did not know that the tornado wind speed at the perimeter of the funnel was of the order of 420km/hr. I could have predicted a figure of the order of 500km/hr, for the simple reason that the wind speed at the funnel perimeter would be about half that of aether spin just inside the funnel, whereas the radial electric field at the surface of a cylinder of uniform electric charge density is 1.5 times that at the surface of a sphere of the same radius having the same uniform charge density. Given that the induced 'virtual' charge density is proportional to angular speed, the 'virtual' electric field intensity is the same for the aether cylinder and the aether sphere only if the actual speed at the cylinder surface is two-thirds that at the surface of the sphere. For the spherical Earth that speed is about three times 500km/hr and so is it really surprising that the tornado wind can
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (1 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
reach a value of 420 km/hr? All speculation, you might say! However, as I indicated in the 'Announcement' at the beginning of this work, we can build on that speculation to extract energy from the aether for our future source of power. I know of several ways in which this 'free energy' scenario can be demonstrated. Indeed, it is the subject of my primary research interest at this time. However, I will take up the theme that follows from my 1983 paper [29]. It refers in its penultimate paragraph to Nobel Laureate Kapitza's efforts to produce thunderballs for application in triggering fusion reactions [120]. Then, in the last sentence, I declared in my paper that: "It remains to devise and conduct experiments aimed at inducing this (vacuum) spin condition by using radial electric fields, so as to verify and perhaps apply the phenomenon to useful ends."
That was my outlook in 1983. I can now quote the research achievement of Dr. Kiril Chukanov. He reports [115]: "I first produced experimental proof that artificially created ball lightning could produce energy for practical needs in 1987 in Bulgaria."
After describing his experimental set-up, which involved an ionized gas discharge in a quartz tube, he wrote: "I experienced great difficulty in evaluating the amount of power produced by the quantum plasma macro-object, but my rough estimation was three to four times more power output than that being supplied by the (input of the high frequency signalgenerating) lamp."
By 1990 he had taken his research project into Sunnivale, California and his onward reporting on his production of excess energy showed that he had measured heat generated in a water jacket enclosing the evacuated glow discharge chamber used in his tests. In his 1994 book Final Quantum Revelation he reports a 900 watt rate of excess energy generation using electrodes of some 3 cm separation. A vacuum developing aether spin in a filamentary discharge region having a volume of, say, 0.3 cc, drawing on 'excess' energy of density 109 J/m3, would take about 3 seconds to regenerate each action cycle to give the 900 watt excess output. Chukanov mentions a 3 second duration of the burst discharge before the discharge, in writhing like a snake, spread to the sides and touched the walls of the containing tube and caused overheating. Professor Chernetskii and his team of researchers in Russia have also produced excess energy at power levels in a self-sustaining plasma discharge device, claiming 4 to 5 times electrical power
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (2 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
output compared with power input. This was reported in 1989 in a Novosti Press Agency Press Release [123]. Dr. Wingate Lambertson at a conference in 1994 in Denver, Colorado reported similar levels of power gain from a circuit including a discharge tube and a device formed as a specially-fabricated thyristor [121]. Recently reported Canadian research in 1995 by Dr. Paulo Correa and Alexandra Correa [116, 117, 118] has established a sustained excess power generation of 500 J per pulse in a cold-cathode discharge confined to an abnormal glow region, with a prospective 40 megawatt-hour electrode lifetime. The Correa technology delivers electrical d.c. output steadily at several hundred volts and a power gain that is also of the order of 5:1 over d.c. input at similar voltage level. The Correa technology will undoubtedly lead us forward on the quest to exploit energy sourced in the aether, especially as it is already well-patented in the USA. In the Correa apparatus successive pulses developed the 500 J in an abnormal glow discharge which is trapped between electrodes, close to the cathode, and probably confined to a volume of a fraction of 1 cc, which also corresponds to 109 J/m3 of energy density. Several other reports of excess energy production are now of record in the scientific and patent literature and one needs, therefore, to be prepared for the aether to reappear into our scientific philosophy, as being the only source that can supply that excess energy. Indeed it is appropriate to refer here to the excellent book The Secret of the Creative Vacuum by John Davidson [119]. This book had the sub-title 'Man and the Energy Dance' and, as readers might guess, it was this that inspired my choice of The Creative Vacuum as the title heading for Part 1 of this work. I refer readers to the chapter in Davidson's book which discusses 'Free Energy and the Real Space Age' and the correspondence between Thomas Townsend Brown and Rolf Schaffranke concerning apparatus involving a dome-shaped aluminium canopy which was part of an electrode structure (see pp. 194-195 in Davidson's book). Upon setting up a radial electric field inside that canopy it was found that the apparatus could lift itself into the air together with an attached load. Furthermore the apparatus was later shown to perform this lifting operation when tested within a high vacuum. Evidently, the reason for this breach of accepted scientific doctrine was not understood by the experimenters involved in those tests, but I see this as a manifestation of the vacuum spin action mentioned above. It taps energy from space to build a kind of aether whirlwind inside the canopy and the electric pressure set up inside that canopy by the energy in spin pushes obliquely against the underside of the canopy to drive it upwards. It becomes a material object powered against the gravity field by a thrust developed against the aether in spin and most of the energy in that spin is drawn from the free energy environment of enveloping space. How can it be that the scientific community of the world can stand aloof and pay no attention to such experimental anomalies which are only rarely discovered but which have such enormous implications for the future of mankind? How can it be that books such as that written by John Davidson have no direct impact on that scientific community by causing a redirection of research funding to probe the reported anomalies in a serious way?
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (3 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
When the consequences of these developments and onward research on this new energy theme become generally known and accepted, the aether will eventually reclaim its rightful place in physical science and then acquire a stature which will dwarf its early role in history. Meanwhile, we need to be a little patient and watch events as the interest grows and conferences on the subject, as well as new journals devoted to these matters, escalate in numbers. In the light of these findings, I am bound to submit that science has lost its methodology. Technology has needed science to point the way forward towards new sources of energy that are non-polluting, but science has faltered. Sensible methodology would have been tolerant of retention of the aether as the foundation on which to build the material world. Even though it is academically interesting to see how far we can go without using a word meaning the 'aether', it was not at all wise for science to reject the concept totally and without reservation. Now, in the present circumstances, too many of the scientists who build their hopes on physical theory are committed to the denial that there is a universal timing mechanism governing everything. They deny the possibility that energy can be delivered to us by an aether, which, if recognized at all, is deemed wholly passive in its role. As a result, instead of leading our thought processes and guiding us forward into a new technological era, building on knowledge of the aether, the scientific philosophers of today have crippled the mental agility of younger generations and made progress so much more difficult. For my part, in writing this text, my main objective is to draw attention to the papers I have written in connection with aether theory. I say there is an aether and I use it throughout my research to explain much in physics that has otherwise remained unexplained. I have been obstructed in my efforts by the prejudice of orthodox belief and have had many more papers rejected than have been accepted, especially in my earlier years of endeavour, from 1955 to 1975. The future ahead now rests, not with reason and philosophy, but with the forces of new technology, because pursuit of reason and logic is claimed as the exclusive province of those who insist on inventing descriptive language alien to Nature's own method of revelation. In physical science we are now destined to witness a slow reformation as technology leads the field and those amongst us who are wise enough to seek recovery of lost ground will hopefully do so by paying more respect to those who have pioneered a belief and not a disbelief in the aether. We need to pay homage to the memory of Ren Descartes and, again quoting the words of philosopher Alfred North Whitehead, words he used by reference to Albert Einstein: "The worst homage we can pay to genius is to accept uncritically formulations of truths which we owe to it."
In my book Modern Aether Science [110] published in 1972, I have developed my theory on the basis of Descartes' work, but as further advanced by that early-20th-century French astronomer, Alexandre Veronnet [123]. He quantized the aether particle motion in units of the Bohr magneton and partly anticipated what I was later to discover from my research as an analogy between aether and the ferromagnetic state. I go much further, however, even including the domain aspect of ferromagnetism. I came to picture each individual star nucleating within its own space domain as gravity appeared, akin to ferromagnetism appearing when a crystal inside iron cools through the Curie temperature. I came to picture each such star moving, in a sense driven by forces somewhat similar to those just suggested in connection with the anti-gravity aluminium canopy experiments, so
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (4 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
as to transit into other space domains at intervals of 100,000 years or so. Imagine Earth, carried along by the solar system, at the known cosmic speed of the order of some 400 km/s, moving through a domain boundary region. For about one minute the Earth would sit astride the boundary. If there is a polarity reversal of electric charge as between the two adjacent space domains, where antiprotons replace protons and positrons replace electrons, is it any wonder then that the Earth's magnetic field reverses in such events? Is it any wonder that gravity forces might become antigravity forces as between matter astride those two domains, for that brief period, to cause earthquakes on an unimaginable scale, sufficient to destroy whole species of life? May it not be, if we wish to worry about our future destruction, that we have a choice for our thoughts as between (a) our own self destruction by nuclear weapons and the like or (b) the random event of a comet or asteroid crashing into Earth or (c) the inevitable and possibly predictable event when our Earth next crosses a space domain boundary? Might it not be that the day will come when some potential survivors will need to climb into space vehicles propelled by future antigravity technology? They will board as we approach that space domain boundary so as to go through it ahead of the Earth but make the transit in a fraction of a millisecond, eventually returning to Earth only after the dust has settled. Believe it or not, our physics, when revised to take account of what is disclosed in the Aether Science Papers of this work, allows us to estimate the timing of the next space domain boundary transit, once we can be sure about the timing of the last one. Indeed, I have detailed the evidence for this quite extensively in chapter 16 of my 1972 book Modern Aether Science and in chapter 8 of my 1980 book Physics Unified and can hardly say more. All I can say is that the predictive power of my theory, as evidenced by the papers appended, seems now to be so far beyond dispute that the implied space domain structure cannot be cast aside as mere hypothesis. The planar boundaries are absolutely essential to assure the restoring force rate as universally applicable to displaced aether charge [34]. Those boundaries must exist and the pattern of geomagnetic reversal and catastrophic events over a range of cosmic time, when taken together with the speed measurements connected with anisotropy of cosmic background radiation, provide the data allowing us to chart our passage through the space domain boundaries. I will here remind the reader of my early comments concerning the 'Big Bang'. There are two papers in the appended bibliography which warrant special attention by the 'Big Bang' enthusiast. There was, of course, no 'Big Bang'. To escape from that dilemma one needs first to understand how the aether attenuates electromagnetic waves without suffering dispersion. The secret here is the same as that which explains gravity. It is 'dynamic balance'. The aether has a dual displacement feature, whereas Maxwell allowed unbalanced lateral displacements which meant that waves travelled without exhibiting lateral inertia. The formal analysis of this is in reference [26]. To complete the story one needs to explain the Hubble constant without appealing to the expanding universe hypothesis and I did that in my paper reference [42]. See also the special note on page 10 which refers to that paper. Unquestionably, we inhabit a universe that is 'steady-state' apart from its bubbling equilibrium. It is as if we were minute observers sitting inside a solid piece of iron, experiencing the thermal agitation whilst being firmly rooted inside that iron, but subject to drifting as we share the Earth's motion, just as if we were part of magnetic domain migrating through a crystal. Eventually, though we may suffer the `heat death' or something similar if gravity is switched off, and lose the attractive power of magnetism as that iron goes through its Curie temperature, the iron (as well as the aether) will still be obedient to a physical system that does not need the notion of an èxpanding universe' or 'dilating time'.
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (5 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
As I revise this section of text, I happen to have just read an article at page 20 of the April 1996 issue of 'Physics World'. It tells us that researchers are seeing more and more evidence of 'proton radioactivity'. Atomic nuclei are shedding protons! The first such discovery is said to date from 1970, but, as the article explains, "Theorists predicted proton radioactivity long before it was observed by experiment for the first time in 1970." Atomic nuclei are known to decay by shedding particles, particles and neutrons and atomic nuclei are said to comprise protons and neutrons, but not beta particles, otherwise known as electrons and positrons. What do you, the reader, believe? Before you reached your conclusion did you ask the 'obvious' question? How do physicists really know that there are neutrons inside an atomic nucleus and not just protons and electrons? Have they ever `seen' a neutron inside the nucleus or are they simply guessing that, because neutrons àppear' as a decay 'product', those neutrons were not 'produced' but had always existed inside the parent nucleus? If so, how is it that protons are durable, whereas neutrons decay with a mean lifetime of about one quarter of an hour? Maybe you have accepted what you were told and can see no reason for doubt. So, now you are being told that 'proton radioactivity' has been discovered, even for atoms with an atomic number greater than Z=82, a so-called 'magic number'. Might that not suggest that the atomic nucleus can shed protons and negative beta particles in a highly energetic paired relationship and we have studied this as an unstable neutral entity and given it the name 'neutron'? In 1929 there was a book published by Cambridge University Press under the title 'The Universe Around Us'. Its author was Sir James Jeans. On page 144 one can read the words 'the most abundant isotope of mercury, of atomic number 80 and atomic weight 200.016, is built up of 200 protons, 120 nuclear electrons and 80 orbital electrons'. I can see no reason to doubt this, it being well-accepted in 1929. How could it be that the phenomenon of the neutron as something observed outside an atomic nucleus could change opinion as to what was inside that nucleus? One curious reason I have been given dates back to the middle of the 19th century. It appears that the Reverend Samuel Earnshaw formulated a theory about the aether. He proved mathematically that charges of opposite polarity could not form collectively into a stable combination with each held in position solely by mutual electric field action. I was told that this destroyed any claim that there could be particles composed of protons and electrons closely bound together. Yet Earnshaw's theorem, though unknown to most physicists, was fully explained in the fifth edition of the book The Mathematical Theory of Electricity and Magnetism, also published by Cambridge University Press and also written by Sir James Jeans. Now, I wonder, why would Sir James Jeans be declaring in 1929 that there are protons and electrons in a stable atomic nucleus, if a theorem with which he was very familiar denied the possibility? The simple truth is that so many physicists today are ignorant on matters of such fundamental importance. Even Earnshaw's theorem, ostensibly rigorous mathematically, is flawed. It declares that: "A charged body placed in an electric field of force cannot rest in stable equilibrium under the influence of the electric force alone."
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (6 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47
In fact, it can, because if a multitude of electric particles, all identical and all of the same polarity, are spinkled into a uniform sea of electric charge of uniform charge density and opposite polarity, then the mutual repulsion of those particles will cause them to take up lattice sites in an array, each such particle being located at a stable position. What Earnshaw and Jeans did not bargain for was that continuum of charge as an enivironmental background. They assumed as their premise that there was nothing in the space between the particles! Yet, in the aether, there is no empty space. It is a plenum! Jeans did say in his notes on Earnshaw's theorem that "if a molecule is to be regarded as a cluster of electrons and positive charges, then the law of force must be somewhat different from that of the inverse square." He was wrong on this, given that we have an aether that fills all space. I have raised this subject here for two reasons. You will understand one reason when you examine the first of the fourteen papers, where I discuss the constitution of the deuteron and also that of the neutron. Secondly, however, in following my interest in energy generation, I have become attentive to the claims made for what has come to be known as 'cold fusion'. The scientific community went beserk upon hearing in 1989 the claims made by Professor Martin Fleischmann and Professor Stanley Pons that there was evidence of excess heat generation from experiments in which a palladium cathode was immersed in heavy water. The absence of neutron production was seen as clear evidence that no nuclear transmutation could possibly have occurred. Where is that scientific spirit which yearns to learn something new? How is it that physicists always see the world in black and white and are ready to 'black' what shines through as appearing 'white', without being tolerant of alternative opinion? They banished the electron from the atomic nucleus and substituted the neutron. That was their doing and not an act of Nature. In science there is always the need to be critical as, so often, revision of one's ideas and formulations is necessary, but, progressively, so long as we keep the main uncertainties in science as our target, we will solve all problems. The need for the phase-lock on a universal scale has been my main target, because it brings together magnetism, gravitation and the quantum connection as encapsulated in the fine-structure constant and from that flows the photon and the problem of duality with electromagnetic wave theory. I leave it to my papers, as listed in the bibliography, to tell their own story and to prove that many of the secrets of the aether are now exposed.
file:///C|/mp3/a/2632.htm (7 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:47

UNIFICATION - THE TIME FACTOR

Physicists versed in the theory of relativity use the expression 'proper time' to refer to what they see as the time rate in their own moving frames of reference. In relativity, time is something that moves ever onwards at different rates according to the perceptions of different observers having different states of uniform motion. By implication there is what we may term 'improper time' which one could say is that prevailing on a universal scale if we were to hold on to our intuitive sense of time as once accepted and relied upon by most scientists including Sir Isaac Newton. Now, there is no scope for unifying anything in physical theory unless one has common ground on which to build and the question of 'time' is intimately involved in the actions of gravitation and electromagnetism because these are both dynamic in nature. The equality of inertial and gravitational mass is not something to be described as a 'principle'. If we do that we need to ask "Whose principle?" You reply: "Einstein, it is his 'Principle of Equivalence'!" Well, really, are we supposed to believe that we experience gravitation because we are being accelerated in an expanding universe? If so, then that acceleration has to be at a different rate for different observers wherever they are in the universe, just as our 'proper time' has to be peculiar to each of us as individuals. Is it not better to examine the cause of that equivalence and see gravitation as evidencing the dynamic connection between two mass systems in a state of balance, one being the normal matter form and one being a `ghost-like' something that belongs to the aether but is the gravity-producing agency? The proposition advanced here by the author is that the mass property of an element of matter as such is seated in its electric charge and that such charge is obliged by an 'aetherial' influence to conform to a jitter motion which puts it out-of-balance dynamically. That 'aetherial' ghost world, which we cannot see and which we only barely detect in its quantum interplay with matter, contrives to provide what we here term 'gravitons' which collectively have a local mass equal to that of matter present and which move in dynamic juxtaposition with the jitter so as to provide a balance. The electromagnetic reference frame is that in which the charge is seen to be at rest as far as the jitter motion is concerned, but yet there is always motion in the inertial frame. This essentially is the causal basis of the phenomenon underlying Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty. So, you see, we can dispose of both Einstein's Principle of Equivalence and Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty by the simple analogy of a school child on a see-saw. The child goes up and down and one can never be sure
file:///C|/mp3/a/3335.htm (1 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:47
exactly how far that child is above the ground, but we know that the body mass must be balanced by something on the other side of that see-saw. We may not believe in ghosts, but that something is not another child! It is an apparition in the aether, a reaction to the presence of that child's action. The gravitons are created as needed. They are what may be termed 'virtual leptons' and, as already implied on page 11, one can show that tau particles play a role here. But they exist in measure related to the inertial mass and they share a synchronized motion in the electromagnetic reference frame solely associated with the jitter that we know features in quantum mechanics. Such effects therefore bring together quantum physics, gravitation and electrodynamics in a very direct way, but the action demands the dynamic balance of a quantum jitter motion, a feature which somehow, quite incredibly, eludes Einstein's theory. The seat of that jitter and the dynamic reaction has to involve energy and action in something that exists in an environmental association with matter but is physically distinct and so we need that aetherial medium. Here again we are reminded that Einstein deliberately chose to reject the need for an aether and thereby failed to grasp its dynamic reality. In that he paid the heavy price of having to wander in a philosophical wilderness searching for his unified field theory. He was searching for a connection between the electrical and gravitational mass properties of matter after actually discarding the missing link, the aether itself. Einstein came close at one point during the early years of wave mechanics to seeing the connection with the Heisenberg jitter activity but he lacked the foresight to interpret his mathematics as representing a real aether and so missed seeing the need for dynamic balance. The acceptance of a coordinated state of jitter motion, which could not occur unless there is an instantaneous action-at-a-distance in the Coulomb sense, is essential to the understanding of the causal factors governing gravitation. It is this that gives the charges their rest mode in the electromagnetic frame, notwithstanding the jitter motion in the inertial frame. This leaves the electrodynamic action of the gravitons as the only related action subject to retardation effects, owing to propagation delays, but even here, exceptionally in the gravitational context, since the gravitons are in synchronized motion owing to their dynamic interaction with the charged matter, even the gravitational force is not subjected to retardation so far as it applies between charged matter at rest in the electromagnetic reference frame. In essence, therefore, this summary account is the basis of the unified field theory offered here by the author. It requires the existence of the energy-active aetherial medium which is our 'Creative Vacuum'. It further requires that this medium, so far as it is coextensive with the range of gravitational action, is, in effect, a universal clock keeping everything in harmonious synchrony so as to share the same jitter frequency. This universal clock keeps what, in Einstein terminology, might be said to be 'improper time'. In order then to explain why experiment suggests that atoms moving through the electromagnetic frame adapt to what is termed their 'proper time' we need to apply the above teachings to a free atom in motion through the electromagnetic reference frame. Note that the connection between electrodynamic interaction and gravitational interaction requires that the electrodynamic force acting between gravitons is directed along the line joining them. The gravity force between matter is, in fact, not a force set up directly between the charges in that matter
file:///C|/mp3/a/3335.htm (2 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:47
but rather a force on their 'field', meaning the closely-associated gravitons. There is no use of the Lorentz force formulation in this analysis because the Lorentz force law is not sufficiently fundamental. As is shown in the papers referenced in this work, we can derive that law as a version of a generic formulation for restricted use in electric circuit theory, but a more fundamental generic force law is needed to explain gravitation. See particularly reference [1]. Fortunately, there is a way of proving this, but first take note that we are to adopt the position that, for gravitons in motion in the electromagnetic reference frame but holding their relative positions unchanged, their electrodynamic interaction force is of the inverse-square of distance form and acts directly between the gravitons. An analogous condition electrodynamically is found in the case of a hydrogen atom in translational motion at speed u through the electromagnetic reference frame. It follows, therefore, that experimental tests on the spectral displacement of radiation from such an atom as a function of speed should confirm the hypothesis about this aspect of the electrodynamic force law. Note here that Einstein's theory dodges the issue by always looking at the problem as if u is zero, and by translating the form of the problem on the assumption that there has been some kind of physical transformation, even one involving time passing at a different rate. This is where the `proper' time versus ìmproper' time aspect is introduced. Unfortunately, for those who adhere to Einstein's principles, those transformations between frames of reference, when applied to the aether itself, actually smear vacuum charge as such, meaning the charge that sustains Maxwell's displacement currents and participates in the quantum jitter motion. They make those currents appear as a series of continuous current filaments. This treats the vacuum medium as having the closed circuit properties which suit the Lorentz version of the electrodynamic force law. The problem treated by the Einstein technique then becomes a distortion of the truth. It is essential, therefore, to stay with the problem of the atom in motion at a translational velocity u and accept the complications of having to factor the actual electrodynamic action into the analysis, whilst working in the universal 'improper' time frame. The basic physics of the Bohr hydrogen atom suffice for this exercise but there is something new here that will surprise physicists. It will be presented below in the precise form of a paper submitted to Physics Letters. The letter of rejection is reproduced immediately following the paper, to show the reader the cursory editorial treatment administered. Then it is for the reader to judge whether the paper, which has bearing on the whole of the unified field theory discussed in this work, warrants such rejection.
file:///C|/mp3/a/3335.htm (3 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:47
file:///C|/mp3/a/3335.htm (4 of 4)25.4.2005 22:31:47

PHYSICAL REASON
As we have just seen, it is not a satisfactory argument to say that something can be explained in terms of a `principle' that emerged from Einstein's thoughts. Quoting from Professor A. M. Taylor's Imagination and the Growth of Science (John Murray, 1966), this being the published version of the Tallman Lectures 1964-5 which he delivered at Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Maine, U.S.A.: "Einstein, as a schoolboy of sixteen, was struck by the electrodynamic paradox, and for ten years he puzzled over it."
The paradox concerned the breach of Newton's third law: that action and reaction must always be equal and opposite. The action of a moving magnet on a stationary electric charge appeared to be different from the action of a moving electric charge on a stationary magnet. This is contrary to Newton's third law. Hence the paradox. So, as Professor Taylor stated: "Einstein postulated that the phenomena of electromagnetism, as well as those of mechanics, possess no properties corresponding to the idea of absolute rest; from which it followed that the action of a moving magnet on a stationary electric charge is equal and opposite to the action of a moving electric charge on a stationary magnet. There is in fact no meaning in the words stationary and moving; one ought to say rather that action between a magnet and an electric charge depends only on their relative motion."
So we are told that, based on the experimental findings of the 19th century, certain conclusions were reached about how electric charges and magnets interact. These conclusions were 'paradoxical' and young Einstein worried about it for ten years from the age of sixteen and finally concluded that when we say a magnet is moving it is not really moving and when we say it is at rest it is not really at rest. He told us that we must look at the problem in just such a way as to avoid the paradox by, as it were, putting on special spectacles. These allowed us to see the situation from either perspective, that of the electric charge and that of the magnet and we could rely on the prescription of those spectacles to
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (1 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
contrive to make sense of the paradoxical situation. Now, to me, this is not physics, but illusion. No 19th century physicist would ever say something is at rest or in motion without admitting a frame of reference. The question really at issue, so far as electricity and magnetism are concerned, is simply that of whether one needs to adopt, as that frame of reference, the aether through which body Earth moves in its motion with and around the sun. Whether or not there is a real aether filling all space is not something to be determined by Einstein pondering on the matter for ten years. The empirical properties of interacting electric charges and magnets are the facts from which to decipher the properties of the aether, because the aether is the 'unknown' parameter in the physical equations which apply. One can be sure that, if there is a paradox, it is not because Nature has a problem, but rather because some human intervention has led us astray in interpreting the evidence. Surely the so-called electrodynamic paradox is not to be regarded as the consequence of something akin to Fermat's Last Theorem, where we found a problem to think about but could find no immediate solution. Indeed, on the basis of the Einstein philosophy, Fermat's Last Theorem can be proved by virtue of a postulate that says the problem has no meaning and therefore can have no solution. To say there is no aether on the basis of the problems encountered by the Michelson-Morley experiment is a statement that the person reaching that conclusion has decided that the aether is like a single sheet of graph paper providing a fixed frame of reference on which one can plot the motion of all light waves whatever their source. The paradox posed by that experiment can then be dismissed by declaring, not that there is no aether, but that the analogy with the graph paper is incorrect. The only open question is that of determining the true nature of the aether and this author is not at all disposed to accepting that Einstein's thoughts have rendered that problem meaningless. We will therefore now target Einstein's interpretation of 'time dilation' for attack, to see how it can stand up to scrutiny on the basis of experimental facts. Suppose I am at rest on body Earth and I am looking at an atom moving in uniform translational motion, relative to me and past my field of view at a speed u. The atom is subjected to excitation and radiates photons of a certain frequency which I measure and take as the timing of an atomic clock. Apart from any doppler effects, Einstein's theory tells me that that clock runs slower, so far as I can judge, owing to that motion at speed u. In other words, if I could jump into the atom and share its motion, so that I would then see the atom as at rest from my new perspective, it would beat to a faster time rhythm, even though there is no variation of clock rate as viewed from that Earth-based observation position. Well, this is a very curious clock because it seems able to send its time signals to Earth and somehow lose a few on the way! That is a paradox in itself, but those who advocate this philosophy approach the problem differently, by saying that the clock loses 'time', the faster it travels. They will even tell you that it has all been proved by transporting atomic clocks in jet aircraft and comparing their time with clocks on the ground. Those statements do not stand up to scrutiny, however, because we are concerned with nonfile:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (2 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
accelerated motion and any clock transported by an aircraft is subjected to acceleration. So the experiment to take note of is the one in which atoms radiating photons are transported in a laboratory experiment at very high speed across one's field of view, the atoms being part of a discharge through an evacuated tube. Einstein's theory does not explain how an atomic clock works. It is Bohr's theory of the hydrogen atom that provides the basic insight into how the atomic clock has a time rate. The photons emitted have a frequency determined by the energy released as its electrons change state. Now, when we first learn about Bohr's theory, we are concerned with atoms which we see as being at rest. This means that the only significant forces acting between the atomic nucleus and the electrons are the electrostatic forces and the only significant energy involved is the related electric potential energy plus the kinetic energy of the electrons. The theory assures us that the electron suddenly drops from its excited state to one of lower potential and spontaneously there is emission of a photon having a very well defined frequency proportional to that energy. The timing of the clock must therefore be a function of how fast the energy can be wrapped up, as it were, in a quantum package and receive its 'stamp' of value, its frequency characteristic, before being dispatched at the speed of light. Neither Einstein nor Bohr were concerned with this exercise in logistics. It is like an artillery officer giving the order 'fire' and taking it for granted that his men have loaded the gun. That officer needs to know that the logistics are in place to assure that the shells of the right calibre are in position. Regarding the atom as such a gun, the photon energy to be shed is dispersed through space in the field enveloping the atom, but somehow the act comes together as if everything is instantaneous and the energy is duly dispatched by virtue of rules which we accept as being simply the facts of quantum theory. In a real world, someone needs to express an opinion on that logistics exercise and the opinion I offer is a simple one, namely that the interaction energy adjustments in what is termed the 'Coulomb gauge' do occur with an action that is virtually instantaneous. If Einstein's followers say otherwise, then let them explain the logistics, as otherwise all they are firing from that 'gun' are a few words and mathematical symbols, but not energy. Accepting the proposition of 'instantaneousness', the question then of interest is that of understanding what happens if the atom is moving at that speed u when it sheds the photon. In theory this should introduce electrodynamic forces as between the charged atomic nucleus and the electrons and it should introduce electrodynamic field energy considerations, which are not subject to the instantaneous action but are affected by retardation at the speed of light. Even before we embark on the task of accounting for the effects of motion of the atom, we know, therefore, that we can be sure that the photon package will not be able to capture that electrodynamic energy fast enough to define sharp spectral lines. The clock frequency, however, must be affected by that motion but we confront a mystery in how to factor the electrodynamic effects into the analysis of the problem. Einstein's theory gives an easy answer by saying that the atom itself is not moving anyway, so it emits the photons with the same timing that applies for the atom when presumed to be at rest. There
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (3 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
are no electrodynamic problems to consider. The physical processes involved are pushed aside as if they do not exist. Instead, one takes the clock frequency and simply declares that `time' itself is transformed as the photons are viewed by an outsider watching the atom move across his field of view. Now, I am not willing to accept that argument. It seems to me that, bearing in mind the photon is emitted spontaneously when the atom is 'at rest', it must be emitted spontaneously when the atom is 'moving' at speed u. This means that the electrodynamic energy component cannot contribute to the photon energy, but note, however, that the electromagnetic forces which determine the separation distance between the electrons and the nucleus do affect the electrostatic and related kinetic energies which do, in turn, govern the energy released and so the photon frequency. I expect, therefore, to be able to deduce the effect of motion on the atomic clock rate and the key question is how this compares with the result indicated by Einstein's theory and how both stand up to test against what is observed by experiment. Note that we are here facing the simple issue of whether atomic clock motion supports so-called `time dilation' or whether we are dealing with the loss of clock rate owing to physical reasons connected with the electrodynamics of the moving atom. At this stage I ask the reader to have the good sense to understand that, before one can say an atomic clock when in motion runs slow, solely because Einstein said time itself `dilates', one should at least examine how the physics of the Bohr atom are affected by motion. I admit that I find it outrageous and beyond belief to see physics taught as if everything stems from Einstein's way of looking at the world when our textbooks do not even explore the normal physics of the problem. This is all the more concerning when one sees that the alternative very logical physics treatment gives an atomic clock rate as a function of speed of the atom that is in full accord with experiment. More to the point, the physics involved provides answers helpful in resolving the problems of the Unified Field Theory, which defeated Einstein! The formal paper already mentioned will now be presented, followed by the text of the referee rejection. The expression will be used to represent (1-u2/c2)1/2. The reader's knowledge of the binomial theorem will be needed to compare the expansion of this expression as: 1 - (1/2)(u/c)2 - (1/8)(u/c)4 - ... with the difference of two energy expressions, one concerning electric energy potential and one concerning kinetic energy, being 22 and 5, respectively. These are therefore: 2 - 3(u/c)2 + (3/4)(u/c)4 .... and: 1 - (5/2)(u/c)2 + (15/8)(u/c)4 ..... which differ by: 1 - (1/2)(u/c)2 - (9/8)(u/c)4 ...
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (4 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
It follows that, for small values of u/c, the expression is the same as that for (23 - 5), except for a term of the order (u/c)4. I am going to base my case on the fact that the time dilation formula as used by Einstein has not been tested to this level of accuracy by atomic clock experiments. For the benefit of readers who understand the theory of relativity, I point out also that the fact that fast moving cosmic mesons exhibit a longer life in proportion to 1/ has nothing to do with 'time dilation' and all to do with the enhancement of energy with speed. The added kinetic energy materializes as a statistical presence of mesonic particle pairs of opposite polarity and this adds mesons which can act in an 'understudy' capacity if the primary meson is hit by a decay influence. The decaying meson merely replaces one that is part of the pair-creation and annihilation system. This causes the mean lifetime of the meson, as measured, to be increased approximately in proportion to 1/. For a detailed account of this process see particularly reference [32], but also reference [33] for onward experimental confirmation. We are here concerned, not with muons which have a decay lifetime, but with electrons which exhibit no such lifetime, except as part of their ability to tunnel through potential barriers, as they decay only to be promptly reincarnated in the same form in the near vicinity of their demise [38]. In criticizing Einstein's theory of relativity, I have no intention to allow its advocates to squirm out of the argument by trying to sidetrack from the main issue by appealing to other evidence about some other aspect of the theory. The immediate task at hand is the problem of the atomic clock and its relevance to the electrodynamic interaction between two discrete charges sharing a common component of motion at speed u. Einstein said that the clock would run slow as seen by an observer witnessing that motion. I say that it will operate at a lower frequency because of those electrodynamic forces and that its frequency will not be the same as that derived using Einstein's time dilation formula. I further say that I am making this a point of issue because the correct understanding of the true nature of the law of electrodynamics is going to bring us to the point of success in unifying the gravitational and electromagnetic force. We shall see that the electrodynamic force between two charges moving together at the same velocity is a force acting directly along the line drawn between the two charges and not one of the form prescribed by Lorentz or Einstein. Next we come to the rejected paper in question, as submitted to Physics Letters. Note that the references in the paper are identified by a number sequence applicable only to the paper and do not relate to the main bibliography of this work.
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (5 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48
file:///C|/mp3/a/3640.htm (6 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:48

ATOMIC SPECTRA AND THE MOVING ATOM

Energy deployed in electrodynamic interactions is physically separate from the electric field and cannot be recovered fast enough to affect photon emission. An atom moving at speed u then has a spectral redshift proportional to 22-3, where is (1-u2/c2)1/2, identical to relativistic time dilation, apart from minor differences of order (u/c)4, but the latter put the relativistic interpretation in doubt.
The Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation based on a study by their Electronics and Surveillance Research Laboratory has recently issued a report [1*] which urges an aether-based treatment of space and time measurement. That report does not, however, contribute any new insight into the physical processes which regulate the time keeping of the atomic clock in motion through space. It assumes that clocks are slowed by the factor of (1-u2/c2)1/2 and that the momentum of a particle of mass m takes the form mu/, where u is the velocity of the clock in the aether frame. The argument then develops from these assumptions using non-relativistic doctrine. However, in the debate between relativity and aether, the fundamental question concerning the timekeeping of an atomic clock is not the issue of whether time itself is speed-dependent, since 'time' has no feature which can be said to have a speed, but the effect of motion on the clock 'mechanism'. In the case of the atomic clock the issue is whether the electrodynamic interaction between the nucleus and the electrons in an atom is dependent upon the translational motion of the atom at that speed u relative to the aether or the observer at rest. There is the equally important question concerning how energy deployed in the field surrounding the atom can be collected in a package fast enough to be shed as a photon, which is the signature of the action we see as defining frequency and which we interpret as time. Note that a photon emitted by an atom changing between specific energy states can hardly be something that waits for the atom to recover its field energy and then stores the energy about to be released until it has all been collected and packaged for emission. That would need another secondary theory to determine the delay time, the storage mechanism and the nature of the ultimate trigger permitting its release. This confronts us with an impossible task, bearing in mind that the deployment of the atom's field energy in its ground state is spread over an indefinite range and supposedly affected by field retardation in the everchanging positions of the atomic electrons. The answer to the first question is that we do not know from our laboratory experiments on charge
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (1 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
interactions how two discrete electric charges in motion relative to the laboratory frame interact in force terms, because all our experiments smear at least one of those motions into a circuital current form. As to the second question, the easiest answer, and the only logical answer for a physicist impressed by the sharpness of frequency of spectral lines, is to say that the motion-related distributed field energy just cannot be redeployed fast enough to affect the emitted photon. The energy component attributable to the electrodynamic interaction is not part of the photon emission. It must be energy that is lost by adding entropy to the field environment, the so-called 'zero-point field', but energy which no doubt can somehow be regenerated, repackaged and shed back to matter-form as part of a process of thermal equilibrium prevailing in atomic matter at a steady mean temperature. There are many researchers who are now looking to the aether as a way forward in explaining certain energy anomalies that are creeping into their experiments and this makes the issue raised by Edgar [1*] topical. The reason is that it seems that energy can become divorced from a specific atomic connection and stored in the aether pending gradual recovery from a quantum-electrodynamic field coupling between atomic electrons and the aether, and in this one sees a link with the problem of the atomic clock. The object here is to show that the above answer to the second question, when taken in conjunction with the facts of experiment concerning the atomic clock, can lead us towards an answer to the first question. It shows us how to avoid the problem of that 'smearing' action by verifying that the component electrodynamic force action between two charges as attributable to their translational motion at a common velocity u is, contrary to the Lorentz force law, at all times the same and is directed along a line drawn between the two charges. In atomic theory one of the primary inconsistencies is the notion of a quantized unit of angular momentum, having regard to the fact that mass can vary as a function of . We find that electric charge is quantized and this would suggest quantization of magnetic moment rather than angular momentum. To bring reconciliation the logical step is to realise that the mass added by motion is seated in the materialization of a kind of 'ghost' particle system. This is that of the fleeting and transient statistical presence of pairs of oppositely charged leptons which can be said to have massenergy accounting for the kinetic energy of the source charge. Separate from the kinetic energy of the individual charges, the electrodynamic action between charges in motion then becomes a collective action seated in a local reference frame defined by that 'ghost' world. It involves field energy which one could say is 'mutual kinetic energy' but which, unlike the kinetic energy of a discrete charge, cannot itself contribute to mass, because it has no overall motion relative to the governing frame and so cannot augment the lepton population. The Bohr theory of the atom affords the easiest presentation by which to bring these factors into perspective in determining how the translational motion of an atom might affect its spectral emission. The Bohr theory assumes a conserved angular momentum for the atomic electrons when there is no spectral emission or event affecting the energy state of the electron. In Newtonian mechanics a conserved angular momentum is the consequence of a centrally-directed force and energy conservation. It makes sense therefore to regard the atom as conforming with both the Bohr and Newtonian conditions between such events and to assume that the regulating quantization of charge velocity moment occurs as a kind of reset action at times of energy transition. Implicit in this is the
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (2 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
underlying requirement of that centrally-directed force, by which any electrodynamic action between the atomic nucleus and an electron must act along the line joining those particles, as does the force of gravity. If these assumptions are correct, then we should be able to derive a satisfactory explanation for the observed electrodynamic redshift of the spectrum of the moving atom without making assumptions about time dilation. The magnetic field energy associated with the electrodynamic force cannot be recovered from the surrounding field fast enough to contribute to the frequency characteristic of an emitted photon. However, the related electrodynamic force action does prevail in the periods between such emission. The radius of the orbital component of electron motion in the atom is affected by that and so depends on the translational motion of the atom, with a consequent modification of the Coulomb interaction energy as between nucleus and electron. As is well known from the Bohr theory of the atom, the energy shed in emitting a photon is determined as the change of the Coulomb interaction energy as offset by half this amount owing to the corresponding change of the kinetic energy of the electron. If, however, the electrodynamic interaction causes the Coulomb attraction to be offset by a factor (u/c)2, then the force which determines the orbital radius of electron motion changes in proportion to 2. The result of this is to adjust the energy state governing the photon to relate to the Coulomb interaction energy as offset by a factor 2/2. However, note that the Rydberg constant, as derived by Bohr theory, is proportional to (Ze2)(Ze2me), where Z is atomic number, e electron charge and me electron mass. The first Ze2 term in brackets corresponds to the energy of the charge interaction but the second such term is really the result of calculating the electron's distance from the atomic nucleus. This latter distance is changed in proportion to 2 owing to the electrodynamic forces and further in proportion to owing to the centrifugal effect of the increase in mass me with speed u. The net result of these 2-dependent modifications is to change the Rydberg term in proportion to [22](3), which is 22-5. This corresponds to a reduction of emission spectrum frequencies with increasing speed u of the atom. Now, when this is compared with the relativistic time dilation factor we find that the differences only appear in the fourth and higher order terms in (u/c). These are too small, given the flow speeds of atoms used in experimental tests for the findings to be capable of interpretation as proof of the time dilation hypothesis. Such evidence of slight discrepancy, as has been reported for the relativistic formulation, gives support for this author's proposition that aether-based electrodynamic principles offer the true explanation. Indeed, there is an underlying and compelling argument in favour of the interpretation based on the non-relativistic case, because if the u-dependence of the atom's time keeping were based on the Lorentzian formulation of eletrodynamic force, which is consistent with relativistic formulation, the 2 term introduced above would become time-dependent during the period taken for the electrons to move around their orbits and its effective mean value would be much reduced. Yet, it is the assumption that the electrodynamic force between electron and atomic nucleus is a direct interaction force along the line joining them, as required for compliance with a gravitational action, and is
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (3 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
constant for action between charges sharing a common motion component u, that results in a redshift in accordance with experimental observation. As the author has shown elsewhere, for example in reference [2*], the known empirical data governing electrodynamic action results in the relevant force law, because two interacting charges cannot develop a turning couple by their mutual interaction and because their interaction with everpresent charge activity in the background field environment can permit energy exchanges with that environment. Such energy exchanges are, in the general case, associated with out-of-balance linear force actions. The law derived by admitting such imbalance of action and reaction nevertheless assures full balance of action and reaction for the specific case where the two interacting charges have no relative motion. This is evident from reference [2*], where it is shown that, since the Neumann potential contains the total energy we associate with the electrodynamic interaction, any force component not represented by this potential must either do no work or do work in such a way that the relative velocity of the two charges is not affected. The Neumann potential component of the resulting force law has a symmetry owing to its (v.v')r form by which the force acts along the charge separation vector r. It would seem, therefore, that when such electrodynamic force action is applied to the atom there is a strong case for regarding the spectral redshift from atoms in rapid translational motion transverse to the observer's line of sight as being not an indication of relativistic time dilation but rather evidence contributing to the empirical data which determines the true law of electrodynamics. The form of law so determined is compatible with the action of gravitation and so this is a step forward in the quest to resolve the long-standing problem of unifying electrodynamics and gravitation. The so-called theory of 'field unification' may not, in the end, be a theory concerning 'fields' as such, but rather a theory in which energy and force are seen as separable from the 'field' at times when there is spontaneous release of energy quanta. The development of the theory of retardation governing actions between electric charge in relative motion and particularly the separation of the Coulomb action from the electrodynamic action has been addressed by this author in a recently published review paper [3*]. The detailed analysis and presentation in that paper are wholly consistent with the new theme presented above. Finally, it is noted that the assumption is often made that the enhanced lifetime of the mu-meson with speed is evidence of time dilation. This is not a valid assumption. As seen by an observer at rest in the lepton-pair creation frame which characterizes the applicable reference frame in electrodynamics, the mu-meson has a mass enhanced by speed and attributable to transient pair creation of mu-mesons. The chance of total decay of this mu-meson complex is reduced by the increase in the mu-meson population, the measure of chance and the overall mass incremented by speed being in inverse proportion. If mass increases in proportion to 1/, so the lifetime of a lepton subject to natural decay is proportional also to 1/, because the chance of decay has reduced in proportion to . Since we have above seen the Lorentz force law come under challenge even though it is unaffected by transformation between inertial frames and this is generally seen as its supporting feature as based on relativity, a note is added below as an Appendix to justify this challenge.
Appendix
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (4 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
If the Lorentz force formula holds in one inertial frame it will, as Edgar [1*] shows, hold in all such frames, given the assumption that momentum is conserved as between lossless colliding particles. Implicit in this, however, is the assumption concerning momentum that we are dealing in mass only and this overlooks the fact that the Lorentz force is concerned with electric charge. Conservation of angular momentum about a centre of motion is solely a consequence of motion of mass under the action of a centrally-directed force, given that energy is conserved. When two electric charges come together in a collision they are subject to mutual force action before they collide and the electrodynamic component of this action is determined by energy which is a function of the square of their relative charge velocities, v'-v. This energy together with kinetic energy and electrostatic Coulomb interaction energy is conserved and one can adduce from this that, since the energy is the same before and after collision, but there has been a redeployment, the two mathematical solutions of (v'-v)2 apply to the two respective states. In other words, the relative velocity of the two charges after impact is -1 times the relative velocity before impact. In Newtonian mechanics, which do not concern electric charge, this circumstance of lossless collisions was derived as Newton's Rule from the assumption of conservation of linear momentum. However, the physics is that of particles which are in their underlying structure nebulous entities of electric charge. By approaching the problem from the electrodynamic aspect one then sees how Newton's Rule takes priority over the momentum conservation principle and in fact we can see that momentum is conserved solely because we have an electrodynamic action between two colliding particles and no net energy transfer to or from that two-particle system in the process. In the real world, however, there are numerous systems of charge in motion and there is inevitably an ongoing exchange of energy between those systems. The physics of the notional two-body problem do not govern the electrodynamic interactions of a system of electrical charge in motion. However, from the physics applicable to electrodynamic actions between two charges if generalized to permit energy exchanges with surrounding charges, one can derive the solutions to problems in mechanics relating to force action between two bodies, each comprising a neutral cluster of many charges. The heart of the problem which besets the Lorentz force law is that it does not, in the general case, satisfy Newton's Third Law but it is accepted because it satisfies the transformation rules which suit relativistic doctrine. The electrodynamic law derived in reference [2*] gives results identical to those based on Lorentz law when applied to closed circuit interactions. Contrary to the Lorentz situation, it also gives the correct form of the law of gravity, even with the planetary perihelion refinements [4*], when applied to charge systems sharing a universal jitter motion, the causal physical basis of Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty. The 'universal' factor is one for which a component of motion shared by all charge is a common velocity u, as used in the above analysis. The electrodynamic force of mutual attraction acting directly between the charges in the atom, has a gravitational counterpart for mutual actions between atoms, but in the latter case the charges involved are those of an overallelectrically-neutral virtual charge population that keeps the dynamic balance with that common jitter motion of matter. We need, therefore, to question the current acceptance of the time dilation hypothesis by reexamining the electrodynamic interactions within the atom.
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (5 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
References
[1*] R.S. Edgar, 'Field Analysis and Potential Theory: Part 3', DSTO Report RR-0017, Australian Government Defence Science and Technology Organisation, December 1994. [2*] H. Aspden, 'A New Perspective on the Law of Electrodynamics', Physics Letters, 111A, pp. 2224 (1985). [3*] H. Aspden, 'Retardation in the Coulomb Potential', Physics Essays, 8, pp. 9-28 (1995). [4*] H. Aspden, 'Physics Unified', (1980), Chapter 2, Sabberton, P.O. Box 35, Southampton, England. In connection with the above paper the following referee statement was provided with the letter of rejection received from Physics Letters: "Manuscript Ho738: Atomic Spectra and the Moving Atom, by H. Aspden The paper is very nicely written but I do not think it is physics, more science fiction. The author is clearly very open minded about the foundations of his subject, being willing, apparently, to jettison relativity, quantum mechanics, even conventional classical electrodynamics. However, since these theories are accepted by almost everyone else, he must provide very strong arguments, which should be explicitly mathematical and include convincing detailed sample calculations, before a physics journal such as Physics Letters A should publish the ideas. I insist on the need for mathematical formulation of the ideas because it is all too easy to be carried away in a verbal phantasy which has only the lexicon of physics but none of its tight logical structure."
The accompanying letter on behalf of Physics Letters A was dated 26 September 1995 and signed by Professor P. R. Holland of the School of Interdisciplinary Sciences at the University of the West of England in Bristol. It read: "Please find enclosed the response from the referee(s) on your paper. We regret that on the basis of the referee's report your paper is not suitable for publication in Physics Letters A. We must therefore unfortunately decline it. Thank you for submitting your work to our journal."
I note that I did enclose with the submitted paper copies of the two references to my prior published papers in Physics Letters and in Physics Essays that I identified in the submitted paper. Both had that 'explicitly mathematical content' and, indeed, I deem the analytical account presented in the submitted paper as being quite explicit in a mathematical sense, especially as the logic of the few equations used in the Bohr Theory of the Hydrogen atom is so elementary and so well known. So, there you have it! Physicists are so well satisfied with their theory of relativity and its 'tight
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (6 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49
logical structure' that they would rather stay looking for their Holy Grail, their hoped-for Unified Field Theory, without listening to someone who points his finger directly at the weakness in what they adopt as their logical picture of the moving atom. They have failed to see that the electrodynamic force as between two discrete charges in motion reveals itself very clearly in the radiation spectrum emitted by a moving hydrogen atom as having a form wholly consistent with that of the force of gravity in that it acts directly along the line drawn between the two charges. Yet, when this is drawn to their attention, by inferring that the spectral redshift is the signature of an electrodynamic effect, rather than being a 'time dilation' phenomenon, they choose to regard the argument and the evidence as 'science fiction'. Can you wonder, therefore, why this author has now resorted to experimental investigation aimed at extracting energy from the aether that the learned professors of physics say is an illusion?
file:///C|/mp3/a/4147.htm (7 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:49

AN EXCURSION INTO QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS

The starting point in the whole of my research has been the subject of electrodynamics and its energy anomalies, by which I mean the experimental anomalies and not the paradoxical notions that beset the theory of the subject. I have found repeatedly, from my attempts to write about such matters, that referees of physics journals delight in pointing to the success of quantum electrodynamics in explaining the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron. They claim such precision in their calculations that is so overwhelming that surely only a fool would dare to think that, by contemplating an aether, there may be a better and easier way of going about that task. So, having discovered the easy alternative, I delved into that wonderful world of QED to see how its magic derived a theoretical value for the g/2 factor of the electron which measurement shows as being 1.001159652193(10). This is the value adopted in consultation with the CODATA Task Group in 1986 and as made available to scientists in U.K. by a pocket chart published by The Royal Society jointly with other learned bodies. The numerical value just quoted is stated to be the magnetic moment of the electron in terms of the Bohr magneton. I saw that a book entitled Introduction to Gauge Field Theory had been authored by Bailin and Love and published in 1986 under the auspices of the Institute of Physics in U.K. and that the promotion literature specifically declared that it provided 'a detailed treatment of quantum electrodynamics'. I bought that book with the express purpose of seeing exactly how those who really understand QED actually obtain the wonderfully precise number that one understands fits so well with the value measured. In a browsing mood, I first opened the book on page 214 and was pleased to see that chapter 14 began with the words: "The spectacular success of quantum electrodynamics (QED) in calculating the Lamb shift and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron and the muon ...". Yes, that statement meant that what I was looking for would be found in the earlier chapters of the book. After all, here was a book on that very subject. I found the relevant section heading on page 140: 'The electron anomalous magnetic moment'. The opening words were: "In this section, we specialise to the case of QED (Abelion gauge theory) and derive the electron anomalous magnetic moment. For convenience we shall work in the Feynman gauge..."
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (1 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
I was expecting then to see the analysis develop to the derivation of something very close to that 1.001159652193(10) number recited above, but, to my horror, the derivation ended on page 142 with the words: "Thus the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron is: ()/2)(e/2m)." Alpha, , is a fundamental constant in atomic physics, the fine-structure constant. I knew that this was only the first-order determination, /2) being the reciprocal of 2(137.036), which is 0.0011614. Evidently the 'spectacular success' was not something I could verify by guidance from that book. I was expected to accept that QED was a 'spectacular success' but it was something I had to take on trust without knowing what assumptions were made in the onward iterations of the calculation. The book was, of course, full of equations, each one following the other and so conveying the impression of being 'a tight logical structure' but when the crunch came and a numerical result should have emerged I had to be satisfied with the above first-order approximation formula. From my academic background in engineering I had always judged the result of a 'tight logical structure' on the end result, by comparing the numerical value derived with that observed as an actual experimental result. I am now going to make the outrageous statement that QED is so powerful a technique that it is like taking a power-driven sledgehammer to crack a nut or, may I say, like using the method of Professor Andrew Wiles to prove Fermat's Last Theorem. There just has to be an easier way to explain how Nature determines that anomalous magnetic moment! A back-of-an-envelope type of calculation can do better than that QED result presented in the book by Bailin and Love. All that is meant by the anomaly of the electron magnetic moment is that the antics of an electron in motion cannot bring to bear the electric energy in the far field zone fast enough to affect its inertia when in orbit having a very restricted radius. There is a cut-off range connected with the electron's Compton wavelength and only the electric field energy within that range contributes to the electron's inertia in its state of minor orbital motion. This may be an engineer's way of looking at the problem, but it is a realistic approach, just as that artillery officer I mentioned earlier would expect to be able to turn his field gun without swinging something around in far off space. If what I have said above about the moving atom and its problems in collecting energy spread over its electromagnetic field is 'phantasy', then so the world of QED is phantasy of an extreme kind, because that goes even further by involving us in the problems of photon-electron interactions and something called 'normalization' to avoid infinities but which amounts to the 'cut-off' range just mentioned. So, I sit, in my aging years, watching the world of physics evolve its 'tight logical structure' and
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (2 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
wonder if that world will ever look up my paper, reference [61] in the bibliography, ('Fundamental Constants derived from Two-Dimensional Harmonic Oscillations in an Electrically-Structured Vacuum', Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 9, 315-323 (1986). That paper shows, in a few pages, how the electron's g/2-factor, can be explained with at least the same precision that is claimed for QED. The formula is: g/2 = 1 + /[2(1+31/2/N) - ] Here, N is determined as the nearest prime number to the value 3/2. Since -1 is just a little above 137, N is 647. Table I below is reproduced from that referenced paper to show how g/2 depends upon the value of -1. -1 (g/2) factor
137.03597 1.001159652365 137.03598 1.001159652280 137.03599 1.001159652195 Table I: Relationship between the fine structure constant and the g/2-factor Now, that paper [61] was received by the publishing journal in November 1985 and at that time I, the author, was completely unaware of the prospect that the CODATA values to be adopted later in 1986 would establish 1.001159652193(10) as the g/2-factor of the electron. Nor did I imagine that the -1 value adopted would be 137.0359895(61). What must then be absolutely clear to anyone reading this is the fact that if QED is a 'spectacularly successful' theory because it provides something very close to this relationship between the finestructure constant and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, then it cannot be any closer than the value derived above using my very simple formula with N as 647. What I offer, however, is a 'back-of-the-envelope' type of analysis for deducing that formula, whereas the eighth-order calculation based on numerous, indeed thousands of, Feynman diagrams as well as arbitrary hadronic involvements, as needed to get a close QED value, is a task that could well keep the reader fully occupied for several years. That assumes the reader has very advanced skills in the relevant mathematics, skills far in excess of the school-level training which suffices to understand my method. As is well known, the electron exhibits a characteristic wave frequency, which is the Compton electron frequency c. This is the frequency of the photon corresponding to the mass-energy of an electron at rest. Now, although Einstein may have said that the idea that something can be at 'rest' is meaningless, I do not accept that. You see, it is a question of deciding whether each electron in the universe is a law unto itself so far as external governing influences are concerned, or whether it is regulated by external influence. I can assure you that that Compton electron frequency is a universal
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (3 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
regulating rhythm that beats the time and all electrons have to dance to that time. They are not free to wander, each having its own proper time, much as Einstein might have wished that to be the case! If you have read in books about 'time' that there is no such thing as 'universal time' then you have exposed yourself to a 'brainwashing' exercise conducted by devil authors who preach the Einstein doctrine but contribute nothing to the science which sustains technological progress. My method involves an energy cut-off range determined by a wave resonance in the near-field zone of the electron as shown in Fig. 1. The length of the radial lines in the outer cavity is half the Compton wavelength of the electron, because the field oscillations are phase-locked by the charge polarity condition. The length of the radial lines in the inner core of the electron charge is approximately the electron charge radius a and represents a standing wave condition of much higher frequency.
Fig. 1: Pattern of electron field cavity wave resonance Now, the electron itself is a form of energy compressed into a field and we can calculate how that energy is distributed. J. J. Thomson did that calculation in the 19th century to find that, in electrostatic units, the energy e2/2a was seated outside the charge radius a. However, he discovered from the study of how electron mass increased with speed, even tending to become infinite as the speed of light was approached, that the effective rest mass of the electron was 2e2/3ac2. This meant that, if the electron were hollow within the radius a, then we could write the energy E as being 3Mc2/4. However, even before Einstein came into the picture in 1905, the Cambridge
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (4 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
cosmologist, the James Jeans already mentioned had, in his early years before being knighted, explained that mass and energy are equivalent and had argued that matter could be annihilated to produce radiant energy. He saw this as being the energy source feeding the sun and all other stars. It is a simple exercise to work out that if the pressure of the electron field at the radius a is the same within the body of the electron, meaning that the charge e has an appropriate distribution conforming with this condition, then the speed of propagation of wave disturbances in the electron charge itself has the value c and that the electric energy inside that radius is e2/6a. So, you see, the net result is an electron of energy 2e2/3a giving a relationship between energy and mass that we can write as E=Mc2. Much of this was accepted physics before Einstein appeared on the scene and was known as 'electron theory', so it is very hard to understand how modern physicists can write that history off as if it never happened! For our immediate purpose, we have now the basis for studying the coordinated wave interaction as between that external influence at the Compton electron frequency and the wavelengths associated with that radius parameter a of the electron. Looking now at Fig. 1, ask yourself how the world outside the electron might interface with the world inside the core charge of the electron. If you think of pressure from the viewpoint of a gas then the interface is just a pressure interface and there is not much to say. However, a gas comprises numerous particles all moving in different directions. There are three degrees of freedom. However, inside that electron it may be that there are not numerous component particles behaving as a gas and moving with those three degrees of freedom. There could be an oscillation that has only one degree of freedom, amounting in its overall effect to a radial oscillation within the radius a. I emphasize here that I have no special insight into what goes on inside an electron. I can only make tentative assumptions and reason on that basis to see how what develops compares with what we see and measure in our experiments. So, I trust you are following the gist of my argument, because I am coming to the point that between the sphere of radius a and the sphere interfacing with those Compton frequency oscillations there is an adjustment at constant pressure in going from one degree of freedom to three degrees of freedom. What this amounts to is that the surface area of that intermediate interface will be three times the surface area of the inner interface. In short, the outer interface radius will be 3a, subject, however, to a little 'tuning'. Now, if this seems a little speculative, there is an alternative approach giving the equivalent result. Look again at Fig. 1 and imagine both the radial oscillations within the core charge of the electron and in the cavity excited at the Compton electron frequency as setting up standing wave antinodes needing to balance those of travelling waves progressing by reflection around a circuit within the middle cavity. You will see that the three-wave interface at the charge surface requires a 120o angular separation. The geometry of this system also requires the outer radius to be 3a. A vital consideration is that point made earlier as to what it is that tells an electron that it is a negative
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (5 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
charge or a positive charge. I do not want to dwell too long on this point so I will simply explain that it is all a question of how those the two frequency modes of oscillation beat together. Undoubtedly, as those who may study the history of aether theory may discover, the answer lies in developing the concepts of C. A. Bjerknes of the period 1877 to 1910 as already mentioned. Positive and negative are states involving oscillations in antiphase, all positive charges sharing a common phase and all negative charges sharing a common phase, but I leave that research to others. Suffice it here to say that the phase of oscillation is important. The Compton electron wavelength has to blend with the wavelength 2a, as the reader can work out from the diagram in Fig. 1. The ratio of these wavelengths has to be an odd integer that cannot be factorized as that would allow the phase of the electron oscillations to have optional values in relation to the regulating universal rhythm of the Compton frequency oscillations. All positive electron charges have the same phase and all negative electron charges have the same phase but positive and negative charges are different because they are in antiphase. This is the secret of the meaning of electrical charge polarity. It is just a question of phase, but there is phase-lock ensuring that there are no maverick charges in the electron family. There are only electrons or their positive versions, the positrons. It is on this basis that there is a constraint on the adoption of the distance parameter a as a wavelength. The wavelength c assumed by the resonant oscillation within the electron has to ensure that: c/2 = Na where N is a prime number. Now, from what has been said above, it can be seen that, since a without this constraint is given by 2e2/3hfc, hfc being the rest-mass energy of the electron and the Compton wavelength c being c/fc, we can write: a = [2e2/hc]c/3 approximately. From these two equations we find that N becomes the nearest prime integer to 3(137)/2, bearing in mind that , which is 2e2/hc, is approximately 1/137. This gives N, uniquely, as 647. The formula on page 49 is then easily explained because the field energy of the electron disposed outside the cutoff radius R is simply e2/2R and R is simply (c/2)(1+ (3)/647). Using the formula: (g/2)(mc2 - e2/2R) = mc2 where m is the normal rest mass of the electron, and also the fact that c is h/mc, it then needs a little algebra to find the residual electron energy thereby effective in confined orbital states of motion. This allows us to determine its ratio to the normal energy applicable for translational motion but one then arrives at the result presented in Table I above.
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (6 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50
file:///C|/mp3/a/4853.htm (7 of 7)25.4.2005 22:31:50

SOME CRITICAL REMARKS

Just in case, at this stage, you are asking yourself why, if what I am offering by my theory is so wonderful, the physics community has not responded in an enthusiastic way, I ought to offer you an explanation. It is because I did not sit in one of those academic compartments occupied by theoretical physicists who enjoy the benefit of state funding allocated to coordinated research within such compartmented peer groups. There is a strong reaction aimed at repelling all who try to intrude into the private territory claimed by such groups. The weapons used are silent but effective. One's original ideas are simply rejected under the cloak of referee anonymity or, if they do somehow penetrate into printed form in journals which are not deemed to be 'mainstream' they are just ignored. Indeed, papers in many nonmainstream journals are excluded from inclusion in the abstracted science literature and so avoid citation record: they are lost forever! There is one other weapon that is brandished in those rare instances where the intruder does penetrate the barriers, as by getting a point across in a Letter to the Editor which refers to the writings of those who have found favour. It is the weapon of public scorn and ridicule. Do you wish me to quote an example to support that assertion? Well, yes, I will even give you an example pertaining to that anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, my non-QED derivation of the g/2 factor. I had drawn attention to this in a Letter to the Editor as published in American Journal of Physics, v. 54, p. 1064 (1986) and, some few months later, I found the following Letter to the Editor had appeared in July 1987 in volume 55 at pp. 584-585. "PI IN THE SKY H. Aspden's [1] amusing "unbelievable" formula for g/2 reminds me of Ramanujan's remarkable number: (2143/22)1/4 = 3.14159265258.. (to be compared with = 3.14159265358..) The agreement with is to 300 parts in a trillion, a factor 10 less spectacular than Aspden's agreement with QED, but, like his, still well within the error of even the most careful measurements of the circumference and diameter of the very finest physical circles. Should one hope that a future theory will confirm that is indeed equal to (2143/22)1/4 thereby freeing us from the need to compute higher and higher order terms in any of the many tedious series mathematicians have had to resort to in these
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (1 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
unenlightened times? Ramanujan's approximation to offers a rather more transparent example of an unbelievable formula against which to assess the validity of one's amazement at Aspden's. Speaking for myself, I'm a little surprised. But not at all astonished. [1] .. H. Aspden, Am. J. Phys. v. 54, p. 1064 (1987). Aspden says there is a theoretical model behind his formula, but he invites the reader to consider the result in and of itself, 'without further elaboration' and it is in that spirit that I offer this reaction." N. David Mermin Department of Physics Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853-2501 Now, it may be that David Mermin was simply seeking to amuse the many physicists in USA who would read this contribution. I had said, in effect: "Look, you are all told that QED gives wonderful quantitative results which can explain the anomalous properties of the electron with such remarkable precision that it convinces you to accept QED principle, but here is a very simple formula that serves the same purpose just as well and which is very simple and has an equally simple supportable physical basis." In the event, David Mermin had implied that I was merely 'playing with numbers', but he had seemingly not taken account of the fact that I had presented a formula which gave the same result as QED whatever the ultimate value of the fine-structure constant . I gave a specific case, showing that the formula was the same as the QED result, even if -1 were 200 rather than a little above 137. I hinted that I might have discovered by my wave-resonance derivation something bearing upon the identity or wave-particle duality that had come from the introduction of quantum theory into electromagnetic energy transfer processes. I still do not see how this has any connection with the subject of Ramanujan's formula for , nor, I presume, had Ramanujan derived his formula from a genuine study of the geometric characteristics of a circle. However, I cannot just point my finger at David Mermin and say that his 'ridicule' has destroyed interest in my own scientific proposition, because, since that formula of mine was published not one single enquiry has been addressed to me asking how I deduced the formula. David Mermin himself could have written to ask if, in fact, he really had doubts and was at all interested. So you must draw your own conclusions. Do those, including perhaps your goodselves, who read about physics generally, really care enough to ask questions to find answers to doubts about what is being told, or are they (and you) merely living a passive role expecting others to select, inform and amuse? Evidently, the world of physics does not conduct itself in the way those who feed it with public funding have a right to expect. It is a world which, so far as I can see, bestows its favours amongst its
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (2 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
own members with no tolerance of any would-be intruder whose only motivation is to interest that community in something discovered outside its closed ranks. If you, the reader, think I am merely exploiting one isolated example in referring to David Mermin, then do refer to pages 160 to 164 of B. W. Petley's 1985 book 'The Fundamental Physical Constants and the Frontier of Measurement', as published in U.K. by Adam Hilger, the publishing house of the Institute of Physics. He explains how "it is not too difficult to synthesize an eight digit decimal number by combinations of the integers 2, 3 and 5 with " and he quotes a Physics Today article in 1971 by Roskies and Prosen and one in 1971 by Robertson in Physical Review Letters on the same point. The gist of this quotation concerned the efforts of record aimed at deriving theoretical values for that constant -1 and also , here used as the proton-electron mass ratio. In the paragraph of Petley's book just preceding those comments, Petley made the following statement: "No doubt the theoretical attempts to calculate the value of and will continue possibly with a Nobel prize winning success. Aspden and Eagles (1972) obtained: -1 = 108(8/1843)1/6 " This was a very curious observation, seemingly ambiguous in its context, given that the following paragraph harped back to the 'numbers game' of those who waste time trying to discredit genuine theoretical effort. In Table 5.3 on page 161 of his book Petley had listed 6 theoretical expressions for -1, dating from 1914 to 1972, including one by Eddington in 1930 giving 137 exactly. The sixth entry in the list was 137.035915, which was this author's value. A seventh entry dated 1973 was the then measured value, stated as 137.03604(11). A separate listing gave three entries for , the proton-mass ratio, dating from 1951 to 1969, but, sadly, it seems that Petley had not seen this author's derivation [3] of the protonelectron mass ratio which was published in a mainstream physics periodical in 1975, as otherwise he would no doubt have included that also in his tabulation. That theoretical derivation of was in full accord with the measured value, even though the latter was known to part per million precision and it was based on the same theoretical principles as applied to -1. I may add here that, as you read through the fourteen papers which follow these remarks, you will be shown how these precise theoretical values for -1 and are derived. Here, I mention further that Brian Petley was writing on the subject on which he was an expert, being a scientist with the National Physical Laboratory in England. I further note that my coauthor on the 1972 paper about the derivation of -1 and also on the 1975 derivation of was employed by the Australian CSIRO at their National Measurement Laboratory and, indeed, these two papers [2, 3] had been submitted for publication with the supporting approval of the Director of that Australian government laboratory.
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (3 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
So, I trust I will not be judged as being a little unreasonable in suggesting that all is not well in our scientific world. Certainly, there is no room for the free-thinking person who has ideas that differ from those prevailing within an institutional research project. I hope that what has been outlined so far will serve as a good introduction to the more formal collection of published papers which follow. This introductory commentary has been given the title 'The Creative Vacuum', because that is what it concerns, the medium in which you, the reader, exist and came to exist as a consequence of Creation. I did not, in the spirit of David Mermin, name this work 'Pi in the Sky', because this is a serious endeavour, not intended to amuse or to mislead, but merely aimed at disclosing some simple solutions to a few of Nature's scientific riddles. These papers, as now reproduced in Part 2, are identically those as presented several years ago. They could be improved by reworking and inevitably there will be the few points that need further clarification and possibly some correction. With that in mind I will await events and see if publication of this work entices comments from readers. Hopefully, in a second edition version, if there is one, I can provide supplementary notes on such points. One such note, directed to an important paper I have referenced but not included in the fourteen appended is needed here in connection with reference [42]. This is the paper, already mentioned, in which I derive the Hubble constant. In that paper I quoted incorrectly the value of the Thomson scattering cross-section of the electron and used that incorrect value to deduce the Hubble constant H. I find upon correction that H-1 would be 3,600 million years if I rely on the standard formula for the Thomson scattering cross-section. Referring to Fig. 1 of this text (page 51) and using the electron radius a of the Thomson electron as defining the obstructing cross-section, the value 21,600 million years would apply. However, if the intermediate field cavity radius shown in that figure is effective the obstructing area is enhanced threefold, making the Hubble time period 7,200 million years. Cosmology today is confused as to the age of the universe based on the notion of an expanding universe. As the conflicting evidence points more and more to a non-expanding steady-state universe the theoretical approach I offer for the cosmological redshift should begin to command the attention of theoreticians, especially those who are inclined to be constructive in their criticism. I find, however, that critics usually prefer to be destructive, no doubt because that is a safer course when confronted with something potentially controversial. It was in 1969 that I published my book 'Physics without Einstein'. One reader wrote to say it was 'too mathematical', even though its formulations were quite simple. Influenced by that, I produced a book 'Modern Aether Science' in 1972, without including any mathematics. A reviewer, someone who had just authored his own book claiming that the universe expands and contracts in cycles, seized upon that non-mathematical aspect and declared that I, the author, was evidently lacking in mathematical skill! No doubt, the title of the book did not help. It seemed to classify it as something archaic and it was not shelved amongst physics books in some bookshops I visited. It did not sell, but yet its message is even more apt now than it was those 24 years ago. Its book jacket indicated that a further mathematical treatment would follow under the title 'Aether Science Papers', but I received no enquiries for that follow-on work and so exercised prudence and patiently struggled to get the occasional paper published in the science periodicals. This, I mention, only because I am now redeeming my 'promise' in naming this book 'Aether Science Papers'. As will be seen, the papers
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (4 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
which follow are mathematical. I ought here to mention again the book 'Physics Unified' which I authored and published in 1980 to get my research to that date on record in a consolidated form. That book gives the formal 'teaching' background which introduces my theory. The fourteen selected papers which follow form a core but are supplemented by many earlier papers of record in the science literature, such as the 1972 paper about -1 and the 1975 paper about . It may, incidentally, come to be noticed from scanning though the titles of those papers, as listed separately on pp. 63-67, that I have shown how to calculate the lifetime of various particles but that the muon lifetime is not mentioned in the titles. The reason is that the muon mean lifetime was derived and published in Physics Unified using my theory and so I did not solicit its separate publication as a paper. I cannot, therefore, resist the temptation to tell you that the 'remarkable success' of QED does not seem to extend to calculating the muon lifetime. The Bailin and Love book, which I mentioned on page 48, included a chapter on 'Feynman Rules for Electroweak Theory'. In that chapter, under a subheading of 'Test of Electroweak Theory', it gave the not-impressive prediction of the mean lifetime of the muon as 2.90+/-2.61 microseconds. It compared this 'test value', as albeit subject to that overwhelming uncertainty, with the measured value of 2.197138+/-0.000065 microseconds. The theoretical value I derive on p. 146 of 'Physics Unified', using the same aether theory that gave -1 and , is 2.1973 microseconds, so I do not see the Feynman methods as being so wonderful. If you, the reader, have been at all impressed by my very simple precise derivation of the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron without use of Feynman diagrams, then you will not be disappointed by what follows. If you remain unimpressed then the rest of this work will not prove of interest and I will not have succeeded in winning you over, but I have done my best and if you can do better in solving the physical riddles of Nature then may you have more success in your own efforts to get your findings accepted! If you feel that the 'aether' is not something one should take seriously and prefer to read about 'electroweak theory' then, to ease your thoughts as you begin to read the first of the selected fourteen papers, I quote from the opening three paragraphs of my 1983 paper entitled 'Planar Boundaries of the Space-Time Lattice' [34]. 'Modern physical theory is tending to regard the vacuum medium as having structure somewhat analogous to that of crystalline materials. Thus we see WEISSKOPF [1] discussing quantum electroweak dynamics and asserting that the Higgs field implies that the vacuum has a certain fixed direction in isospace, namely that of the spinor associated with the Higgs field. WEISSKOPF states that the situation is like that of a ferromagnet, in which the direction in real space is determined as long as the energy transfers are smaller than the Curie energy. This, of course, implies an ordered structure of the vacuum medium, a feature discussed at some length by REBBI [2] in an article entitled 'The lattice theory of quark confinement'. REBBI refers to a 1974 proposal by WILSON that QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) should be formulated on a cubic lattice, an array that divides space
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (5 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51
and time into discrete points, but is essentially an approximation to real space-time. The advantage is that this allows calculations to be made that would otherwise be impossible. This author, in collaboration with Dr. D. M. Eagles [3], has advocated the analysis of a vacuum structure and shown how a value of the fine-structure constant correct to about one part in a million can be determined by a cubic lattice model of the vacuum. Further research on this model has now shown the essential need for a particular boundary condition imposed upon a physical portrayal of the vacuum state expressed in terms of electrical charge. It is in view of the current interest in lattice theory as applied to the vacuum field system that it seems appropriate to draw attention to what has been, to the author at least, a rather elusive consideration. [1] V. C. WEISSKOPF: Physics Today, v. 34-11, p.69 (1981) [2] C. REBBI: Scientific American, v.248, p.36 (1983) [3] H. ASPDEN and D. M. EAGLES: Physics Letters A, v. 41, p.423 (1972)." This paper went on to explain why the storage of electric field energy in the vacuum (the aether) demands the presence of planar lattice boundaries, which implies a domain structure in space somewhat analogous to that found in ferromagnetic materials. The paper was written in 1983, a few weeks after I retired from my executive position with a multinational corporation to engage in a private research venture as a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at my local university. Some 29 years earlier I had parted from my Ph.D. research on magnetism at Trinity College, Cambridge to take up a career in industry, but it was that academic research background concerning ferromagnetism and its domain structure that led me to conceive the need for an aether that was similarly structured. The chronological development of the papers, as reproduced and as listed in the following pages, reflects that circumstance by which I spent those 29 years away from the academic world, whilst still developing a scientific theory of such wide scope. It may also explain why this effort has proved such a struggle, but, then again, it might further explain why there has been such fruitful progress, because there were no peer-constraints affecting project funding and suppressing originality. The time has, however, come when, some 13 years on from retirement from the business world, this consolidated presentation of my theory is warranted.
file:///C|/mp3/a/5459.htm (6 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:51

EPILOGUE
Having shown the power of my theory and presented (as by the tenth appended paper) what has to be a convincing account of the true nature of gravitation, I remind readers of that riddle and the challenge I introduced at the outset of this work. It will, I am sure, become possible to build the machine that can harness the force of gravity. One might hope to see a levitating machine operating with an energy input that is minute in relation to the power demands of 20th century aerospace technology. That objective is a little beyond my own horizon, even though I remind readers of my early reference on page 28 to John Davidson's book The Secret of the Creative Vacuum. It is not beyond my range of view to see in prospect the possibility of so enhancing the gravitational pull on the working core of a machine that the drop in consequential energy potential releases very substantial amounts of heat energy. This could become a way of doing the work of the Maxwell Demon, namely the effortless pumping of energy from a cold to a hot environment. That would provide us with a pollution-free new source of power. With that in mind I offer now another clue. It was noted that uranium was amongst the four metals that were candidates for use in exploring the supergravitational activity, but neodymium and samarium were more likely to be destined to be at the heart of that future technology. However, it will give confidence to the project if we can also understand why uranium is also so very special in this gravitational context. The reason is similar to the dual influence applicable close to the atomic number Z=61 (promethium). There was a 5th harmonic resonance by the K-shell electrons coupled to the gravitational frequency (the Compton electron frequency). Also, as explained in the fourth of the appended papers, for corresponding orbital motion there was a strong perturbation because the orbiting electron sweeps close to the aether lattice charges at radius d 2 from the atomic nucleus centred at an aether lattice site, where d is the lattice spacing. One needs now to imagine a gravitational resonance involving the electrons in the L or higher order atomic electron shells. Note that the harmonic pulsation frequency of the electrons, as set up in the electromagnetic reference frame, is the Compton electron frequency multiplied by the factor:
file:///C|/mp3/a/6062.htm (1 of 3)25.4.2005 22:31:51
(Z)2/n3 Here is the fine structure constant (approximately 1/137), n is the Bohr quantum number of the electron, is 1 or 2 according to whether one electron is active or two in antiphase motion are active and is the order of the harmonic setting up the resonant condition. The latter condition is then given by resonant tuning giving a phase-lock condition in an atom for which Z has a value close to that given by: Z2 = (n3>)(137)2 From this, with n=2, the least value of corresponding to a value of Z in the range of stable atoms is then seen to be 9, with equal to 2, so determining Z as 91. Now this is a quite remarkable circumstance, because it not only determines which harmonic is governing but it also replicates the situation we see for neodymium (Z=60), promethium (Z=61) and samarium (Z=62) by a new sequence. Thorium (Z=90), protactinium (Z=91) and uranium (Z=92) constitute a special group as well, with a very rare middle element. Unlike promethium, protactinium has a finite abundance, but it is virtually non-existent, being ten parts in a billion of the abundance values of its `next of kin' thorium and uranium! Surely this is evidence of a supergravitational influence acting upon the two atomic elements that are at the centre of each of these dual resonant situations. I can also add the point that had I set 85 J/gm as the threshold level for the latent heat of fusion of metals with melting points in excess of 1,000oC, there is only one metal that would then have been added to Nd, Sm, Au and U in that introductory note on page 1. That metal is the one we see next to protactinium, thorium with a latent heat of fusion of 82.8 J/gm! The latent heat of fusion of promethium Pm (Z=61) and protactinium Pa (Z=91) were not listed in my data source as having been measured. Promethium (3.7 year half-life) is a fission product of uranium. As to protactinium, even if the wisdom of nuclear experts favours attributing its scarcity to some quirk of radioactive decay, they must surely view the natural absence of promethium as a real mystery and give serious consideration to the supergravitational proposition offered here. Hopefully these thoughts will cause scientists to realise that the gravitational theory I have developed gives a new direction for research aimed at harnessing the link indicated between gravity and these particular atomic elements. In the meantime, and even before that research prospect of technological benefit emerges on the near horizon, I do hope that common sense will prevail and scientists will have the wisdom to turn their attentions away from Einstein's theoretical treatment of gravitation. Leaving the gravitional challenge to the future, I now conclude this dissertation. I believe that enough has been presented in this work to put my discoveries on record for scrutiny by future generations. The present generation of theoretical physicists has shown an unwillingness to pay attention to my findings and so they are best left to squander their time on their own devious attempts to interpret a universe of their own imagination. I was, by that anonymous referee quoted on pp. 46-47, accused of presenting phantasy and science fiction as physics and offering no tight logical mathematical structure.
file:///C|/mp3/a/6062.htm (2 of 3)25.4.2005 22:31:51
You, the reader, if you have read what I have presented in this work, must now judge whether or not my `phantasy' world has something to offer. Meanwhile, I now look away from the 'physicist' who wears his fine and invisible garments woven from a 'relativistic web' over his 'superstring' vest. I appeal instead to that portion of the scientific community that sees technology as having the more prominent role in scientific endeavour and I ask that attention be paid to the role the aether can play in supplying the pollution-free power we need in the 21st century. As readers will understand from the dates of the papers referenced and presented, virtually all of what has been described was completed more than six years ago. I could have produced this collection of papers then, but I have deemed it more important to divert my attentions to experimental projects. I shall now concentrate on writing about 'Energy Science' from a practical viewpoint and describing the results of my endeavours of the past six years on that task of extracting energy from the aether. Being academically trained and well versed in conventional disciplines of physical science it has not been easy for me to overturn in my mind the dogma that block research interest in the latter field. Nor has it been easy to solve the riddle of gravitation but we have now the solution, thanks to overturning belief in erroneous dogma. Gravitation aside, the breakthrough factor in this work has been the new fundamental principles of electrodynamics which we can already see have practical application in the latest research on the generation of a new form of electrical power. It came as a welcome surprise to see that Dr. Paulo Correa acknowledged the relevance of my work [1,34,112] in the U.S. patents [117,118] which describe the research findings on that new power generation project and I record here my appreciation for that recognition. Undoubtedly the way forward is to show that we can tap energy from the aether even though this does mean overturning some of the accepted doctrines in physics. 'Aether Science Papers' may help to ease the bewilderment of the scientific community as the new technology emerges. H. Aspden, PhD, BSc, FIEE, FIMechE, MInstP, C.Eng, C.Phys, Wh.Sc. May 1996
file:///C|/mp3/a/6062.htm (3 of 3)25.4.2005 22:31:51

THE BIBLIOGRAPHY
Papers by H. Aspden [1] ... 'The Law of Electrodynamics', Journal of the Franklin Institute, 287, 179-183 (1969). [2] ... [Jointly with D. M. Eagles], 'Aether Theory and the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 41A, 423-424 (1972). [3] ... [Jointly with D. M. Eagles] 'Calculation of the Proton Mass in a Lattice Model for the Aether', Il Nuovo Cimento, 30A, 235-238 (1975). [4] ... 'The Fresnel Formula applied to Empty Space', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 15, 263-264 (1976). [5] ... 'Inertia of a Non-radiating Particle', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 15 631-633 (1976). [6] ... 'A New Approach to the Problem of the Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Electron', International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 16, 401-404 (1977). [7] ... 'Electrodynamic Anomalies in Arc Discharge Phenomena', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS-5, 159-163 (1977). [8] ... 'Energy Correlation Formula Applied to Psi Particles', Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 59-63 (1978). [9] ... 'Crystal Symmetry and Ferromagnetism', Speculations in Science and Technology, 1, 281-288 (1978). [10] .. 'G Fluctuations and Planetary Orbits', Catastrophist Geology, 3-2, 1-2 (December 1978). [11] .. 'Ion Accelerators and Energy Transfer Processes', U.K. Patent Specification No. 2,002,953A (Published 28 February 1979). [12] .. 'The Spatial Energy Distribution for Coulomb Interaction', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 25, 456458 (1979). [13] .. 'Energy Correlation of Radiative Decays of Psi(3684)', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 26, 257-260 (1979). [14] .. [Jointly with D. M. Eagles], 'The Spatial Distribution of the Interaction Contribution to the Magnetic-Field Energy Associated with Two Moving Charges', Acta Physica Polonica, A57, 473-482 (1980). [15] .. 'The Inverse-Square Law of Force and its Spatial Energy Distribution', J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 13, 3649-3655 (1980). [16] .. 'Speculations in General Plus Some of My Own', Speculations in Science and Technology, 3, 114-116 (1980). [17] .. 'UFOs and the Cosmic Connection', Energy Unlimited, 8, 37-40 (1980). [18] .. 'A Theory of Neutron Lifetime', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 31, 383-384 (1981).
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (1 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
[19] .. 'Atmospheric Electric Field Induction', Speculations in Science and Technology, 4, 314-316 (1981).' [20] .. 'The Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Electron', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 32, 114-116 (1981). [21] .. 'Electron Form and Anomalous Energy Radiation', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 213-216 (1982). [22] .. 'A Theory of Pion Lifetime', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 237-239 (1982). [23] .. 'The Correlation of the Anomalous g-Factors of the Electron and Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 33, 481-484 (1982). [24] .. 'Mirror Reflection Effects in Light Speed Anisotropy Tests', Speculations in Science and Technology, 5, 421-431 (1982). [25] .. 'Charge Induction by Thermal Radiation', Journal of Electrostatics, 13, 71-80 (1982). [26] .. 'The Aether - an Assessment', Wireless World, 88, 37-39 (October 1982). [27] .. 'Relativity and Rotation', Speculations in Science and Technology, 6, 199-202 (1983). [28] .. 'The Lamb Shift for a Cavity-Resonant Electron', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 36, 364-368 (1983). [29] .. 'The Thunderball - an Electrostatic Phenomenon', Institute of Physics Conference Series No. 66: Electrostatics 1983, pp. 179-184. [30] .. 'The Determination of Absolute Gravitational Potential', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 169172 (1983). [31] .. 'The Nature of the Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 37, 210-214 (1983). [32] .. 'Theoretical Resonances for Particle-Antiparticle Collisions based on the Thomson Electron Model', 37, 307-311 (1983). [33] .. 'Meson Lifetime Dilation as a Test for Special Relativity', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38 206210 (1983). [34] .. 'Planar Boundaries of the Space-Time Lattice', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 243-246 (1983). [35] .. 'The Mass of the Muon', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 342-345 (1983). [36] .. 'The Assessment of a Theory for the Proton-Electron Mass Ratio', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 423-426 (1983). [37] .. 'The Scope for First-Order Tests of the Light Speed Anisotropy', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 38, 568572 (1983). [38] .. 'The Finite Lifetime of the Electron', Speculations in Science and Technology, 7, 3-6 (1984). [39] .. 'Electromagnetic Reaction Paradox', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 247-251 (1984). [40] .. 'The Muon g-Factor by Cavity Resonance Theory', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 39, 271-275 (1984). [41] .. 'Boson Creation in a Sub-Quantum Lattice', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 40, 53-57 (1984). [42] .. 'The Steady-State Free-Electron Population of Free Space', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 41, 252256 (1984). [43] .. 'Don't Forget Thomson', Physics Today, 15 (November 1984). [44] .. 'The Nature of the Pion', Speculations in Science and Technology, 8, 235-239 (1985). [45] .. 'The Maxwell-Fechner Hypothesis as an Alternative to Einstein's Theory, Speculations in Science and Technology, 8, 283-289 (1985). [46] .. 'Unification of Gravitational and Electrodynamic Potential based on Classical Action-at-aDistance Theory', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 44, 689-693 (1985) [47] .. 'The Paradox of Constant Planetary Mass as Evidence of a Leptonic Lattice-Structured Vacuum State', Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 44, 705-709 (1985).
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (2 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
[48] .. 'The Exploding Wire Phenomenon', Physics Letters, 107A, 238-240 (1985). [49] .. 'A New Perspective on the Law of Electrodynamics', Physics Letters, 111A, 22-24 (1985). [50] .. 'Theoretical Evaluation of the Fine Structure Constant', Physics Letters, 110A, 113-115 (1985). [51] .. 'The Proton Enigma', American Journal of Physics, 53, 938 (1985). [52] .. 'More on Thomson's Particles', Americal Journal of Physics, 53, 616 (1985). [53] .. 'Weak Violation - a New Concept in Relativity?', Nature, 318, 317-318 (1985). [54] .. 'Earnshaw's Theorem', Nature, 319, 8 (1986). [55] .. 'Anomalous Electrodynamic Explosions in Liquids', IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, PS14, 282-285 (1986). [56] .. 'How to Test Special Relativity', Nature, 321, 734 (1986). [57] .. 'Classical Relativity', Nature, 320, 10 (1986). [58] .. 'Electron Self-Field Interaction and Internal Resonance, Physics Letters, 119A, 109-111 (1986). [59] .. 'The Mystery of Mercury's Perihelion', The Toth-Maatian Review, 5, 2475-2481 (1986). [60] .. 'Flat Space Gravitation', Physics Education, 21, 261-262 (1986). [61] .. 'Fundamental Constants derived from Two-Dimensional Harmonic Oscillations in an Electrically Structured Vacuum', Speculations in Science and Technology, 9 315-323 (1986). [62] .. 'The Theoretical Nature of the Neutron and the Deuteron', Hadronic Journal, 9, 129-136 (1986). [63] .. 'Meson Production based on Thomson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 137-140 (1986). [64] .. 'An Empirical Approach to Meson Energy Correlation', Hadronic Journal, 9, 153-157 (1986). [65] .. 'The Theoretical Nature of the Photon in a Lattice Vacuum', pp. 345-359 in the Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Quantum Violations: Bridgeport, Connecticut 23-27 June 1986, published by Plenum in NATO ASI Series B: Physics vol. 162. [66] .. 'A Causal Theory of Neutron Diffraction', Physics Letters 119A, 105-108 (1986). [67] .. 'On the Creation of the Sun', The Toth-Maatian Review, 5, 2609-2612 (1986). [68] .. 'The Case for the Sub-Electron', The Toth-Maatian Review, 5, 2827-2833 (1987). [69] .. 'Ampere's Law: Comments on a Discussion by Milnes', The Toth-Maatian Review, 6, 29812984 (1987). [70] .. 'Derivation of the Electrodynamic Force Law', The Toth-Maatian Review, 6, 2985-2987 (1987). [71] .. 'The Exploding Wire Phenomenon as an Inductive Effect', Physics Letters, 120A, 80-82 (1987). [72] .. 'Earthquake-Related EM Disturbances', Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 28, 535-536 (1987). [73] .. 'A Note on the Silvertooth Experiment', Speculations in Science and Technology, 10, 9-12 (1987). [74] .. 'Earnshaw's Theorem', American Journal of Physics, 55, 199 (March 1987). [75] .. 'The Physics of the Missing Atoms: Technetium and Promethium', Hadronic Journal, 10, 167172 (1987). [76] .. 'Synchronous Lattice Electrodynamics as an Alternative to Time Dilation', Hadronic Journal, 10, 185-192 (1987). [77] .. 'Steady State Electrodynamic Induction - A Feature of the General Law of Electrodynamics', Progress in Space-Time Physics 1987, Editor J. P. Wesley, Benjamin Wesley, Blumberg, Germany, pp. 137-155 (1987).
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (3 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
[78] .. 'Tests of Photon Theory in Terms of Precision Measurement', Problems in Quantum Physics; Gdansk '87, (Conference Proceedings), Editors L. Kostro et al., World Scientific, New Jersey, pp. 353-373 (1987). [79] .. 'EM Wave Interference', American Journal of Physics, 56, 103 (February 1988). [80] .. 'Ghost Mass and the Unseen Energy World as Revealed by the Anomalies of the Gyroscope', The Toth-Maatian Review, 6, 165-3171 (1987). [81] .. 'Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded Energy Transfer', Hadronic Journal, 11, 307-313 (1988). [82] .. 'The Theory of the Proton Constants', Hadronic Journal, 11, 169-176 (1988). [83] .. 'A Theory of Proton Creation', Physics Essays, 1, 72-76 (1988). [84] .. 'Do We Really Understand Magnetism?', Magnets, 1, 19-24 (1988). [85] .. 'The Vacuum as our Future Source of Energy', Magnets, 3(8), 15-18 (1988). [86] .. 'A Modern Test for the Ether?', Physics Today, 41, p. 132 (March, 1988). [87] .. 'The Proton Factor and its Unknown Effects', The Toth-Maatian Review, 7, 3725-3734 (October 1988). [88] .. 'Anti-Gravity Electronics', Electronics & Wireless World, 29-31 (January 1989). [89] .. 'Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation and Biological Effects', Speculations in Science and Technology, 12, 17-20 (1989). [90] .. 'Conservative Hadron Interactions Exemplified by the Creation of the Kaon', Hadronic Journal, 12, 101-108 (1989). [91] .. 'The Theory of the Gravitation Constant', Physics Essays, 2, 173-179 (1989). [92] .. 'A Theory of Pion Creation', Physics Essays, 2, 360-367 (1989). [93] .. 'The Supergraviton and its Technological Connection', Speculations in Science and Technology, 12, 179-186 (1989). [94] .. 'Standing Wave Interferometry', Physics Essays, 3, 39-45 (1990). [95] .. 'The Harwen Energy Radiation Regenerator', Speculations in Science and Technology, 13 295299 (1990). [96] .. 'Maxwell's Demon and the Second Law of Thermodynamics', Nature, 347, 25 (1990). [97] .. 'Switched Reluctance Motor with Full A.C. Commutation', U.S. Patent 4,975,608 (4th December 1990). [98] .. 'Thermal Power Device', U.K. Patent Specification 2 239 490A (Published 3rd July 1991). [99] .. 'The Theory of Antigravity', Physics Essays, 4, 13-19 (1991). [100] . 'Power Lines, Cancer and Cylotron Resonance', Electronics World and Wireless World, pp. 774-775 (September 1991). [101] . 'Magnets and Gravity', Magnets, 6(6), 16-22 (1992). [102] . 'Electricity without Magnetism', Electronics World, 540-542 (1992). [103] . 'The Law of Perpetual Motion', Physics Education, 28, 202-203 (1993). [104] . 'The First Law of Thermodynamics', Physics Education, 28, 340-342 (1993). [105] . 'Retardation in the Coulomb Potential', Physics Essays, 8, 19-28 (1995). [106] . 'Vacuum Spin as a New Energy Source', Proceedings: International Symposium on New Energy, Denver, Colorado, April, 1996, pp. 1-19.
Books by H. Aspden
[107] . 'The Theory of Gravitation', pp. 48 (1960), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (4 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
SO16 7RB, England. [108] . 'The Theory of Gravitation', 2nd Ed. pp. 132 (1966), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [109] . 'Physics without Einstein', pp. 224 (1969), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [110] . 'Modern Aether Science', pp. 165 (1972), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [111] . 'Gravitation', pp. 78 (1975), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England. [112] . 'Physics Unified', pp. 206 (1980), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England.
Other publications by H. Aspden

[113] . 'Space, Energy and Creation', pp. 24 (1977), Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England.
Other references
[114] . Altschuler, M.D., Howe, L.L. & Hildner, E., 'Is Ball Lightning a Nuclear Phenomenon?', Nature, 228, 545 (1970). [115] . Chukanov, K.B., 'Final Quantum Revelation', General Energy International, Salt Lake City, Utah, pp. 220-221 (1994). Samokhin, A., 'Vacuum Energy - a Breakthrough?', Press Release No. 03NTO-89071CM04, Novosti Press Agency, Moscow (1989). [116] . Correa, P.N. & Correa, A.N., (1995), 'Electromechanical Transduction of Plasma Pulses', U.S. Patent No. 5,416,391. [117] . Correa, P.N. & Correa, A.N., (1995), 'Energy Conversion System', U.S. Patent No. 5,449,989. [118] . Correa, P.N. & Correa A.N., (1996), 'Direct current Energized Pulse Generator Utilizing Autogeneous Cyclical Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharges', U.S. Patent No. 5,502,354. [119] . Davidson, J., 'The Secret of the Creative Vacuum', pp. 429 (1989), C.W. Daniel & Co., Saffren Walden, England. [120] . Kapitza, P.L., Reviews of Modern Physics, 51, 417 (1979). [121] . Lambertson, W.A., 'History and Status of the Win Process', Proceedings of the International Symposium on New Energy, Denver, Colorado, May 12-15, 1994, pp. 283-288. [122] . Pappas, P.T. & Vaughan, T., 'Forces on a Stigma Antenna', Physics Essays, 3, 211 (1990). [123] . Veronnet, A., Comptes Rendus, 188, 1380-1381 (1929).
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (5 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
file:///C|/mp3/a/6368.htm (6 of 6)25.4.2005 22:31:52
Aether Science Papers (Back Cover)
Aether Science Papers: Commentary on Back Cover

BY HAROLD ASPDEN
The author has, for some 40 years now, sought to interest the world of science in his discoveries concerning the nature of the force of gravitation. His contribution has not been heeded because the research findings have not developed from the conventional theoretical stream. Yet, from his Ph.D. research at Cambridge on anomalous energy activity in ferromagnetism, Dr. Aspden could see so clearly where the mathematical philosophers had erred drastically in replacing the aether by mathematical symbols before they had fully understood how it stores energy. The aether plays a creative role, besides constituting a universal energy bank, giving us the means to deposit and withdraw energy. Left to its own devices it even absorbs the energy we shed as waste and which we write off under the heading 'entropy' but it does something our textbooks say is impossible. It thrives on that energy and regenerates it in a material form by creating the particles we know as protons and electrons. However, scientists have become blind and cannot 'see' such an aether in their vision of things. They look only at how created matter evolves and see no creative source. So they devise computer programs to test their imagination of a universe in a notional Big Bang scenario, with scant regard to the simple problem of how the energy of electromagnetic induction is actually stored in 'empty' space in our laboratories here and now on earth. In so doing they create obstacles in science where none exist, imposing their will on Nature's province and missing key issues which should be obvious to any mechanic. They use equations to represent electrodynamics, say energy has mass, introduce a quantum jitter which makes the position and momentum of that mass uncertain, and then forget to look for whatever it is that accounts for dynamic mass balance and so keeps their jittering wave mechanical universe from tearing itself into pieces. They try to understand gravity as a property of matter and cannot see that it is a property of the aether by which it responds to the presence of matter to keep it in dynamic balance. They complicate gravitation by declaring it to be a distortion of 'space-time' by matter but still cannot reach their objective of field unification. In adopting Einstein's theory mathematicians have confounded our understanding of physics, without realising that there is a better way forward by which to solve the mystery of unification of gravitation and electrodynamics. Although this unification is of clear record in the scientific literature, one needs a guide map to find a way to the relevant clearing in the jungle of periodicals which line university library shelves. This book provides that guidance and goes further in presenting the full text of fourteen of the basic papers. The reader will see from these papers how easy it is to derive the constant of gravity in terms of the electron charge-mass ratio and determine by simple theory the precise value of the protonelectron mass ratio. Given this unifying connection between gravitation and matter creation, one can see a way forward by which to tap some further energy from the same source as that which fed the creation of the universe. We are now on the brink of a technological revolution that will deliver us energy in abundance with no risk of pollution, but we need to understand its source, that real medium, the aether, that so many think of as a mere vacuum. ISBN 0 85056 015 2 Sabberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton SO16 7RB, England
file:///C|/mp3/a/back.htm (1 of 2)25.4.2005 22:31:52

Aspden Free Energy Collection 3

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Aspden Free Energy Collection 3

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

1

ENERGY SCIENCE: AN INTRODUCTORY OVERVIEW

Aspden Research Papers, No. 1 (2004)

ENERGY SCIENCE: A BRIEF REVIEW AND A CONCLUSION

Aspden Research Papers, No. 1 (2004)

Aspden Research Papers, No. 1 (2004)

Aspden Research Papers, No. 1 (2004)

Aspden Research Papers, No. 1 (2004)

Aspden Research Papers, No. 1 (2004)

Aspden Research Papers, No. 1 (2004)

Aspden Research Papers, No. 1 (2004)

Aspden Research Papers, No. 3 (2005)

CAN GRAVITY BE AN ELECTROSTATIC FORCE?

Aspden Research Papers, No. 3 (2005)

Aspden Research Papers, No. 3 (2005)

PHYSICS WITHOUT EINSTEIN A Centenary Review by Harold Aspden

Harold Aspden, 2005

ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

POWER FROM ICE: THERMOELECTRICS: PART I

ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

POWER FROM ICE: THERMOELECTRICS: PART I

8 HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

(a) Thermoelectric current flow: no transverse excitation

(b) Junction cooling on left with transverse up-current

(2) (3) (4) (5)

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

THE STRACHAN-ASPDEN INVENTION

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

11.22 0.298 12.60 0.337

19.00 0.530 10.07 0.720 0.518

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

59 )i ' x 4Kx 2 (3)

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

From (9) this becomes: o/) ' 1 % (v/4K) 2nm/L (10)

if is expressed in microvolts per degree C.

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2

HAROLD ASPDEN, 1994 ENERGY SCIENCE REPORT NO. 2