DC Power Supply 5KV PDF

50,000 Volt DC Power Supply
These plans use the old Diode and Capacitor Method, Turn 120 vac. into 25,000 to 50,000 volts DC of
earth shaking power! Amperage depends on what size capacitors you use. The higher the micro farads of
the cap, the higher the amperage rating. Use an AC amperage meter on the input wire, once you find out
how much amperage the cap is rated at, use diodes 2 x’s higher that rating, Example: 200 uf x 360 v
photoflash capacitors will use about 3 to 4 amps max, so you will want to use diodes rated at 6 to 8 amps x
400 to 450 volts. If you exceed the rating you can cause a fire hazard or a cap or caps can blow up! Please
be careful. NOTICE! Use rubber gloves when working with high voltage, we are not responsible for
anything in these plans you build at your own risk!
+ + + +
115 VAC
Input
+ + + +
+
Output
3,500 vDC
+ = Electrolytic capacitor
-
= Diode
Cover
Capacitor’s rated at 360 V x 200 uf, Diodes rated at 400 v x 6 amps
Optional: For higher amperages

you can use High power diodes
or rectifiers. 40 amp x 600 v
AC Amp Meter
Page 1
WARNING: We are not responsaible for

anything in these plans you build at your own risk......
Be carefull high voltage can kill..... Use rubber gloves
and rubber shoes when working at anytime around
high voltage, it only takes one mistake and it's over
for you...
WARNING: Always Discharge capacitors before touching them.... use a stick with a high
amperage wire attached to one end then attach the other wire end to capacitor + side, then
touch the other end of the wire that's attached to the long dowel rod wood stick and touch the
Negative side of the capacitor it will short it self out not harming the capacitor, do not look into
spark it is an ark spark and can blind you. Again: WARNING: This article deals with and involves
subject matter and the use of materials and substances that may be hazardous to health and
life... do not attempt to implement or use the information contained herin, unless you are
experienced and skilled with respect to such subject matter and substances... neither the
publisher nor the author make any representation as for the completeness or accuracy of the
information contained herein, and disclaim any liability for damages or injuries.....
A Cascade Multiplier
Add more stages for more Multiplication... Use capacitors and Diodes rated for twice the input
voltage. Output ripple can be reduced by using large values for the capacitors.......
+ + + +
115 VAC
Input
+ + + +
+
Output
3,500 vDC
-
+ = Electrolytic capacitor
= Diode
Voltage Doublers
VOLTAGE DOUBLED
AC DC
+
voltage
OUTPUT
input
Voltage Tripler
+ +
AC
+
input
voltage
DC
+
TRIPLES AND CONVERTS AC TO DC, Again use capacitors and diodes rated at 2 times the
input voltage...
If you have been looking for a good way to generate high voltage then these plans are it!
Great for many free energy experiments and free energy motors. Also great for small anti-
gravity air craft experiments.
Stepping up voltage by using diodes and capacitor combinations have been around for a
long time.
If you do not know anything about Capacitors or Diodes, then Radio Shack has a book
you can Purchase for about $15? called “Getting started in Electronics “ it's written by
Forrest M. Mims, and will teach you very Quickly what a Diode and Capacitor is and
there many functions. It also teaches you about how to soldier which is very important in
the construction of many of our free energy devices and circuits.
WE HERE AT CREATIVE SCIENCE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BUYING THESE PLANS,... IT WILL HELP US
HELP OTHERS, WE ARE DEDICATED IN HELPING THE POOR WHO CAN NOT AFFORD ELECTRICITY OR GAS
FOR THERE HOME'S, AND TO EDUCATE THE WORLD ABOUT FREE ENERGY.....
Construction Tip!
When constructing your capacitor multiplier diode circuit, it is good to use a PC plastic
board with multiple holes. you may have to drill the holes bigger to fit your leads
through. Component leads are inserted through the holes and thin copper foil or thin
sheeting can then be cut and used to join one component to another. Each lead will then
be soldered to the copper, I find this is much faster and neater to do than anything else I
have ever tried before. Rick invented this method.
4 amp, 4 diode bridge rectifier under glass!

We are using 120 vac input and raises voltage
to 300 vdc to power our 3/4 hp free energy elec-
tric motor.
Page 5
You can buy thin copper sheeting from an art supply store or your hardware store.
Usually if a hardware store or art store does not have it they can order it for you.
Page 6
Page 7
Figure 3
R1 1 meg
T1
120 VAC
Uses 1n4007 diodes rated at 1,000 volts with 0.068 or 0.1 uF capacitors.
MEASURING HIGH VOLTAGE DC

Voltage measurments will be possible only to about the second or
third stage of a cascade voltage doubler with most voltage
meters..... Beyond that you will need to use either a high voltage DC
meter or an external voltage divider for use with standard high
impedance voltmeter (10 megohms or more.)
A good divider that can be used for the purpose of high voltage
measurments is the RCA sk3868/DIV-1, a high voltage DC divider; it's
used in TV's to reduce the final anode voltage going to the CRT to
the level required for the focus voltage. It consist of resistors R1 (200
megohms) and R2 40 megohms,
Page 8
Connected in series, as shown in figure 4. There are three leads,

one for the free ends of each resistor, and the other at their
juncture. If you put both a 10-megohm meter and a 2.7-
megohm resistor (r3) in parallel with the 40-megaohm resistor you
can achieve almost exactly 100:1 range multiplacation. For a
full scall deflextion of 20,000 volts DC..
to be measured on the 200 volt meter scale.....
Figure 4
HV HVDC TV CRT FOCUS DIVIDER

(red wire) RCA PART # SK3868/div-1
R1 200 meg
R2 40 meg
white wire black wire
R3 2.7 meg
+ V -
dc volt meter Page 9

A computer casing makes a great project case
Page 10
#379
Cascade Voltage Doublers

Figures 1-3 show four additional volatage doublers. the one shown in figure 1 is the
most straight forward.. If you build it, use #1n4007 diodes with peak inverse voltages of
1,000 volts = 1kv and 0.068-0.1 uF capacitors with working voltages of 400 volts DC.
Figure 1
T1
120 VAC
120 VAC
Uses 1n4007 diodes rated at 1,000 volts with 0.068 or 0.1 uF capacitors.
T1 + + + +
120VAC
+ + + +
+
Output
Figure 2 -
Page 11
A Practical Guide to ‘Free Energy’ Devices
Paper No 65: Last updated: 19th February 2007 Edited by: Patrick J. Kelly
The presentation shown here is a digest of most of the information to be found on the web site
http://www.esotericscience.com/Aether.aspx and is reproduced here by kind permission of the owner of the
site. It discusses the Zero-Point Energy field which used to be called the “aether” which term is still
sometimes used for the ZPE field.
Chapter 1. The Aether

Re-emergence of the Aether
The aether concept has been around for some time, it was first put forward in the 18th century in order to
explain the wave nature of light. This was later abandoned because certain experiments seemed to
contradict this idea. The chief of these being the ‘null’ result of the Michelson-Morley experiment. To this
day scientists unquestioningly accept the idea that light exists independent of any other medium.
The notion that one can have a wave without anything doing the ‘waving’ seems to this author to be an
absurdity, and is in itself a good reason to re-examine the whole issue of the aether. In fact, there are
several other advantages to the aether model, many of which we will consider in these pages.
When one looks into the matter one discovers that there many problems with Einstein's theory of relativity.
Milan Pavlovic has carefully examined Einstein's original special relativity papers and found them to contain
many inconsistencies and questionable assumptions .[1] Further, he looked at the experimental evidence
used to justify the special theory of relativity, such as the Michelson-Morley experiment, the Doppler effect
for light, Fizeau's light through water test and the aberration of starlight. He showed that most of these could
be understood in non-relativistic terms or with the assumption that the earth entrains the aether.
Also the unresolved contradictions relating to the twin paradox and time dilation (discussed in Chapter 10),
add further doubt as to the validity of the special theory of relativity. Note that we are not questioning the
correctness of the relativistic formula, just the special theory of relativity and its postulates. Lorentz derived
the relativistic formula prior to Einstein, based on the aether model and the results of experiments in
electrodynamics. See also Burniston Brown's classic article [2] which takes a critical look at both the Special
and General theories of relativity, as well as the Marcus Coleman article [3] which catalogues objections by
well known physicists and mathematicians, to Einstein's theory of relativity. Further experimental support for
the existence of the aether is provided by Webster Kehr [4].
Another important finding comes out of Harold Aspden's energy of rotation experiment [5]. He spun a
permanent-magnet rotor up to its rated speed. He found that if the rotor is brought to rest and spun up again
within a minute after stopping, it required only 30 Joules to bring it to the same speed as compared to 300
Joules for the first attempt! The importance of this experiment is that it strongly points to a medium that is
affected by the first spin and which in turn affects the second spin. The most plausible explanation lies with
a medium like the aether in which one can imagine the first spin creating something like an aether vortex
(see Inertia section) which persists for a time after the object stops spinning.
Standard theory is unable to explain such an effect - this includes the Zero-Point field theory. Quantum
Electrodynamics (QED) has led to the concept of electromagnetic fluctuations spontaneously arising out of
the 'vacuum' [6]. This represents a kind of medium which can interact with the charge components inside
matter. Such interactions with matter have been proposed as an explanation for inertia, among other things
[7]. This theory, while plausible in the case of inertia, would have a lot of difficulty explaining the delayed
effect of Harold Aspden's rotation experiment.
It seems now that even orthodox science is starting to re-think the possibility of an aether-like structure
pervading space. Recently, an article was published in Scientific American by Theodore A. Jacobson and
Renaud Parentani, which points out the similarity between the behaviour of sound waves in a fluid and light
waves in curved space-time, such as around black holes [8]. The approach of assigning to space-time, the
qualities of a fluid, solves some fundamental flaws in the theory of photon radiation from black holes as
developed by Stephen Hawking. This theory leads to difficulties such as infinite red-shifts for the virtual
photons escaping a black hole, with implied zero-length wavelengths and infinite energies, etc.
Attributing granularity to space-time, in the way that a fluid has granularity at small sizes, provides a low
wavelength cut-off that solves many of these difficulties. However, one of the consequences of their model
is that light could have different velocities depending on how the 'molecules' of space-time move relative to
one another. This includes photon velocities greater than “c” under certain conditions. Clearly this
contradicts relativity theory! We include here a quote from the article which summarises this dilemma:
"This fix to Hawking's analysis has a price - relativity theory must be modified.
Contrary to Einstein's assumptions, space-time must act like a fluid consisting
of some unknown kind of 'molecules'."
The article also has an interesting quote from a letter that Einstein sent to his friend Michele Besso about a
year before his death, in which he expresses reservations about the very edifice he helped to create. The
quote is included here for you to ponder on:
"I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept,
that is, on continuous structures. Then nothing remains of my entire castle in
the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of
modern physics."
The aether model allows us to describe the universe in a more intuitive way, which eliminates many of the
paradoxes and contradictions of standard theory. For example, the particle/wave duality of light and matter,
the origin of inertia and gravity, and the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass, the conceptual
contradictions with the collapse of the quantum wave function, the conflict between quantum
electrodynamics and general relativity, the twin paradox of relativity, among others.
The Michelson-Morley Experiment

Before we can talk about the aether model we have to address the apparent ‘null’ result of the Michelson-
Morley experiment (1880's).
The experiment was designed to detect the presence of the aether, by measuring the time of travel of light
when the aether, or carrier of light, was moving towards or away from the observer. The time should be
different in the two cases, in a similar way that waves on the surface of water would be affected by the
movement of water that carries the waves. The outcome of this experiment was an apparent ‘null’ result.
That is, the times of travel were the same, suggesting there was no aether carrying the light waves.
We say apparent because there were additional, more extensive and more accurate, experiments done in
the early 1900’s by Dayton Miller which produced a definite difference. See James DeMeo’s article [9] for an
interesting account of those experiments. In fact, even Michelson himself who repeated the experiment in
1928 found a small positive effect. But because the effects observed were much smaller than what one
would expect from the then assumption that the earth was travelling at a rapid rate through a stationary
aether background, the small effects were attributed to experimental error. Ever since then, the concept of
the aether has been relegated to “fantasy-land” by the scientific community.
However we believe there is another, rather simple, explanation for this ‘null’ result which was put forward
back in the 1800's and by Dayton Miller himself, and others since. That is, that the earth entrains the aether,
causing it to rotate with the earth. This would seem quite plausible on the assumption that the aether is of a
gaseous or liquid consistency, for if we spin an object in air or water the air or water will soon begin to spin
with it. This implies that the aether would spin at the same rate as the earth on the surface of the earth and
at an increasingly lower speed as one moves away from the earth.
Thus the model would explain why any experiments done on the surface of the earth would produce a null,
or very small, result for the speed of the aether relative to the earth. It is interesting to note that Dayton
Miller, who did most of his experiments on top of Mt. Wilson (1800m high), measured a higher result on
average than Michelson and Morley who did their experiments in a basement close to sea level.
This would be consistent with the aether-entrainment model, which predicts that as one moves further up
from sea level, there would be a greater relative movement of the aether compared to that at the surface of
the earth. If this model is correct, then one would expect that if the Michelson-Morley experiment were done
in space, it would produce a much greater effect, bearing in mind that the sun will itself entrain the aether
around it.
There is some support for this with the findings of Bryan Wallace [10], who in 1961 did radar distance
measurements of the surface of Venus. An analysis of the data did not confirm the speed of light as a
constant, but rather, appeared to show a component that followed the classical c+v format. Also,
interestingly, the data contained diurnal, lunar and synodic variations.
The above model is also supported by experiments carried out by Yuri Galaev [11], who performed a variety
of tests designed to detect the aether, using radio waves as well as light. His results were in general
agreement with Dayton Miller's and interestingly, showed an increased effect with height from the surface of
the earth, consistent with the aether entrainment theory. He has even had a go at measuring the viscosity of
the aether.
Other Difficulties with the Aether Model

One of the other main objections people have to the aether model relates to the transmission of transverse
waves, a characteristic of light vibration. If the aether were to be a solid it has been estimated that it would
need to have the hardness of steel in order to support transverse waves at the speed of light. On the other
hand gases and liquids don’t normally support transverse waves.
However on closer examination we find that liquids can in fact carry transverse waves. There has been
recent experimental evidence in support of this, where it was found that supercooled helium, which becomes
superfluid at very low temperatures, transmits transverse sound waves [12]. Other difficulties, such as the
photon or particle properties of light can also be accounted for within an aether model (see Chapter 4). For
some other interesting ideas and perspectives on the aether concept, see the following references: [13],
[14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19].
A Working Model of the Aether

As a starting point, we will assume the aether to be of a consistency close to a liquid, and occasionally solid
such as within nuclear particles. It would have the ability to flow like a liquid and to carry longitudinal and
transverse vibrations. The aether particles would be a lot smaller than subatomic particles, and possibly
consist of different types of particle.
Also it will be assumed that the aether extends into the 4th dimension (time). This is required in order to give
a satisfactory explanation for charge and matter formation. It also allows gravity and quantum mechanical
effects to be incorporated into the picture as described in the other sections. It is important to note that the
aether is not to be considered as separate from other matter, but as the substrate, within which all particles
are formed, and through which, physical forces are mediated.
Chapter 2. Matter
The Electron
If we consider the behaviour of charged particles, we can see from examining Maxwell’s equations, that they
behave a lot like sources and sinks of ‘something’. That is, the equations for the force between charges has
similarities to hydrodynamic equations for fluid flow where negative charge is similar to a ‘sink’ and positive
charge to a ‘source’ of fluid material.
As such, there have been a number of people who have proposed models which are based on the ‘sink’ and
‘source’ idea. However, most of these suffer serious difficulties because they are based on a 3D model. It is
difficult to come up with a realistic scheme for the appearance and disappearance of material and at the
same time maintain spherical symmetry. There is really only one way to go, if one is to have sinks and
sources and be able to satisfy spherical symmetry, and that is the 4th dimension.
We will adopt here the model put forward by Maurice Cooke [20], where the aether flows inwards at the
negative charge and outwards at the positive charge, via the 4th dimension. Furthermore, the flow of the
aether follows a vortex type motion at the sources and sinks, in a similar fashion to the vortex flow which is
observed in a bathtub as the water flows out through the drain hole.
Fig 2.1 illustrates this idea for an electron proton pair.
Fig 2.1 Aether vortex model of the electron.
The other important aspect of this model, is that it considers the electron to be nothing more than the aether
vortex itself. The electron is not a ‘solid’ particle having a particular mass. In this model the ‘mass’ and
inertia attributed to an electron, originate from the properties of a vortex which can behave as an
independent entity, carrying momentum and force.
Charge
Another great advantage of this model is that it naturally explains the equal and opposite charge of the
electron and proton. The vortex spins in a particular direction at the electron where it exits 3D space, and in
the opposite direction at the proton where it re-enters 3D space, as can be seen from the geometry in Fig
2.1.
The whole picture is somewhat more complicated because of the nature of 4D space. Fig 2.1 is really a
simplification for clarity, where the vortex is projected on to a 2D plane on which it appears as a spiral. The
correct projection would be from a 4D axis to 3D space. However, adding an extra dimension to the 2D
vortex spiral would imply that the entry and exit points for the vortex would have spherical symmetry in 3D
space. In other words, spherically symmetric sources and sinks for the aether in 3D, which can be equated
to the positive and negative charges. As pointed out by Maurice Cooke, this explains the rather curious
observation that the ‘masses’ of the electron and proton are orders of magnitude different yet the
magnitudes of their charges are exactly the same.
This model also explains the neutron being a special case of the proton, where the vortex link to the electron
ceases to exist. We know from nuclear physics experiments, that if a neutron is ejected from the nucleus,
after a certain period it naturally decays into a proton-electron pair. In our model this would equate to a
vortex spontaneously forming in the region surrounding the neutron and creating an aether flow to the
neutron via 4D, turning it into a proton. Somewhat like the way tornadoes form in turbulent air masses
above the earth. This also accounts nicely for charge-conservation and the fact that the mass of the
universe is found to be electrically neutral. Charges can only be created or destroyed in pairs.
The Proton and Matter Waves
Unlike the electron, the proton is assumed to be a particle or ‘drop’ of condensed aether. To see how this
might come about within the context of the present model, we draw again on the theory put forward by
Maurice Cooke [20]. He puts forward the notion that throughout space, there exist numerous oscillating
‘primary’ points which generate vibrations in the aether along the 4th dimensional axis. He in fact presents
some evidence in support of this notion.
Because the oscillations are along the 4D axis, or perpendicular to 3D space, we are not directly aware of
these vibrations as there is no component projected on to 3D space. In the same way that a 2D being living
in a flat world, would not be aware of small vibrations in the 3rd dimension.
Furthermore, the primary points are assumed to move about with a range of speeds from zero to perhaps
close to the speed of light. The oscillations of these primary points would combine and interfere with one
another, to form regions of high and low vibrations along the 4D axis, in a similar way to that in which the
waves on the surface of a pond combine to form regions of high and low amplitude - see Fig 2.2:
Fig 2.2 Superposition of spherical waves from 3 sources.
Again, the whole picture is a little more complicated because we are dealing with 4D space. Normally on the
surface of a pond, the waves from a disturbance move outwards in circular rings from the point of
disturbance. However, if one were to translate from the 2D space of the pond surface to 3D space, the
circular rings would become spheres as a result of adding an extra dimension. We would therefore have in
3D space, spherical disturbances moving out from the primary points, i.e. bubbles within bubbles. Thus we
would have throughout 3D space, regions of high and low vibration amplitude. Amplitudes which represent
the movement along the 4D axis and not just vibrations in 3D space.
The key proposal put forward by Maurice Cooke in this area is that the proton and other stable atomic
particles are formed or condensed out of the aether at the points where the 4D waves superimpose in such a
way so as to create nodal points of low vibration. This is somewhat similar to the way water droplets
condense out of water vapour in clouds. The atoms, like the droplets, would require a certain amount of
energy to be applied in order to ‘evaporate’ or re-expand back into the aether form.
One would also expect other more transient particles to be created and re-absorbed, with the appearance
and disappearance of these low-vibration nodal points. This is consistent with particle physics experiments
which demonstrate particles appearing for short periods of time and then dissolving into other forms of
energy, etc. It is also consistent with the existence of ‘Zero Point Energy’ that is associated with a seething
background of energy fluctuations [21]. These have been observed at very low temperatures where thermal
vibrations have been eliminated.
This fluctuating energy has also been likened to the ground-state of the electromagnetic field as described
by Quantum Electrodynamics - a field which current theories indicate would contain an enormous amount of
energy. The vibrational energy of the above-mentioned 4D waves, fits in nicely with this picture. In fact, the
similarities go even further if one considers the 'quantum foam' picture proposed by Wheeler [22]. In this
view, particles are like bubbles or vortices arising out of the dynamics of the zero-point energy fluctuations.
He also describes the formation of hyperspace structures or 'wormholes' that channel energy into, and out
of, 3D space which is very reminiscent of the electron vortices described above.
This model is also able to incorporate in a natural way, the concepts of gravity and inertia as well as
quantum mechanical effects. Chapter 5 and Chapter 7 discuss these effects.
The Fourth Dimension
In order to get a better grasp of what a 4th dimension might be like, we will consider the geometrical analogy
of moving from 2 to 3 dimensions. For 2D beings living in 'flatland' there would have to be some barrier
preventing them from moving into the 3rd dimension. Otherwise they could become aware of the 3rd
dimension as soon as they moved at right angles to the 2D plane. Furthermore, the barrier would have to
touch every point on the plane, the beings sliding along it without realising it is there. By a similar analogy
there would have to be a barrier to us moving along the 4D axis otherwise we would become aware of the
4th dimension.
In the esoteric traditions, we hear of the concept of a veil which separates the physical plane from the higher
dimensions. We imagine that this veil refers to some sort of thin (along 4D axis) membrane that allows the
normal rarefied aether to flow through it but not the denser form that constitutes physical matter. Note that
the veil is thin along the 4D axis only. From a 3D perspective the veil would have to be touching every point
in 3D space and might more appropriately be described as a fog. It might also be the case that the 3D
matter is somehow confined within the veil or membrane itself, while the aether particles are able to flow
through it. The veil needs to allow the flow of aether in the 4th dimension, otherwise we could not have the
electron vortex as described above.
The eastern mystical traditions talk about incarnation, where the consciousness or soul 'attaches' part of
itself to a physical body, in order to experience life in a more limited form. The part of consciousness which
is identified with the body, cannot be aware of the 4th dimension, as it relies on sensory input from physical
instruments, such as the eye. The veil prevents this dense physical matter moving into the 4th dimension,
therefore physical instruments cannot have a direct perception of it. The only way for the incarnated
consciousness to move into the 4th dimension is to detach itself from the physical body, such as occurs at
death, or to partially detach as in out of body experiences, etc. There is good evidence for the existence of
higher dimensional realities. Some of the most convincing evidence comes from people who have had near
death experiences.
We also advance the proposition, that it is this veil or membrane that creates the 4D waves by oscillating
along the 4D axis. We imagine that some form of intelligence has created the veil and infused it with the
'primary' points or 4D wave generators for the purpose of creating a 3D universe of dense matter, in which a
myriad of life forms can experience this particular form of existence.
We also suppose that this membrane wraps in on itself, to form a 4D sphere, such that if a 3D being were to
move long enough in a 'straight' line he would eventually return to the starting point. However the radius of
such a sphere would be so large that there was little chance of that happening any time soon. Note that this
would only be a sphere when viewed from 4D space, it would not be so from a 3D perspective. This is
similar to the old analogy of a 2D plane or rubber sheet being wrapped around into a balloon.
It also follows from the above model, that one could stack additional veils or membranes along the 4th
dimensional axis. Somewhat like stacking pancakes on top of one another with the syrup representing the
aether. Each membrane would delineate a slice along the 4th dimensional axis that contains a full 3D
universe. We would then effectively have a model of parallel universes (the pancake model).
Teleportation as Inter-dimensional Travel

The 4th dimension can also be used to help explain some of the more unusual phenomena that have been
reported - that of teleportation. We have had reports of people and objects disappearing into thin air, such
as with the Bermuda triangle. One of the more extraordinary stories concerns the Philadelphia Experiment
[23].
It is claimed that the US military used Tesla-type technologies to try and make a ship invisible to radar. But
in the process they managed to make the ship disappear from it's position and re-appear some distance
away. This had some devastating effects on the people who were on board the ship at the time. Many have
reportedly died in the process, some were literally embedded in the structure of the ship as if two objects had
been merged together.
It would be easy to dismiss such amazing claims, were it not for the fact that some of the effects reported
have been reproduced by modern day researchers. One of the reported effects is invisibility, which has
been partially reproduced by scientists [24]. However, the most notable work in this area has been that of
John Hutchison [25]. He has used the Tesla technologies, involving high voltages and radio frequency
beams, to create some very unusual phenomena, such as anti-gravity effects.
In particular, he has reproduced some of the reported effects of the Philadelphia Experiment. There are a
number of the photographs on the above referenced website which show pieces of wood and metal
embedded in a larger slab of metal. This was a result of using high voltage and radio frequency instruments
- no heating being involved. From the Philadelphia Experiment we have reports of people and objects being
embedded in the steel structure of the ship. It is as if the included objects simply displaced the container
material out of existence.
One way to explain these effects would be if the included object displaced the atoms of the container into the
4th dimension, making them disappear from view. This can be illustrated more easily by resorting to the old
2D “flatland” analogy. Let's consider 2D beings living on a 2D flat world, they would not be aware of the 3rd
dimension. If a 2D object were lifted off the 2D plane into the 3rd dimension it would disappear from the
view of the flatlanders, and it would magically reappear at the position where the object touched the 2D
plane again.
Furthermore, if there was an object already at the point where the reappearing object touched down on the
2D plane, the two objects would merge into one another. The re-appearing object displacing the existing
object's atoms into the 3rd dimension, or possibly even merging with the existing atoms if there was enough
inter-atomic spacing, giving rise to the two objects being embedded on the 2D plane. A similar argument
can be applied to the 3D case, where objects would disappear into the 4th dimension and reappear at a
different point in 3D space.
A clue as to how this may be achieved, is provided by the fact that high voltages are often involved in these
experiments. Given that in our model charge is considered to be an aether vortex into the 4th dimension, a
high voltage region is expected to create a macro-scale vortex flow into the 4th dimension. One can imagine
that this would create a pressure on the veil or membrane which normally prevents the atoms from moving
along the 4D axis. Somehow, the combination of this pressure and the radio frequency waves used in these
experiments, seems to create a hole or opening in this membrane, allowing atoms to flow into the 4th
dimension. It could just be that the strong aether flow into the 4th dimension, creates a high enough
pressure to tear a hole in the membrane. Similar effects would be expected with strong rotating magnetic
fields, which would be likely to create a strong aether vortex into the 4th dimension. In reports of people and
planes disappearing from the Bermuda Triangle, for example, there has been mention by the pilots of
rotating compass needles before the planes disappeared. This suggests that the planes had entered a
region of strong rotating magnetic fields.
In such situations one would expect that the atoms are carried along by the high aether current running
through the vortex region causing a movement into the 4th dimension, reappearing back in 3D space some
distance away, see a in Fig 2.3:
Fig 2.3 Teleportation through the 4th dimension.
It would seem reasonable that the objects would remain relatively intact during this process because of the
atomic forces that normally keep an object together. However, this movement might alter the relative
positions of separated objects involved in the transfer. This could lead to two objects landing in the same
place in the 3rd dimension and could explain the reports of people embedded in the structure of the ship in
the Philadelphia Experiment.
One might also speculate that the stronger the aether flow the further the objects would travel before
reappearing back in the 3D plane, see b in Fig 2.3. Therefore, with strong aether currents, the objects might
disappear completely and reappear in some other part of the 3D universe. One could even conceive that if
there exist parallel universes that are not widely separated along the 4D axis, it might be possible to
transport objects to another universe by this mechanism, see c in Fig 2.3.
Chapter 3. Magnetism
Magnetism as the Flow of Aether
It is well known that Maxwell’s equations have many similarities to the hydrodynamic equations for a fluid.
This is not surprising given that the original Maxwell’s equations were derived on the basis of a fluidic
medium (aether) [26]. It is worthwhile looking at these similarities more closely.
If we consider the general equations for fluid flow where we are only interested in describing the velocity, we
get the following equations [27]:
where v is the velocity of the fluid and is the vorticity, or circulation of the fluid
is in fact a vector which points in the direction perpendicular to the circulation and whose magnitude is
proportional to the amount of circulation, Fig 3.1(a).
If we now look at the Maxwell’s equations that describe the magnetic field we have, for the case where there
are no changing electric fields, the following:
where B is the magnetic field and j is the electric current
We can immediately see the similarities between these and the last two equations above if we equate the
velocity v with B and vorticity with the current j.
This suggests that, at least under certain conditions, the magnetic field represents the velocity of the aether
as projected on to 3D space. That is, as there is a 4D component to the circulation of the aether (see next
item) the aether particles would not move parallel to the 3D velocity vector above, but would move in and out
of the 4th dimension, with the 3D projected velocity being represented by v.
We can get a better idea of what is involved by considering a normal 3D vortex such as one observes in
water draining from a bathtub. If we then imagine a 2D plane (x, y) at right angles to the vortex axis (z), the
water molecules will follow a spiral path which appears circular when projected on to the 2D plane. However
2D flatlanders living on the plane would not see the water molecules going in a circle, rather the molecules
will appear briefly as they cross the 2D plane before disappearing again from their awareness. We would
expect something similar to occur when going from 3D to 4D space.
Fig 3.1 Comparison between magnetic field and fluid flow.
We can apply this idea to the case of a current-carrying wire, as shown in Fig 3.1(b). We know from
experiments that the magnetic field around a current-carrying wire is proportional to the current and it falls off
as 1/r, where r is the distance from the wire. This would imply that the projected 3D velocity of the aether
also falls off as 1/r with a magnitude that is proportional to the current flow.
Based on the previous discussion about the similarity of the current and the vorticity, this would suggest that
the moving charges that form the current somehow create a preferential rotation of the aether around the
wire. Given that electric currents are generated by moving charges, it remains to be explained how a
moving charge can create a circulating aether perpendicular to the direction of motion.
Moving Charges and Magnetic Fields

As detailed in the previous section, a charge is considered to be a vortex of aether entering the 4th
dimension (Fig 2.1). Let us consider the case when the charge moves in 4D. One might expect that the
aether vortex, whose axis is perpendicular to 3D space (Fig 2.1), would lean over behind the direction in
which the charge is being pulled: Fig 3.2. This of course is a much simplified picture of a 4D vortex. We
would then have a net component of the vortex spin around the direction of motion where the 4D axis meets
3D space.
Fig 3.2 Electron vortex motion in 4D.
In other words, the aether flow from a charge would not be spherically symmetrical, but would show a
preferential rotational movement around the direction of motion. The magnitude of that preferential spin,
would depend on the speed of that motion relative to the aether background. The faster the charge moves,
the more the vortex would lean over in 4D and the greater would be the component of spin projected on to
3D. Motions in 4D are difficult to picture but it does make intuitive sense.
This preferential rotation of the aether around a moving charge, would produce what we observe as the
magnetic field, when all the individual charge contributions are summed. This picture also neatly accounts
for the fact that, when a charge reverses direction of motion, the magnetic field rotates in the opposite sense.
That is, the vortex leans over in the opposite direction, and therefore the projected spin goes from clockwise
to anticlockwise or vice versa.
Aether, Magnetism and Relativity

Note that the above implies that the magnetic field from a charge depends on the speed of the charge
relative to the aether background and not relative to the observer as standard theory suggests.
The idea that the magnetic field should depend on how fast a charge is moving relative to the observer leads
to a number of conceptual difficulties and paradoxes. Where is the actual field in space if it depends on the
observer? By assuming that the magnetic field is dependent on the speed of the charges relative to the
aether a lot of the complexity simply disappears.
There is a logical requirement (Lorentz invariance) that the forces between objects, such as the force
between two current carrying wires, should not depend on what the observer is doing. In the aether model,
this condition will be satisfied in a natural way, because the forces surrounding moving charges will not
depend on the speed of the charges relative to the observer but their speed relative to the aether. Let us
see if this is consistent with observation.
We can consider the situation of two parallel current-carrying wires that attract each other by virtue of their
magnetic fields, Fig 3.3.
Fig 3.3 The force F between two current carrying wires.
One might ask what happens if in the above example we move both the wires in the opposite direction to the
movement of the conduction electrons by an amount equal to the drift velocity of the electrons. In other
words, the wires are moved in such a way as to make the conduction electrons stationary, on average, with
respect to the aether. Shouldn’t this make the magnetic field disappear, contrary to experience?
On closer examination we find that moving the wires in this way causes the positive charges of the atoms to
move relative to the aether by an amount equal and opposite to the drift velocity of the electrons (Vd in Fig
3.3). This movement of the positive charges relative to the aether will create exactly the same magnetic field
as the conduction electrons do for the stationary wire case.
In general, moving the wires at any speed will create a magnetic field that is the difference between the
positive and negative charge contributions. This means that the net magnetic field will always be
proportional to the average drift velocity of the conduction electrons relative to the wire, no matter what the
speed of the wire is, relative to the aether.
It is not too difficult to see that any neutral object, carrying any current whatever, will behave in exactly the
same way in both the aether model and the standard theory. Things get more interesting however, when we
have objects with a net charge moving through the aether.
It is worth noting that the aether theory does not eliminate relativistic type effects. When two objects move
relative to one another relativistic effects will come into play because of the finite speed of the forces, which
is what relativity takes into account.
Differences Between the Aether Model and Standard Theory

It follows from the logic in the previous section, that an object with a net charge moving relative to the aether
should produce a magnetic field even for an observer travelling with the object. Here we have a distinct
difference between our aether model and standard theory.
One might ask if this difference really exists, how is it possible that this discrepancy to standard theory has
not been noticed up to now? We believe there are two reasons for this:
Firstly, any experiments done with moving charges where the observer is stationary with respect to the
surface of the earth, will produce the same results in the two cases. This comes about because the aether is
assumed to be stationary with respect to the surface of the earth so that the speed of the charges relative to
the aether will be the same as the speed relative to the observer.
Secondly, even when the observer is moving with the charges, the magnetic field predicted by the aether
model is quite small for most cases that we encounter. To see this, we consider an extreme example of a
1m diameter conducting sphere charged to 1 million Volts. By standard electrostatic equations, we can
calculate the charge on the sphere to be around 5x10-5 Coulombs. If we now moved the sphere at
100km/hr along the surface of the earth it would equate to a current of around 0.015 Amps. In the aether
-9
theory this would produce a magnetic field of around 2x10 Teslas near the surface of the sphere, or around
-5
10 the strength of the earth’s magnetic field. Quite easy to miss if one were not specifically looking for it!
There is however, another situation where we might expect to see a much greater effect. All things being
equal, the electrostatic forces between two charged bodies are much greater than the equivalent magnetic
forces at normal charge velocities. One would therefore expect that the force between two charged bodies,
would be affected by the movement through the aether, and might be detected under normal conditions.
There is in fact some experimental support for this idea. Charles Morton has reported observing a variation
of the force between strongly charged bodies when they are set in motion as compared to the stationary
case, even for low speeds [28]. The force was also found to be different in front compared to the rear of the
moving charges.
This experiment, if it can be replicated, has important implications for the current understanding of how
things work. According to standard theory, the forces between charged bodies not in motion relative to one
another, should be the same in all inertial reference frames (frames moving at constant speeds). The
'Morton Effect' would point to, among other things, a universal reference frame or aether.
Further Experimental Support for the Aether Model

If we follow further, the consequences of the aether model, it predicts that an observer (detector) moving
relative to a charge that is stationary with respect to the aether, will not see the usual magnetic field. This is
in disagreement with standard theory which predicts a ‘B’ field whenever an observer moves relative to
charge. Stefan Marinov carried out an experiment that is relevant to this prediction. He used a Hall effect
detector to measure the magnetic field produced by a spinning charged disk, Fig 3.4, a variation on the
Rowland experiment.
Fig 3.4 The Marinov experiment:

(a) detector is stationary and disk spins,
(b) detector rotates and disk is stationary,
(c) detector and disk spin together.
He reported the following results for 3 variations of the experiment:

(a) The detector is stationary and charged disk spins. This produced a ‘B’ field.
(b) The detector rotates but the charged disk is stationary. This did not produced a ‘B’ field.
(c) Both the detector and disk spin together producing the same reading as in (a).
We will analyse these findings with the standard theory and the aether model.
Standard Theory
(a) There is relative movement between the detector and the charges so we expect a B field.
This agrees with observation.
(b) There is relative movement between the detector and the charges so we expect a B field.
This does not agree with observation.
(c) The detector is completely stationary relative to the charges so we would not expect a B
field to be registered.
This does not agree with observation.
Aether Model
(a) Charges move relative to the aether so we would expect a B field.
(b) Charges do not move relative to the aether so we would not expect a B field.
(c) Charges move relative to the aether so we would expect a B field even though there is no
movement of the detector relative to the charges.
As we can see the results are in disagreement with standard theory but are completely consistent with the
aether model.
Chapter 4. Light
Light as a Vibration of the Aether
One of the main difficulties people have with the concept of light as a vibration of the aether is the issue of
transverse waves. If we assume that the aether is somewhere between a gas and a liquid, as outlined in
Chapter 1, then we are faced with the difficulty that gases and liquids don’t normally support transverse
vibrations.
However under certain conditions a liquid can support transverse waves. This has been proven by recent
discoveries where it was found that supercooled liquid Helium is able to transmit transverse sound waves
[29]. In other words, a state of matter where the atoms behave as a liquid but also display collective
behaviour that is able to provide the restoring forces needed to support transverse oscillations. The closest
we would normally come to seeing this type of behaviour is with the metal mercury. Mercury is a liquid at
room temperature, but because of its high surface tension, it exhibits collective behaviour. A drop of
mercury liquid will move about on a flat surface as a unit rather than the disordered spreading out that we
see with water for example. This can be seen more readily by sprinkling powder on the surface of a mercury
drop. When the drop moves all the powder particles on the surface will move in unison, illustrating that the
surface of the mercury drop retains a collective movement even though it is a liquid. That is, the drop 'rolls'
along the surface rather than spreading out. We will assume that the aether has properties similar to
mercury or the supercooled liquid Helium.
Bearing in mind that electromagnetic radiation gets generated from accelerated charges, it becomes obvious
from the discussion in Chapter 3 how light would be produced in the aether scenario.
Fig 4.1 Generation of an aether wave.
As the charges are accelerated in one direction and then in the opposite direction, such as occurs in a radio
antenna, we would get oscillations of aether circulation around the direction of the charge movement.
Somewhat like the motion of a washing machine which rotates the water in alternate directions around the
axle. We must bear in mind that in our model there is a 4D component to the aether rotation so it is not just
a simple rotation of aether particles around the axis. One would expect that such disturbances in the aether
would be propagated away radially from the line of charge motion (Fig 4.1). We can see from the above
diagram that the radiation would be primarily a transverse or shear wave.
The Photon
We know that visible light is usually generated by the transition of electrons from one energy state to
another, lower energy state. In such a case we would expect that the electrons are in some way first
accelerated and then decelerated as they move from one energy orbital to another.
From the previous discussion we would expect that such accelerations would produce a wave disturbance
radially outwards from the line of motion of the electrons. The difference here being that the disturbance is
of a short duration because the motion of the electron goes through only half a wave cycle compared to
oscillating charges. However we would expect that the disturbed aether would rebound from the half wave
rotation and cause a disturbance or wave rotation in the opposite direction, but of smaller magnitude. It
would make sense that this motion would continue for a number of cycles, each with a diminishing
amplitude, until the aether reverts back to a normal state.
Fig 4.2 Generation of a photon.
This would imply that the transition of the electron would generate a wave train that spreads out in ever
expanding circles, perpendicular to the line of motion of the accelerated electron, Fig 4.2. Somewhat
analogous to the way a rock thrown into a pond will generate a surface wave train that moves out in ever
expanding circles from the point of impact. The mechanism of generating the wave train would however be
different in the two cases.
This ‘wave train’ is what the standard theories would refer to as the photon. It has a finite extension
consisting of several waves so that it has some properties of a particle and at the same time behaves like a
wave with a specific frequency. It is also easy to see that the frequency of the wave train will be dependent
on how strongly the electron is accelerated and decelerated as it moves from one energy state to another.
And this will be dependent on the difference between the two energy states. This is consistent with the E =
hf formula relating energy to frequency that applies to photon radiation, h being Plank's constant.
Aether, QED and the particle/wave duality of light

Modern science has not been able to reconcile the particle/wave duality of light. In some cases it clearly
behaves as waves, such as with diffraction, and at other times as a particle. A sensitive light detector will
register distinct 'clicks' or events rather than a continuous effect, which is suggestive of a particle or a
quantum of light. It cannot simply be an expanding spherical compression wave in a medium as some
people have suggested because several light detectors placed equidistant from the source will not fire
simultaneously.
Also the energy of each 'click' is constant independent of the intensity of the source, the number of 'clicks'
being proportional to the intensity of the light. How then does one reconcile the two different behaviours?
Physics has given up trying to understand the inner workings of light. Quantum Electrodynamics (QED),
which is our best attempt at explaining the behaviour of light, has a set of rules that correctly predict light
intensities for various configurations but is unable to give a conceptual explanation of why it behaves as it
does, [30].
We believe that the above photon model provides a plausible resolution of the particle/wave contradiction.
As an example of this, we will first consider the often quoted case of light scattering by two slits. When
coherent light is shone through two closely spaced slits, the light intensity on a screen behind it displays
regularly spaced maxima and minima, Fig 4.3, rather than just a simple shadow of the slits.
Fig 4.3 Double slit diffraction of light.
The variation in light intensity can be 'explained' as a superimposition of waves originating at the slit
positions. That is, the intensity at P of Fig 4.3 for example, can be calculated by adding the amplitudes of two
waves, one originating at slit 1 going to P and the other from slit 2 going to P, with their correct phase
relationship. The intensity curve is similar to that which one sees when the height from two sources of water
waves are combined. This clearly displays the wavelike behaviour of light.
However, light detectors placed at the screen still only detect one photon or quantum of light at a time. One
might suppose that the photons travelling through slit 1 somehow interact with the photons going through slit
2 to produce the maxima and minima. However, this explanation is incorrect because experiments show
that if the intensity of the light is reduced to such an extent that only one photon travels past the slits at any
one time it still produces the same intensity variation when averaged over many photon counts.
It is as if a single photon goes through both slits, interferes with itself to produce the maxima and minima.
What then is a photon? If it were a particle one would expect it to be localised, so that it either goes through
slit 1 or slit 2 but not both. However interference requires a superimposition of waves from two different
points that are coherent or in phase with one another. Without the addition from two coherent sources, the
whole concept of interference is meaningless.
Therefore logically we have to conclude that whatever one conceives the photon to be it has to cross both
slits in it's journey from the source to the screen or detectors. This means that in it's lateral extent it has to
be at least as large as the slit separation. Our photon model described in the previous section fits the
requirements.
Fig 4.4 Photon geometries for the double slit diffraction experiment.
The photon rings cross both slits in most cases, Fig 4.4(a). The plane of the photon ring will take on many
different angles. The angle being dependent on the direction of the electron motion that generates each
individual photon ring as described in the previous chapter. Also, the photon has a short extent in the
direction of travel giving us the characteristic quantum property.
Our photon model also allows us to explain some other anomalies associated with the quantum nature of
light. With the standard particle picture of a photon one is led to ask whether we can find out which hole or
holes the photon went through in the above double slit experiment to produce interference. It has been
observed experimentally however, that if we placed photon detectors behind the slits as shown in Fig 4.5, in
order to try and determine which hole the individual photon went through, we would lose the interference.
Fig 4.5 Trying to detect which slit a photon goes through.
This has become one of the mysterious rules of Quantum Electrodynamics theory, derived from observation,
which says that if a photon, or any quantum 'particle' for that matter, has a number of possible paths it can
take in order to get from A to B, then we have interference between the wave amplitudes for the different
paths. However, if we know which path a quantum 'particle' takes, then we lose the interference, and the
intensity or probability of observing a 'particle' is the sum of individual probabilities taken separately, see
[30].
We would like to propose a simpler and more intuitive explanation for this. In the above example, Fig 4.5, if
photon detector B registers a 'click' it blocks the contribution of our photon originating from slit 2, which is
required for the interference to occur, so that we are left with the pattern corresponding to slit 1 alone being
opened. It is also generally accepted that photon detectors A and B in Fig 4.5 do not register the same
photon, that is produce simultaneous 'clicks'. This would have contributed to the standard Quantum
Electrodynamics picture as discussed above.
This can also be understood with our photon ring model. From Fig 4.4(b), we see that the two photon
detectors, A and B, will only register simultaneous 'clicks' when they both coincide with the plane of a photon
ring. For the majority of photons this will not be the case. Therefore, depending to some extent on the
construction of the detector, only a small portion of the photons will register simultaneous 'clicks' on both
counters.
It is quite conceivable that experimenters do see some coincident hits, but because it occurs in only a
fraction of the cases it would be natural for them to assume that these were cases where more than one
photon happened to be emitted at roughly the same time. This would need to be investigated further.
The second example we would like to consider here is that of a diffraction grating. Fig 4.6 shows an
idealised grating consisting of regularly spaced grooves that produce maxima and minima in scattered light
intensity. The standard Quantum Electrodynamics explanation of this, is that light from a source (S), is
scattered from the raised elements of the grating, paths A,B,C,D, to produce an intensity at P that can be
calculated by summing the individual amplitudes for each path A,B,C,D with the correct phases defined by
the path lengths S-A-P, S-B-P, etc.
Fig 4.6 Light scattering by a diffraction grating.
Whether we get a maxima or minima at any point P will be determined by whether the individual path
contributions interfere constructively or destructively. See Richard Feynman's work [30] Chapter 2, for a
more detailed explanation. Now here is the interesting bit, it has been found experimentally that if the
intensity of light is reduced to the extent that only one photon travels between S and P at any one time we
still get the same maxima and minima variation when the data is averaged over many photon counts.
This is the same dilemma as with double slit diffraction - how can a single photon that is supposed to be a
'particle' traverse all the different paths in order to produce interference. The only way that this result makes
any sense is to assume that parts of the photon travel through all the different paths. Put another way, there
must be a coherent energy disturbance that travels along path A, path B, etc., otherwise the concept of
interference and the Quantum Electrodynamics approach are meaningless.
Again, our photon model gives us a solution to this dilemma. Fig 4.7 shows how an expanding photon ring is
able to affect many of the raised groves in the grating in a coherent way.
Fig 4.7 Photon scattering by a diffraction grating.
We are suggesting that when the photon ring arrives at the A groove point (GA), it causes electrons in the
grating to oscillate in resonance. The excited electrons then, in turn, generate a secondary photon ring, in
phase with the original photon, that then travels from GA to point P. Similarly for GB, etc., giving the correct
phase relationships between the different paths.
This explains how a single photon can generate the diffraction maxima and minima. Not all photon rings will
have their plane positioned as shown above, some will have their planes parallel to the grating groves and
will not contribute to the interference. However, on average, there will be many photon rings that cross two
or more grooves contributing to the interference.
This picture is not too dissimilar to the classical electromagnetic treatment of light propagation. Many of the
properties of light interacting with matter, such as interference, reflection, transmission, absorption, bending
of light, etc., can be explained by assuming that electromagnetic waves impinging on matter cause it's
electrons to vibrate in resonance, which in turn creates secondary waves that then interfere with one another
[31].
What is different about our model is that it says that a single photon can influence more than one electron.
This would be analogous to an expanding ring of surface waves on water, generated for example by
throwing a rock in a pond, being able to influence many separate objects floating on the surface.
Energy of a Photon
The discussion in the previous section then leads us to re-examine the meaning of a photon's energy as
given by E = hf. Is it not odd that a photon's energy should be proportional to it's frequency with no
reference to the amplitude of the waves? Wave and field amplitudes normally feature in determining wave
energies, so how does frequency figure in all of this?
From our model of light we have that the frequency represents oscillations of the aether corresponding to
variations in the magnetic field. If we look at the following Maxwell's equation:
where B is the magnetic field and E is the electric field, we see that a changing magnetic field will produce
an electric field at right angles to the changing B vector. The faster the magnetic field changes, i.e. the
higher the frequency of light waves, the stronger the induced electric field will be. The electric field
represents the force exerted on a nearby charge due, in this case, to a changing magnetic field.
We think it is more useful to view the photon's frequency as representing the force that it can exert on a
charge rather than the photon's total energy. The standard E = hf photon energy required to make an
electron jump from a lower to a higher energy orbital inside an atom can be considered to represent the
minimum force required to produce that jump. The corresponding energy will be given by the usual force x
distance considerations, where the distance represents the length for which the force is applied. This does
not mean that other parts of the photon ring cannot also affect other electrons in the same way. Only the
part of the photon ring interacting with the electron will lose it's energy to the electron. This is similar to the
way water waves will affect multiple objects floating on the surface of the water.
This resolves another of the paradoxes of the standard theory - the absorption of a photon through it's
interaction with an electron inside an atom (the Photoelectric effect). As we have argued in the previous
section, the photon has to be at least as large as the slit separation in the 2-slit photon interference
experiment for the whole thing to make sense. For light that means at least approximately one millimetre in
size.
Even without that, it is difficult to see how a photon could be smaller than one wavelength of the light
-6
vibration constituting it, which for red light is about 10 m. Therefore, we have to ask how can an electron
-10
whose motion is normally limited to atomic dimensions (around 10 m), absorb or negate a disturbance at
4 7
least 10 times larger, and more likely at least 10 times larger, than the atom. This is conceptually illogical.
(We note that although it is possible to create a disturbance smaller than one wavelength by superimposing
a number of waves of slightly different frequency, to negate that disturbance would involve negating all the
constituent waves, which leads us back to the original dilemma).
This problem does not arise with our model, since the electron only affects the part of the photon ring with
which it interacts - it does not negate the whole photon. It only appears to do so conventionally, because of
the way the photon energy has been defined. The author is not aware of any experiment which clearly
demonstrates that the photon is totally annihilated. Very few experiments deal with single photons, most
involve light which is made up of numerous photons. It would be difficult to determine accurately what
happens to any one single photon under such conditions.
Going back to the photon interference experiments described in the previous section, the photomultiplier that
is used to detect photons will register a hit whenever an electron is knocked free of an atom so that it can
then be detected and amplified by the instrument to register a signal. If we then assume that the probability
of knocking an electron free is proportional to the intensity of the light at the detector our photon description
is complete.
Electron-Positron annihilation
In our model, the positron is the same as the electron but with aether spins reversed, see Chapter 7 for a
more detailed discussion of this.
Therefore, in an electron-positron annihilation we have the two particles both creating magnetic type aether
spins in the same direction. This is because although their charges, and therefore spin directions, are
normally opposite they are moving in opposite directions with the result that they will both spin the aether in
the same direction around a line joining the two particles, as shown in Fig 4.8.
The electron and positron will accelerate towards one another under the influence of the electrostatic force
and will therefore create a rapidly increasing rate of rotation of the aether just before the collision. According
to our model of photon creation outlined in the previous sections, this rotational aether disturbance should
give rise to an expanding photon ring at right angles to the line joining the electron and positron, as shown in
Fig 4.8.
Fig 4.8 Electron-positron annihilation.
Based on this reasoning, the two photons moving in opposite directions, which are normally detected with
electron-positron annihilation experiments, are not really two separate photons but the opposite ends of an
expanding photon ring.
Another interesting observation with electron-positron annihilation experiments is, that in a small percentage
of cases, three or even more photons have been detected simultaneously. This is perfectly consistent with
our photon model. We see from the photon ring geometry that if a photon is registered at a detector (e.g. D1
in Fig 4.8) there will always be a second event registered for a detector placed at the opposite end of the ring
(detector D2). However, a third event will only be registered if the third detector is coincident with the plane
of the ring (D3) and nothing will be detected if it is positioned off the plane, like D4 in Fig 4.8.
Since the probability of the plane of the photon ring being coincident with three randomly placed detectors is
small, our photon model accords with observation. This also strengthens our argument that a single photon
can affect more than one electron, as discussed in the previous section.
Chapter 5. Gravity
Gravity as a 4D Wave Phenomenon
Modern science is still not able to give a convincing explanation of how gravity works. It struggles to explain
how two bodies can pull on one another at large distances. The conventional view involves the rather
peculiar notion that gravity results from an exchange of particles (the as yet unseen ‘gravitons’) between the
planetary bodies.
We think that there is a much more simple and conceptually more satisfying explanation for gravity, which
involves the idea of a push or shadow effect. If a force is transmitted to a body from 'something' pushing on
it from all directions the body would remain stationary as all the forces would cancel out, as shown in Fig
5.1(a).
Fig 5.1 The shadowing effect of two bodies resulting in an 'attraction'.
However if a second body is brought close to the first one, part of the impinging force on body 1 would be
blocked out and cause a net push towards body 2, as shown in Fig 5.1 (b). Similarly, body 1 would cause a
net push on body 2 towards body 1, resulting in what would appear to an observer to be an attraction
between the two bodies.
This idea is not new, it has been proposed by a number of people, one of the earliest of which was La Sage
2
[32]. He showed that the amount of shadowing produced is proportional to 1/r , where r is the distance
2
between the two bodies. This is consistent with the 1/r variation of the gravitational force. However we will
not assume, as La Sage did, that the impinging force is caused by the bombardment of particles or gravitons
or aether particles in our case. This type of assumption leads to other difficulties, such as the resistance and
slowing down that this would cause to an orbiting body and incompatibility with inertia.
This is the fundamental flaw of all 'pressure' based gravity models - inconsistency with inertia. That is, if
gravitational attraction is to be considered as an imbalance in the pressure due to shadowing it implies that
any object moving through the aether will experience a greater pressure in the front compared to the back. It
would therefore experience a resistive force, even if moving at constant velocity, contrary to experience.
We will adopt here, the model outlined by Maurice Cooke, which explains the push on the bodies to be a
consequence of the shielding of 4D waves [33]. That is, aether waves along the 4th dimensional axis as
described in Chapter 2. The very same waves which in the aether model are responsible for the creation of
particles, giving us a way of unifying gravity and quantum mechanics.
As described in the Chapter 2, 4D waves are generated by 'primary' points and appear in 3D space as
spherical waves travelling in all directions. Close to a planetary body, the waves from the opposite end are
blocked by the planet, causing a change in the resultant interference pattern, or points of low and high
vibration surrounding the body. In such a situation, the superimposition of waves will produce a general drift
of nodal points towards the body. The best way to illustrate this effect is with a computer simulation.
Fig 5.2 The interference pattern from spherical wave generators
(red points) surrounding a spherical body.
Fig 5.2 shows the arrangement used in the calculation. The purple sphere represents a planetary body.
The red dots represent a more or less randomly distributed collection of 3D spherical wave generators. The
black and white areas show the interference pattern produced by superimposing all of the individual
contributions. Of course, this is not to scale. In actuality the waves would be of a much smaller wavelength,
of the same order as atomic distances, but the principle would be the same.
Fig 5.3 Series of images showing the nodal drift towards a planetary surface.
The time interval between images is about 5% of the wave period.
Fig 5.3 shows a magnified image of the rectangular region in Fig 5.2 as it develops over time. Although
there are small changes in particular areas of the pattern due to a time evolution of wave amplitudes, the
overall structure of the pattern remains intact from one image to the next. As the highlighted points show,
there is a general movement of the recognisable structures towards the spherical body. The drift being
greater the closer one gets to the surface.
Fig 5.4. Same as Fig 5.3, but without the planetary body.
Fig 5.4 shows the same area when the spherical body is not present. As before, there are small changes
due to a time evolution of waves, but there is clearly no movement in the structure of the pattern. As
discussed in Chapter 2, the nodal points in the 4D wave pattern, corresponding to low vibration areas in the
aether, are the points where matter particles condense out of the aether. If we further assume that the
particles once formed have a tendency to 'stick' to low vibration nodal points, we can see that the nodal drift
near a planetary body will exert a force on any objects in the vicinity, towards that body.
When a second body is brought close to a planetary body, it will block out some of the waves normally
reaching it, as shown in Fig 5.1(b). This will result in a smaller nodal drift, and therefore a smaller force, on
the side facing the second body. The side facing away from the second body will still have the same nodal
drift and therefore push. The result of all this will be to produce a net force on the first body towards the
second. By a reciprocal argument there will be a net force on the second body towards the first.
The amount of nodal drift near the planetary surface will be dependent on the amount of 'shadowing' from
2
the other body. Given that the amount of shadowing follows a 1/r relationship, [32] the present model would
2
be consistent with the 1/r variation of the gravitational force.
This model also explains why all objects fall towards the surface of a planet at the same rate independent of
shape, mass or density. The nodal points at a particular radius all drift towards a planet at the same rate
giving an equal 'push'. This model also accounts for the breaking up of large objects, such as large meteors,
as they hurtle towards a planet.
Because the nodes are drifting towards the surface of a planet they get progressively closer due to lateral
shrinkage. This lateral shrinkage will squeeze the object perpendicularly to the line of the nodal drift, as
shown in Fig 5.5. The larger the object, and the faster it travels, the greater the lateral force will be.
Fig 5.5 Compression forces on a falling body.
We should also note that the 4D waves will not necessarily be completely blocked at the surface of the
planetary body. It is likely that they will penetrate some way into the body, with a diminishing amplitude. The
4D waves might even exit the other side with a much smaller amplitude, and possibly a phase shift due to
the waves slowing down inside the body in a similar way light does when it passes through a denser
medium. In either case, the net effect will be the same, a drift of the nodal points towards the body.
Aether and General Relativity

General relativity is an outgrowth of special relativity and embodies some of the same assumptions, such as
the constancy of the speed of light. Because electromagnetic signals are used to measure distances and
times, one could say that the curvature of space-time, or change in the metric, is a consequence of the need
to maintain the constancy of the speed of light. However, once one frees oneself from the straight-jacket of
requiring the constancy of the speed of light, a host of new options open up. Then it makes more sense to
assume that the metric is constant and the speed of light changes, the effect is the same.
For example, the bending of light by gravity could be explained by assuming that the aether increases in
density as one nears the surface of a planetary body. Light would then be bent or refracted in a similar way
as when it passes through matter of varying density. Also, one would expect that the atomic processes of
clocks might run slower in a denser aether, giving rise to the time dilation that we observe in a gravitational
field.
Tom Van Flandern has shown that the effects ascribed to general relativity stated above, could be explained
by an underlying medium whose density increases linearly with the closeness to the gravitational body [34].
The 4D wave model described above, gives us a possible mechanism by which the density of the aether
would be increased near a planetary body. One might expect that the drift of the nodal points towards the
surface of a planet would create a small, but definite pressure, on the underlying aether. A pressure that
would increase as one moved closer to the planetary surface, giving rise to an increasing aether density.
Tom Van Flandern has also presented a convincing argument, based on experimental observation,
suggesting that the speed of gravity is much greater than the speed of light [35]. The assumption that gravity
is propagated at the speed of light leads to predictions that are in stark disagreement with observation. The
notion that gravity propagates faster than the speed of light is also supported by experiments carried out by
Eugene Podkletnov and Giovanni Modanese. They used a high voltage discharge mechanism to generate
what they refer to as a gravity wave impulse [36]. This impulse was found to travel through thick metal and
brick walls, and was able to affect objects a long distance away from the source. More importantly, they
measured the beam speed to be more than 60 times the speed of light. We must therefore allow the
possibility, that the 4D waves we have been describing, can travel much faster than the speed of light. This
also implies that gravity cannot be explained as a residual effect of electromagnetic interactions as some
have proposed, because electromagnetic forces are limited to the speed of light.
Resolution of the Conflict between Quantum Electrodynamics and General Relativity

The inconsistencies between Quantum Electrodynamics and General Relativity are well documented.
Jordan Maclay gives a good account of these [37]. The main difficulty is that Quantum Electrodynamics
114
predicts a zero-point energy density in empty space to be somewhere around 10 joules/cubic meter. It is
amusing to think that 'empty' space could contain such staggering amounts of energy.
2
To get a better idea of the quantities we are dealing with, we can use Einstein's E = mc formula to convert
92
the above figure to an equivalent mass, giving us a density of about 10 kg/cc. The consequence of this is
that, as Jordan Maclay points out - "A volume the size of a proton in empty space contains about the same
amount of vacuum energy as all the matter in the entire universe!". According to general relativity, this
should produce a gravitational field so strong that it would collapse the entire universe into a region of space
much smaller than the atom. That hasn't happened yet, so obviously there must be something wrong with
the assumptions of Quantum Electrodynamics or General Relativity, or both.
If the aether theory presented here is correct it becomes obvious where the problem lies. As discussed in
Chapter 2, the zero-point energy that Quantum Electrodynamics describes, can be equated to the energy of
the 4D waves. It is likely that the 4D waves would contain a lot of energy, it is just that we are not normally
aware of it because the vibrations are along the 4th dimensional axis with no component projected on to 3D
space. However the key point is, that this enormous energy cannot be equated to mass which would
influence normal mass gravitationally. These waves are instrumental in facilitating the attraction of two
bodies as discussed previously, but until some of this energy is converted to dense matter it will not directly
attract another body.
2
We think that this is a case where the E = mc equation has been taken beyond the domain to which it
applies. Or it could be said that the equation correctly describes the conversion of energy to matter and vice
versa, but that we cannot always consider them as being equivalent.
Chapter 6. Inertia
Inertia as a 4D Wave Phenomenon
Modern science doesn't have an adequate explanation of what causes inertia. Standard theory attributes
inertia to the interaction of an object with the background of all matter in the universe. This has its origin in
Mach's principle, which argues that if an object were alone in the universe, how could it know it is being
accelerated? However, no one has been able to give a convincing explanation of how this interaction with
the matter in the universe comes about.
The same arguments can be applied to rotational inertia. A gyroscope for example will maintain its direction
with respect to the background of stars if it is carried around the earth and brought back to its starting point.
Again, rotational inertia seems to be tied to the background of matter comprising the universe. One is
entitled to ask what kind of interaction with the background matter is capable of keeping the gyroscope
aligned to it? The most sensible explanation for inertia is to assume an underlying medium, or aether.
Inertia can then be simply explained as some form of interaction of an object with the surrounding medium.
Another version of a possible medium has arisen out of Quantum Electrodynamics in the form of the zero-
point fluctuations, considered to be created spontaneously out of the 'vacuum' [38]. These represent a kind
of medium which can interact with the charge components inside matter. Such interactions with matter have
been proposed as an explanation for inertia [39]. However, as discussed in Chapter 1, this theory has
difficulty in accounting for certain experiments, for which the aether makes more sense.
An aetheric model has to be able to explain inertia. Why a body travelling at constant speed feels no
resistance while an accelerating one feels a strong resistance. Again we draw on the model proposed by
Maurice Cooke [40]. As discussed previously, particles of matter are formed at, and tend to remain in, the
nodal points in the 4D wave pattern corresponding to low vibration regions in the aether. Assuming that the
'primary' points generating the 4D waves move about at a whole range of speeds, the nodal points will also
move about at those speeds. Therefore the atoms of a moving body have to catch a 'ride' on the nodal
points moving at the same speed as the body. While they are riding on the nodal points the atoms will not
experience any resistance. However when there is a force applied to the body in order to accelerate it, the
atoms have to jump out of their existing nodes and on to other nodes travelling at the higher velocity. If it is
assumed that particles have a tendency to remain or 'stick' to the nodal points, then we can see that jumping
from one node to another will meet with some resistance. It is this resistance that we experience as inertia.
The higher the acceleration the more nodes there are which have to be jumped per unit time, and therefore
the higher the resistive force.
This mechanism is also able to explain the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass. In the case of
gravity, it is the nodes which change speed and 'drag' the atoms with them. This is experienced as the
gravitational acceleration (see Chapter 5). When the atoms are allowed to move with the nodes in free fall,
they experience no force, even though they are accelerating. While, with inertia, we have the reverse
situation of accelerating atoms being dragged out of their companion nodes. In both cases, the forces and
accelerations will be generated by the same mechanism - resistance to jumping of nodes. Hence we can
understand why gravitational and inertial masses would be equivalent.
It also follows logically, that if jumping of nodes during acceleration creates a resistive force on an object,
there must also be a force exerted by the object on the aether. One would therefore expect that whenever
an object is accelerated, there would be created some sort of movement of the aether along the direction of
acceleration. The stronger the acceleration or deceleration, the stronger the disturbance in the aether. It
should be possible to detect this movement by, for example, using techniques pioneered by Dr Kozyrev. He
set up equipment which was so sensitive that it was able to detect changes caused by raising and lowering a
10kg weight 2-3 meters away! He referred to the disturbances that travelled from the weight to his detectors
as torsion fields. We would simply refer to them as changes in the movement of the aether. One might also
consider these as longitudinal waves with a spiral motion. See David Wilcock's site [41] for an interesting
account of Dr Kozyrev and his colleague's many discoveries.
Rotation
The above model of inertia can be used to explain the radial forces generated by the rotation of an object. If
we consider an atom at the edge of a spinning disk, as shown in Fig 6.1(a), we can see that it starts to move
in a line tangential to the edge of the disk. That line of motion will not encounter any resistance as it is
moving with a node which we are assuming normally travels in a straight line.
However, this can only last for a very short period, before the forces which keep the wheel together, pull the
atom towards the centre of the disk to keep it on a circular path. This means that the atom has to jump the
node with which it was moving, and temporarily follow another node which is moving tangentially to the edge
of the disk at the new atom position, as shown in Fig 6.1(b). Because of the rapid node-jumping along a line
towards the centre of the disk, the atom will feel a force in the opposite direction.
Fig 6.1 The radial node jumping for a rotating object.
We can therefore understand why a spinning object will experience a force radially outwards but no
resistance to the actual rotation (ignoring friction for the moment), in accord with experience. And because
the rate of node-jumping will increase with the rate of spin, the outward force will also increase with the spin.
The conservation of angular momentum and the precessional forces on a gyroscope, can be explained by a
similar analysis. One of the other consequences of the above rotation model will be a force on the aether
radially towards the centre of the disk, following the action and reaction argument of the previous section.
Therefore, one would expect an increase in the aether pressure towards the axis of rotation.
However, during the initial spinning up of the disk, or while the rate of spin is increasing, there will also be
some node-jumping along the line tangential to the edge of the disk. This is because the rate of spin is
increasing, therefore the tangential velocity v of fig 6.1(a) is also increasing. Thus there will be a resistance
to the increasing of the spin rate, consistent with observation. It also follows from this, that during the
spinning up, there will be a force on the aether along a line tangential to the edge of the disk, in the direction
in which the object is spinning. This would seem to be a reasonable mechanism by which we could explain
entrainment of the aether around planetary bodies. Indeed any spinning body would be expected to produce
a spinning aether, and it should be possible to detect such in the laboratory, with a suitable detection
mechanism such as that used by Dr. Kozyrev [41].
When we combine this rotation of the aether with the pressure towards the axis of rotation, as described
above, we have all the elements of a spiral motion. If we were only dealing with 3D space, the inward
flowing aether would have nowhere to go (except perhaps out of the north and south axis of rotation),
however in 4D space, the aether pressure towards the axis of rotation can push the aether into the 4th
dimension. Therefore, one would expect that the aether particles would move a short distance in 3D space
before they 'disappear' into the 4th dimension, mapping out a spiral as seen from 4D space.
We have here all the elements of a vortex flow into the 4th dimension. Similar in fact, to the electron vortex
described in Chapter 2, but with an aether circulation which is centred on an axis in 3D space. We would
therefore expect that any rotating object would create a transfer of energy from 3D space into the 4th
dimension (or even higher dimensions).
This seems to be supported by unusual patterns observed at the polar regions of various planets in our solar
system. Richard Hoagland and David Wilcock have pointed out the unusual formations observed on the
outer planets of our solar system, [42] which are difficult to explain by standard theory. They also point out
o
the many instances of unusual phenomena occurring at around 19.5 latitude on many planetary bodies in
our solar system. Hoagland & Wilcock attribute these to a geometrical relationship to higher dimensions.
While our approach is different to theirs, it does strengthen the proposition that rotating objects create large-
scale energetic flows to and from higher dimensions.
Also, as discussed in Chapter 10, we expect that when aether flows relative to matter, it slows down atomic
processes, and therefore produces time dilation. In the case of rotation, aether flows are more pronounced
because of the strong 4D component as discussed above. Therefore, one might expect that rapid rotation
would lead to a more pronounced time dilation effect.
There is in fact experimental evidence for this. It has been reported that Bruce DePalma carried out
experiments where he spun a 30 pound concrete disk at some 8000 rpm. Above the disk he suspended a
Bulova Accutron watch that according to the specifications was accurate to within 1 second per year.
However, the watch above the spinning disk reportedly lost 1 second in 20 minutes!
Chapter 7. Atoms and Quantum Mechanics
Atoms, Aether and 4D Waves
As outlined in Chapter 2, the present model assumes nuclear particles to be condensations of aether at
points where 4D waves produce nodes of low vibration, while electrons are assumed to be aether vortexes
which connect to the protons via the 4th dimension. However, the electron vortexes are not positioned at
nodal points. In the same way that atmospheric vortexes, such as tornadoes, form in air that is turbulent, it
would make sense that the electron vortexes would form in regions of high aetheric vibration. That is,
regions surrounding the nodes where the 4D wave oscillations are at a maximum. Thus we have an image
of an atom as being composed of a nucleus sitting at a nodal point, surrounded by electron vortexes being
continuously moved about in the high vibration regions around the nucleus by aetheric currents.
The above picture would imply that the first peak of aetheric vibration would occur around the 0.5 Angstrom
-10
(0.5x10 m) distance from the nucleus corresponding to the first electron orbital of the Hydrogen atom.
Therefore it would make sense that the shortest 4D wave would be such as to produce a peak at the 0.5
Angstrom distance. In other words, a wavelength of around 1 Angstrom. It is also expected that there would
be waves generated, whose wavelengths are multiples of the shortest wavelength. These would be the
harmonics of the basic wave which combine in such a way as to produce the required low and high vibration
regions surrounding the atoms.
The 4D vibrations would also be expected to create complex aether flows in 3D space in the presence of
'hard' matter such as protons and neutrons. This is supported by the observation that neutrons outside the
nucleus will after a short period, spontaneously transform into a electron-proton pair. This implies that the
presence of the neutron changes the surrounding aether in such a way as to promote the formation of the
electron-proton pair. That such an event should occur is difficult to explain conceptually with standard
models. This model might also help us to understand some unusual observations that seem to involve the
reverse process of electron-proton pairs being converted into neutrons inside atoms. That is, transmutation
of the elements.
There have been reports over the years of processes that produce conversions from one element to another.
One example is the Marcus Hollingshead device, consisting of orthogonal spinning toroidal coils, that over a
period of time change the properties of the materials inside it [43]. The material was found to have a greater
proportion of neutrons than the starting proportion. The well known cold-fusion experiments are another
example. One mechanism that might be involved in some of these processes is the breaking of an electron-
proton 4D vortex connection, perhaps by use of high powered electromagnetic fields oscillation at resonant
frequencies, leading to a dissolution of the electron-proton charge vortexes. This would effectively be a
conversion of an electron-proton pair into a neutron, without having to force the electrons close enough to
the nucleus to merge with the protons.
Aether and Quantum Mechanics

The standard quantum mechanical wave equation essentially describes standing waves. The reasoning
being, that only standing waves can be used to describe a stable orbit of electrons around the nucleus, in the
same way that a guitar string will form standing-wave patterns for wavelengths which are multiples of the
string length.
The requirement of standing waves is not too different from what is required in the 4D wave aetheric model.
Only nodal points that persist for many wave periods will be stationary long enough for nuclear particles to
firstly condense out of the aether and secondly for the atoms to travel with the nodes.
The basic quantum mechanical wave equation is of the form:
The requirement of a standing wave pattern then leads to the condition that only certain wavelengths are
allowed in the solution of the above equation. In the standard theory, particles are associated with a
wavelength that is proportional to their momentum (p = mv), leading to the quantum nature of atoms. That
is, the electrons can have only certain energy values (E) corresponding to the allowed wavelengths through
the equality:
However, we think that it is not necessary to attribute a wave nature to the particles themselves. Perhaps
we have been looking at this the wrong way? Perhaps the wave nature is not a component of the particles,
but of the medium in which they are embedded, the aether.
As outlined above, the 4D wave model assumes that the electrons occupy regions of high aetheric vibration
around the nodal points. Therefore in this model, the electrons are driven around the nuclear orbits by their
interactions with the 4D wave oscillations of the aether. It may be that the wave function of quantum
mechanics, as it applies to atomic structure, corresponds in some way to the level of vibration in the aether.
This is similar to certain models in Quantum Electrodynamics which seek to explain quantum mechanical
effects as a consequence of a particle's interaction with the zero-point energy fluctuations [44].
The Problem of the Non-Radiating Electron

One of the reasons that Quantum Mechanics was created in the first place, was to try and explain why
orbiting electrons inside an atom, do not generate continuous electromagnetic radiation as a result of being
accelerated around the nucleus, as would normally be the case for an accelerated charge. One would
expect that such an electron would continuously radiate energy away, and as a result, spiral into the nucleus
collapsing the atom.
The quantum mechanical explanation is, that the electron is to be described by a standing wave pattern, as
described by the wave function, which only forms a stable configuration for certain wavelengths. As
discussed in the previous section, this implies that the energy of a particular electron orbital is constant,
since it is proportional to the wavelength. Therefore it is argued, that an orbital with a constant energy
cannot radiate energy away.
This however, is an artificial explanation, it does not really explain why the electron cannot radiate energy.
Even if we accept the idea implied by the uncertainty principle, that “we cannot, in principle, know where an
electron is inside an atom”, a localised particle orbiting a nucleus should still radiate energy, even if we do
not know where the particle is. Otherwise, we have to assume that the electron is some kind of 'smeared
out' amorphous substance - a philosophically ugly notion that at the conceptual level creates more problems
than it solves.
Standard theory attributes a velocity for the different electron orbitals which for a Hydrogen atom is given by:
where vn = electron velocity for n orbital and n = 1,2,3... the orbital quantum number
We see that for the ground-state electron (1s orbital) in Hydrogen, the speed is slightly under 1% of the
speed of light. The speed decreasing in proportion to 1/n. The very notion of an orbital velocity, implies a
localised particle. It is difficult to see how the concept of an orbital velocity could be applied to a 'smeared
out' substance as implied by the wave function.
Inherent in Quantum Mechanics are two contradictory pictures of the electron, one a localised particle as
implied by the orbital velocity and the potential energy function, the other a 'smeared out' substance as
implied by the wave equation. As already discussed, we believe that it makes more sense to attribute the
wave properties to the medium or aether than to the particles themselves, eliminating the contradiction.
However, with this model we still need to explain why the orbiting electrons do not radiate electromagnetic
energy and spiral into the nucleus.
As described in Chapter 4, our model assumes that electromagnetic radiation is generated whenever a
charge is accelerated relative to the aether. One way to explain the non-radiation, is to assume that the
electrons do not accelerate relative to the aether. In other words, it is possible that electrons are carried
along on currents of flowing aether, similar to the way vortexes on the surface of rivers are carried along by
the flowing water. This would imply that for each electron orbital, there are stable orbiting aether currents
along which the electrons move. Furthermore, when the electron jumps from one orbital to another it would
accelerate relative to the aether and would therefore radiate a photon, along the lines discussed in Chapter
4.
Quantum Mechanics or Fluid Dynamics?
The concept of the quantum mechanical wave equation corresponding to vibrations in some gas/liquid
medium, is further supported by the work of R. M. Kiehn and others who have pointed out the similarities
between the wave equation and fluid dynamics. R. M. Kiehn has shown that there exists a direct mapping
between the Schroedinger wave equation for a charged particle in a magnetic field and the Navier-Stokes
fluid dynamic equations for vortex motion in a compressible viscous fluid [45].
The absolute square of the wave function, which normally represents the probability of finding a particle in a
given position, is then equal to the vorticity distribution in the fluid. The mapping between the two systems is
complete with the following equality for the kinematic viscosity of the fluid:
where vk = kinematic viscosity, h = Plank's constant and m = particle mass
Given that our aether model equates charge to an aether vortex (see Chapter 2), it would make sense that
m, which is the effective vortex mass, should be equated to the inertial mass of the electron! We can then
estimate the kinematic viscosity of the aether by substituting the electron's mass in the above equation. The
2
result we get is vk = 1.1 cm /s.
Yuri Galaev has carried a direct experimental determination of the aether viscosity, by using an
interferometer to measure the aether velocities as a function of time inside a tube [46]. His estimate for the
2
kinematic viscosity of the aether is about 0.6 cm /s. This is close enough to the above calculated value to
2
make it interesting. For comparison purposes we note that the kinematic viscosities for Water = 0.01 cm /s
2
and Air = 0.15 cm /s.
Given also that in our model the magnetic field is seen as a flow of aether, (see Chapter 3), the above
example would equate to a picture where we have vortex motion in a stream of aether, somewhat like the
vortex motion which can be observed on the surface of a river.
The fluid dynamic equations also allow for the formation of connected vortex pairs. One form of these, is the
so called Falaco solitons, that are readily observed in water, and which are stable for relatively long periods
of time [45]. The structure of these pairs is similar, but with some important differences, to the vortex
structure we are associating with charge pairs (see Chapter 2). In this case, we would have a vortex pair
without the proton. In other words, an electron-positron 4D vortex link, as shown in Fig 7.1, where both the
electron and positron are nothing but connected aether vortexes.
Fig 7.1 An electron-positron vortex pair.
The fluid dynamic equations can therefore describe the charge pair production that is observed in high
energy physics experiments. The mapping from the quantum mechanical wave equation, to the Navier-
Stokes fluid dynamic equations described above, is done for the two dimensional case. The fluid dynamics
case requires a discontinuity in the medium for the vortexes to form, such as the water-air interface in the
above example. The 3rd dimension contains the discontinuity.
However in our aether model, a complete description of charge requires an additional dimension. The
discontinuity for the vortexes to form, is provided by the veil or membrane defining a 4D surface (see
Chapter 2). The complete Navier-Stokes equation would have to include four position variables, all
orthogonal to one another. The complexity of fluid motion would increase considerably, as there are more
degrees of freedom in the 4D case. We could not only have rotation in an x-y plane, but also the z-w plane
at the same time, where w is the 4th axis. Charles Hinton gives a good description of rotation in 4
dimensions [47]. In addition, a complete fluid dynamic description would have to include the 4D vibrations,
along the w-axis, which are discussed in previous sections.
Particles or Waves?
One of the more ambiguous concepts of modern day Physics, is the particle wave duality of matter.
Particles are treated as waves under certain conditions and solid objects in others. The basic dilemma is
often illustrated by resorting to the double slit experiment involving electrons. If electrons are fired through a
double slit arrangement as shown in Fig 7.2, the probability of detecting electrons on the back plane would
show a pattern that is consistent with the interference effects which one observes with waves.
Fig 7.2. The double slit experiment with electrons.
What is even more surprising, is that if the beam intensity is reduced to such an extent that only single
electrons go through the slits at any one time, the same intensity pattern will appear when a large number of
hits are recorded. In other words, even when a single electron goes through the slits it behaves as if it was
going through both slits and interfering with itself.
The dilemma then is, that if the electrons are to be viewed as particles confined to a small region of space,
then they can only go through one slit or the other but not both. To resolve this dilemma Physics has come
up with the notion that the electrons consist of some sort of amorphous extension in space, as described by
the wave function, which moves through both slits and creates the interference pattern. And that when we
come to detect the electrons using our instruments this amorphous 'substance' somehow collapses into the
localised particle. A strange notion indeed! It leads to many conceptual difficulties and paradoxes. For
example, how does the wave function know when to collapse?
The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics assumes that the wave function collapses upon
observation. However the wave function doesn't know that a person is going to be reading a detector used
in a measurement. We do not think it is that clever. What criterion should we use for the collapse of the
wave function? One might suppose that it collapses when it, or some aspect of it, encounters a 'solid' object
such as a detector, but if that is so, why does it not collapse when it encounters the object containing the
slits?
As discussed above, we think there might be a more common sense interpretation of these events. Namely
that the interference effects are not to be attributed to the electrons themselves, but to the wave nature of the
medium. The above example is to a large extent academic, because it would not be practical to carry out
this experiment. There are however, other experiments that have been carried out, which demonstrate this
principle. One common example is the scattering of electrons by a crystal, such as occurs in an electron
microscope. There, the scattering of electrons, or diffraction pattern, definitely displays the interference
effects normally associated with waves.
However we believe that it is not necessary to attribute the wave properties to the electrons but rather to the
4D aetheric waves that surround the atoms within the crystal. The patterns of aetheric vibration will be
modified by the presence of the crystalline atoms. The regular periodicity of these atoms will introduce
periodic variations in the 4D standing wave patterns inside and near the crystal. Therefore, an electron fired
into the crystal would not only be affected by the Coulomb forces of the atoms but also by the 4D wave
patterns.
It is conceivable that the diffraction patterns we observe in the scattered electrons, are in fact due to the
influence of the aetheric vibration patterns on the electrons as they pass through the crystal. The influence
being such as to somehow produce an effect that is consistent with the observed relationship of the
wavelength being proportional to the momentum of the incoming electrons. Similar logic could be applied to
other atomic particles.
Sub-atomic Particles and Higher Dimensions

As outlined in Chapter 2, the present model assumes nuclear particles to be condensations of aether at
points where 4D waves produce nodes of low vibration, in a similar way to that in which water vapour
condenses into water droplets. However, we believe that in the case of nuclear particles, the aetheric
particles are themselves structured. That is, the aether constituting the nuclear particles, forms a crystalline
or ordered structure, rather than a liquid form as in a water droplet. In this model, the different sub-atomic
particles that Physics has discovered, are a consequence of the different arrangements of the aether
particles from which they are formed.
We also believe that the aether particles come in different sizes and qualities, and are therefore able to form
their own sub-units, somewhat analogous to the normal atoms but much smaller. This implies that the
aether particles are themselves constituted from even smaller particles in a similar way to that in which
atomic particles are formed from the aether ones. If that were the case, then it would make sense that these
sub-aether particles could be related to a 5th dimension in the same way that aether particles are related to
the 4th dimension. That is, the aether particles would be prevented from moving into the 5th dimension by
some sort of veil spanning the surface of a 5D sphere, in the same way that nuclear particles are prevented
from moving along the 4th dimensional axis (see "The 4th Dimension" in Chapter 2). However, the sub-
aether particles would be able to pass through the 5D veil and thus form vortexes or 'wormholes' channelling
this rarefied matter in and out of the 4th dimension.
It doesn't take too much of a leap to imagine that there could be several levels down of particle sizes, each
more rarefied and each corresponding to the next higher dimension as per the previous example. Until a
level is reached where there exists pure consciousness, as the eastern mystics suggest. Thus we can begin
to understand the statements of esoteric and eastern teachings that the manifest worlds are created and
maintained by consciousness. That life is a play of consciousness.
There are some similarities between the above model and the so called ‘string’ theories of modern Physics.
Matter is viewed as consisting of tiny strings which vibrate in different dimensions. Different modes of
vibration giving rise to different particles and forces [48]. However, these extra dimensions are assumed to
wrap around themselves at a very small scale, much smaller in size than atomic particles. This is the
physicist's way of explaining why we do not see these extra dimensions.
However, we are suggesting here, that the extra dimensions actually extend indefinitely along the axes
perpendicular to the 3D ones with which we are familiar, it is just that we are prevented from moving along
these extra dimensions. We are also suggesting, that there are a number of particle size levels below the
nuclear size one, in fact 7 basic levels corresponding to 7 dimensions. It is also interesting to note that in
recent years physicists have been increasingly talking about vibrating membranes as the foundations of
matter. Membranes spanning surfaces in higher dimensions, similar to the veil idea presented here [49].
Chapter 8. Free-Energy
Free-Energy
The idea of free limitless energy has been around for some time now. It holds the promise of solving our
energy needs without compromising our environment, while alleviating poverty and suffering. We should be
making free energy research a priority rather than giving it the scant support it is currently receiving. We
have set out a plan that outlines our vision of how we can move closer to the goal of free energy for all in
Chapter 11 the “Free-Energy Roadmap”.
We must emphasise that by free-energy we do not mean creating energy out of nothing, but rather tapping
into the enormous stores of energy that we believe the universe contains. The erroneous belief that free-
energy implies a violation of conservation of energy laws has discouraged traditional scientists from doing
any serious research in this area. The concept of free energy is however, starting to gain respectability
among the scientific community, as a result of recent developments in physics dealing with zero-point
energy.
As discussed elsewhere, the latest theories suggest that the vacuum contains an enormous amount of
energy, only a small portion of which would be enough to supply all the world’s energy needs many times
over [50].
It is ironic that physicists, who would normally denounce the idea of creating something out of nothing, have
little difficulty in accepting the zero-point energy concept, which is the ultimate in something out of nothing
theories! After all, we are talking about a supposed vacuum, from which emerge charged particles and
energy out of nothing - courtesy of the uncertainty principle.
Even though the zero-point fluctuations are allowed by the uncertainty principle, it does not explain why they
should arise in the first place. If one accepts a causal universe, then there has to be some underlying
mechanism or cause that gives rise to these fluctuations. ,The uncertainty principle is a condition not a
cause.
Aetheric vibrations are a much more reasonable explanation for zero-point fluctuations.
More and more scientists are trying to work out ways to tap into this zero-point energy. One of the main
ideas being, that because the zero-point fluctuations impinge on matter from all sides equally, we are not
normally aware of this enormous energy. However, if one were able to create a coherence in the
fluctuations, one might be able to create a net force and therefore extract energy from the vacuum.
The Casimir effect gives us a possible way of doing this. This idea has been taken up by a number of
researchers - see for example, the research being done at Quantum Fields [51]. As discussed in Chapter 2,
the 4D waves model presented here, has many similarities to the zero-point fluctuations. The next section
demonstrates this, by showing that the Casimir effect can be explained within the context of the 4D wave
model. Like the zero-point fluctuations, the 4D waves would be expected to contain large amounts of
energy, it is just that we are not directly aware of this as the 4D waves oscillate along the 4th dimensional
axis.
However, we do not think that the Casimir effect is the best or the easiest way to extract energy from the 4D
waves. As outlined in Chapter 2, charge is viewed as an aether vortex moving into and out of the 4th
dimension. There is a 4D component to charge, and therefore a coupling to the 4D waves. Thus, there is
the possibility of tapping the 4D wave energy through the motion of charge. The "Free Energy and Charge"
section below, examines this concept in greater detail. Another way of coupling to the 4D waves is through
the movement and rotation of matter, in particular the spiral motion. We look at this in more detail in the
"Free Energy and the Spiral" section below.
4D Wave Explanation of the Casimir Effect

It has been shown experimentally, that when two metal plates are separated by a short distance (of the order
of a micro meter) there exists a force that draws the two plates together. This has been attributed to the
effects of zero-point energy fluctuations as described by Quantum Electrodynamics. We can show however,
that this effect can readily be explained within the context of the 4D wave model presented here.
The best way to demonstrate this effect, is through a computer simulation. Fig 8.1 shows the arrangement
used in the calculation:
Fig 8.1 Demonstration of the 4D wave Casimir effect.
(b) is an enlargement of the yellow area of (a).
(c) is the same area a short time later
(about 20% of the wave period).
The purple slabs represent two metal plates surrounded by a more or less random distribution of spherical
wave generators represented by the red dots. The pattern of white and dark areas show the interference
pattern produced by superimposing all the individual wave generator contributions. As with other examples,
the white and dark regions represent the amplitudes of movement along the 4th dimensional axis and not
motion in 3D space. The 4D wave amplitudes produced by the generators or primary points are assumed to
drop off as the inverse of distance in 3D space (1/r variation), which is consistent with energy-conservation
principles.
Also, it is assumed in the above example that there is some attenuation of the 4D wave amplitudes as they
pass through a plate. This gives rise to the 'duller' region between the plates in Fig 8.1(a), signifying lower
average vibration amplitudes in that region. The result of all this will be a greater wave contribution from the
side of the plate that is facing away from the second plate as compared to the side facing towards the
second plate. Consequently, there will be a drift of vibration nodes towards the plates from the outside
which is greater than the drift towards the plates from the inside region, as shown in Fig 8.1(b) & (c). As the
red arrows show, there is a noticeably larger drift of nodes from the left (outside) than from the right (inside).
This is similar to the drift of nodes surrounding a planetary body as discussed in Chapter 5. If we assume
that the particles have a tendency to 'stick' to low vibration nodal points, as outlined in the previous sections,
we can see that this nodal drift will produce a force tending to push the plates together. This is very similar
to the way a drift of nodes produces a gravitational force between two bodies. Gravity could be thought of as
a long range Casimir effect, or vice versa.
Fig 8.2 shows what happens when we increase the separation of the plates of Fig 8.1.
Fig 8.2 As for Fig 8.1 but with double the plate separation.
Increasing the plate separation also greatly increases the number of wave generators within the plates,
thereby creating a more equal contribution of wave amplitudes from the outside and inside of a plate. As Fig
8.2(b) & (c) show, this creates a much more equal drift of nodes from both sides of a plate. The result is that
there is a greater balance of forces on both sides of a plate, and therefore, a much smaller force tending to
push the plates together, in accordance with experiment.
There are similarities between the 4D wave and zero-point energy treatments of the Casimir effect. In
Qunatum Electrodynamics also, there is a greater density of zero-point fluctuations outside than inside the
plates, leading to a force that pushes the plates together. However, the way this imbalance of wave strength
comes about is different in the two cases.
In standard Quantum Electrodynamic theory, the conducting plates give rise to boundary conditions on the
surfaces, which means that only the zero-point fluctuations that have a wavelength of a half integral multiple
of the plate separation, are allowed within the plate region. This gives rise to a greater density of fluctuations
outside than inside the plates. The Qunatum Electrodynamic explanation of the Casimir effect, implies
conducting plates. The 4D wave theory presented here however, predicts a Casimir type force for plates of
any material. This provides a direct test of the 4D wave model.
Free Energy and Charge

As already mentioned, our model of charge as a 4th dimensional vortex, means that it has strong coupling to
the energy of the 4D waves, and therefore makes it a prime candidate for tapping into these enormous
stores of energy. Indeed, our model holds that it is the action of the 4D waves that drives the electrons in
their atomic orbitals.
In fact, the vortex flow itself, would contain a lot of energy, maintained by the 4D aetheric vibrations, in the
same way that tornadoes contain a lot of energy. Magnetic aether flows are in the same category as they
are a direct result of moving charges. Normally one cannot extract free-energy out of charge flow as these
processes are cyclic in nature, what you gain in one part you lose in another. However, if one could create
an asymmetry in the cycle, it is conceivable that one could extract useful energy directly from charges. Tom
Bearden [52] and John Bedini [53] seem to have been able to achieve just that.
One common theme that we observe with many situations that produce anomalous energy outputs or forces,
is the idea of rotation combined with translation. One example of this, is the anomalous effects observed
with plasmas under certain conditions. The Russian physicist Chernetskii has reported that, when ions are
forced to undergo a cycloid motion within a plasma device, anomalous energy outputs have been observed
[54].
As Fig 8.3(a) illustrates, the basic cycloid motion is the path traced by a point on a wheel rolling in a straight
line. This is in effect, a combination of rotation plus a translation perpendicular to the rotation axis.
Precession is a particular case of cycloid motion where the translation follows a circular path. We could also
translate along the axis of rotation which would give us the helical spiral motion, as shown in Fig 8.3(b). The
vortex is a particular case of the helical spiral where the radius of rotation decreases with the translation, as
shown in Fig 8.3(c). The most general motion would have both of these translations combined.
Fig 8.3 Different forms of rotation plus translation.

(a) Cycloid - translation is at right angles to the rotation axis.
(b) 3D Spiral - translation is parallel to the rotation axis.
(c) Vortex - as for (b) but with a decreasing radius of rotation.
So perhaps it is understandable that cycloid motion of charges produces anomalous effects in plasmas, our
model of charge, in fact involves a kind of rotation of aether particles represented by the 4D vortex. It is
conceivable that this type of motion creates a coherence in the forces that the 4D waves exert on the
charges, giving us a way of tapping into the energies of the 4th or even higher dimensions.
This is further supported by other cases where cycloid motion has produced anomalous forces. Prof.
Laithwaite has discovered, that when a spinning gyroscope is forced to undergo a cycloid type motion, it
exhibits inertial/gravitational anomalies [55]. As discussed in Chapter 6, a spinning body is expected to
generate a 4D aether vortex centred around the rotation axis. This however, is similar to what happens in
the case of a moving charge. As discussed in Chapter 3, a moving charge is assumed to generate a 4D
vortex with a preferential rotation around the direction of motion. Given the similarities of aether motion in
these two cases, it is perhaps not surprising that both charges and gyroscopes produce anomalous effects
when forced to undergo cycloid motion.
An outstanding example that has produced free-energy outputs, as well as antigravity, is the Roschin &
Godin device [56], itself a modified version of the Searl SEG machine [57]. It also makes use of cycloid type
particle motion within the device.
The above ideas relating to cycloid motion of charge, would suggest that an arrangement of wires or
conductors that forces electrons to flow in a cycloid or spiral motion, should produce anomalous effects. The
same outcome could also be achieved by a simple arrangement of conducting wires that is forced to rotate
or move in irregular paths.
A natural extension of that, is to the area of magnetic fields. Given that magnetic fields are generated by
moving charges, we already have a form of rotation and translation of the aether. One would expect
therefore, that rotating or moving magnets in a non-uniform way, would generate anomalous effects. There
are plenty of examples of such anomalies in magnetic devices that have been reported by various
researchers. Some examples are, the Adams motor [58], the Newman device [59], the Johnson motor [60],
and the Lutec1000 [61].
Free Energy and the Spiral

Following on from the previous section, we examine the ‘rotation plus translation’ idea for the spiral case.
Simultaneous rotation and translation, produces anomalous effects, not only with moving charges, but also
with neutral macroscopic objects. The spiral motion (Fig 8.3(b),(c)) in particular seems to be involved in
many cases.
A prime example of this is provided by the spinning ball experiments of Bruce DePalma [62]. He projected
two metal balls upwards inside a vacuum container, one spinning at some 20,000 rpm and the other non-
spinning, and observed them to detect any differences. He discovered that the spinning ball moved higher
and further and also fell faster than the non-spinning one, as shown in Fig 8.4. This effect has since been
verified by other researchers [63].
Fig 8.4 DePalma's spinning ball experiment.
Here we have a rotation plus translation of particles forming a spiral motion that produces effects defying
standard theories. From an aether particle perspective we have a 4D aether vortex being moved parallel to
the axis of rotation. One might therefore expect that keeping the rotating body still, and moving the aether
along the axis of rotation, would also produce some sort of anomalous energy effect. Although the two
cases are not exactly the same, there is a symmetry between the two arrangements. Given that our aether
model assumes the magnetic field to be a movement of the aether, see Chapter 3, it would make sense that
a magnetic field applied along the axis of rotation of a spinning body, would produce some such effect. This
has in fact been observed in the devices invented by Bruce DePalma, which are based on the Faraday disc
[62]. The basis of these devices is a rapidly spinning metallic disc placed between the poles of magnets, as
shown in Fig 8.5.
Fig 8.5 Faraday disc. The principle behind DePalma's N-Machine overunity generator.
This arrangement produces a voltage difference between the axis and edge of the rotating disc. DePalma
was able to generate free-energy from such a device. Paramahmsa Tewari has also demonstrated a free-
energy device based on a variation of the Faraday disc principle [64].
Another good example of the spiral principle is the water vortex effect observed by Schauberger [65]. He
claimed that when water was forced to undergo a vortex type motion, by the use of spiralling tubes, it caused
a blue glow to appear at the centre of the vortex, as well as creating excess energy outputs. An extension of
the Schauberger vortex concept is the water vortex propulsion device designed by Alexander Frolov [66],
based originally on Spartak Poliakov's ideas. He demonstrated an 'inertialess drive' that converts rotary
vortex type motion into a linear force. We also note that Arie DeGeus has been able to obtain free-energy
outputs, among other unusual effects, by use of a plasma vortex [67].
From the perspective of the aether model, there are a number of factors that come into play in determining
the forces and energies involved in spiral motion. There is the 4D aether vortex induced by rotational
motion, as described in Chapter 6, giving rise to etheric pressure towards the axis of rotation. There are
forces involved with node jumping due to rotation and acceleration. Also, if we assume that the aether is the
carrier of 4D waves, then one would expect that a moving aether would create phase shifts in the 4D waves,
which in turn would give rise to nodal shifts. The details of the forces and interactions are complex, however
we would say that for anyone interested in tapping into the free-energy of higher dimensions, rotation plus
non-uniform translation or spiral motion is a good place to start.
It is interesting to speculate on the possibility of the spiral being a prime mechanism by which living things
are energised from higher dimensional sources. We think this mechanism applies to all living things,
including plants. If one considers the flower for example, we marvel at the rapid burst of growth and
development from bud to full flowering in all its beautiful patterns. We think that there is more to this than
just chemical reactions. We believe that some form of energy spiral at the flower connects it to higher
dimensional energy patterns.
Chapter 9. Anti-Gravity
Experimental Evidence
A number of experiments have demonstrated antigravity effects. The most notable of these, because of it's
rigor and level of detail, is the Roschin & Godin device [68], itself a modified version of the Searl SEG
machine [69]. It consists of sets of rapidly rotating magnets that have been shown to reduce the weight of
the whole apparatus by a significant amount. The self-rotating magnets have to be slowed down to prevent
a runaway situation occurring which would cause the device to fly into the air, were it not for the fact that the
centrifugal forces would damage the device. Also, electromagnetic and temperature anomalies have been
observed when the device is in operation.
Another example of rotating magnetic fields producing anti-gravitational effects is the Hamel device [70]. It
consists of two counter-rotating wheels of magnets stacked three levels high. This is also reported to be a
self-spinning device which if allowed to rotate freely speeds up until it reaches a point where the whole unit
shoots up into the air, at the same time, producing electromagnetic anomalies.
Another interesting gravity-shielding effect was demonstrated by Eugene Podkletnov's rapidly rotating
superconducting disk [71]. When the disk is spun at some 7,000 rpm in the presence of an external
magnetic field, anything situated above the disk loses weight.
However, weight reduction has also been observed with simple rotation of objects. Hideo Hayasaka and
Sakeo Takeuchi have reported a weight reduction in rapidly rotating gyroscopes [72]. Interestingly, the
weight reduction occurs only for clockwise rotation.
It would seem that the strongest effects are produced by rotating magnetic fields. This would make sense
based on our aether model, which assumes magnetic fields to be movements of the aether. Thus for a
rotating magnet, we would have a combination of two movements of the aether, giving a more dynamic
motion.
There have also been a number of experiments involving high voltages which have shown weight-reduction,
among other unusual effects. Some examples of these are the Townsend Brown gravitor [73] and the
Kowsky-Frost quartz crystal levitation experiment [74]. The most notable of these however, is the work of
John Hutchison who has demonstrated objects being raised into the air by using a combination of high
voltages and radio frequency beams [75].
4D waves, Rotation, Magnetism and Anti-gravity

How do we explain these effects from the perspective of the aether model? One of the more interesting
clues in the above examples is that only clockwise rotation produces a weight loss. The Roschin-Godin
device clearly shows that a clockwise rotation produces a weight reduction and an anti-clockwise rotation a
weight gain! Why should this be? Standard theories are unable explain this difference.
According to the aether model presented here, rotation generates an aether vortex into the 4th dimension
(see Chapter 6). Given that gravity, according to this model, is essentially a 4D wave phenomenon, it
suggests that left/right spin difference is a 4th dimensional effect. The most obvious variable of the 4th
dimension is the direction of aether flow, negative to positive or vice versa along the 4D axis. Therefore it is
plausible, that a clockwise rotation makes the aether flow in one direction along the 4D axis, and anti-
clockwise in the opposite direction along the 4D axis, thereby producing opposite effects for the two spin
directions. There are two ways in which an aether flow into the fourth dimension could cause a reduction in
gravitational force:
The first involves the shift of 4D nodes which results from the aether movement. Given that the aether is the
carrier of the 4D waves, a strong flow of aether will cause a phase shift in the wave fronts and therefore the
pattern of high and low nodes of vibration. It is conceivable that the aether flow would cause the
gravitational nodes discussed in the first section to drift at a different rate towards the planetary body, and
therefore to change the force of gravity. The nodes might not only slow down, but be shifted sideways,
changing the force again. Note that the force of gravity does not need to be completely cancelled in order
for an object to be lifted into the air. There is always present, the centrifugal force due to the earth's rotation
which is overshadowed by the stronger gravitational force. One need only reduce the gravitational influence
below that of the centrifugal force and the slingshot action of the rotating earth will shoot an object into the
air.
More generally, if a way could be found to manipulate the nodes, one could manoeuvre a craft at high
speed. That is, the craft could be accelerated or have it's direction changed without the occupants feeling
any inertial forces, in the same way that a free falling object moving with the gravitational nodes will not
experience any force even though it is accelerating.
The second way that an aether flow could cause a reduction in weight is by reducing the resistive forces that
an atom feels when jumping nodes. As discussed in Chapter 5, the gravitational force according to our
model, results from the atoms jumping from one low aether vibration node to another, brought about by the
nodal drift near a planetary body. One would expect that the resistive force is determined by some form of
interaction of the atoms with the surrounding aether. It is therefore reasonable to expect that a moving
aether, in particular a vortex, would change in some way, the atom-aether interaction responsible for the
gravitational force.
Furthermore, in our model, the gravitational force and inertial resistance (see Chapter 6) are caused by the
same mechanism of node jumping. Therefore this model predicts that if this mechanism is involved in
weight reduction, one would also experience a reduction in the inertial force, or inertial mass, of the object.
There is evidence of this happening with the Marcus Hollingshead device, which consists of orthogonal
spinning toroidal coils constructed from bifilar windings [76]. When the unit is in operation it not only causes
weight reduction but loss of inertial resistance as well.
Antigravity and High Voltage

It has been shown by several experiments, that high voltages, usually over 100kV, can create unusual
gravitational and inertial effects. Many unusual effects have been observed with the Townsend Brown
'gravitor' experiments [73]. One example of this was that the motion of the unit, (a kind of electrified
pendulum), was found to depend on the position of the major planets!
The Kowsky-Frost quartz levitation [74] and the Hutchison effect [75], both involve high DC voltages,
together with oscillating electromagnetic fields. There are many examples on John Hutchison's website, of
all types of objects, including heavy ones, rising into the air. Interestingly, one example involves water rising
out of the cup that contained it. The cup did not get affected - suggesting that the Radio Frequency waves
only create the correct effect with materials whose internal processes are in resonance with the frequency of
the RF oscillations.
From an aether model perspective, we can perhaps begin to understand some of what is going on, by
resorting to the concept of charge being a 4D aether vortex. A high voltage plate for example, would contain
many little vortices whose combined effect would be to produce a macroscopic region of aether flow into the
4th dimension. Although a little different to the rotational and magnetic aether vortices discussed previously,
one would expect that this aether flow would also create a shift in the 4D wave patterns which are
responsible for gravity. One would therefore expect high voltages to influence the gravitational force.
However, from the above two examples we see that the high DC voltage is not sufficient in itself to produce
a strong anti-gravitational effect and the oscillating electromagnetic field is obviously an important
component of this process.
One would imagine that the Radio Frequency fields create, through some sort of resonance effect, a
significant change in the electron orbitals of the substances it affects. That such a strong effect is possible,
is attested to by the fact that this process is able to cold-melt metals, as illustrated in a number of
photographs [75]. We therefore theorise, that this internal change also affects the aether resistance to
atomic node jumping, as discussed in the previous section, thereby reducing the force of gravity. This,
combined with the high voltage, produces the desired effect.
One consequence of this argument is, that if we were to apply strong electromagnetic fields of the correct
frequency, or combination of frequencies, to an object, we should be able to produce a weight reduction
even without the DC voltages. Alternatively, a combination of a strong static magnetic field and alternating
electrostatic fields could achieve similar results. There is a lot of scope here for further investigation.
Chapter 10. Relativity
Given the important role that relativity has played in the rejection of the aether concept by mainstream
science we examine here in some detail relativity from an aether perspective.
We show that many of the contradictions of standard relativity, such as the twin paradox, can only be
satisfactorily resolved by assuming a medium that transmits light.
What is Wrong with Relativity?

When one looks into the matter carefully, one discovers that there many problems with Einstein's theory of
relativity, both at the conceptual level and experimentally. In an outstanding piece of work, Milan Pavlovic
has carefully examined Einstein's original special relativity papers and found them to contain many
inconsistencies and questionable assumptions [77].
Further he looked at the experimental evidence used to justify the special theory of relativity, such as the
Michelson-Morley experiment, the Doppler effect for light, Fizeau's light-through-water test, and the
aberration of starlight. He showed that most of these could be understood in non-relativistic terms or with
the assumption that the earth entrains the aether.
Other objections to the theory have been raised by various scientists over the years, see for example
Burniston Brown's classic article [78] which takes a critical look at the special and general theories of
relativity, as well as the Marcus Coleman article [79] which catalogues objections by well known physicists
and mathematicians.
Those who have looked into the matter [80] have documented more than 3,000 articles published in
scientific literature that criticise the special theory of relativity. Articles which have been largely ignored or
conveniently swept under the carpet. Experimentally too, there are disagreements with Einstein's relativity.
One of the postulates on which the special theory of relativity is based, states that the speed of light is
constant for any observer. However a number of experiments contradict this, for example Dayton Miller's
[81] and Yuri Galaev's [82] Michelson-Morley type experiments that produced a definite positive result under
certain conditions. If the postulate was correct, no Michelson-Morley type experiment would produce a
positive result. Chapter 1 discusses the 'null' result of the Michelson-Morley experiment and how it can be
explained within the context of an aether.
As well, there is experimental evidence emerging that the speed of light might not be so constant after all,
[83]. Also, the experiments of Eugene Podkletnov and Giovanni Modanese suggest that it is possible to
transfer a signal faster than the speed of light. They used a high voltage discharge mechanism to generate
what they refer to as a gravity wave impulse [84]. This impulse was found to travel through thick metal and
brick walls, and was able to affect objects a long distance away from the source. More important to the
present discussion, is the fact that they measured the beam speed to be more than 60 times the speed of
light!
See also the following link [85] for a clear and concise description of the conceptual difficulties inherent in
special relativity. This site also provides a good description of several experiments which are relevant to the
aether versus special relativity debate. Other evidence exists that supports the existence of a medium which
transmits light, see for example Webster Kehr's work [86].
However, in the author's opinion, it is the unresolved contradictions around the twin paradox and time
dilation which provide the most compelling argument against special relativity. They highlight contradictions
that make the precepts of special relativity untenable. Relativity predicts that time slows down for a moving
object relative to a stationary observer. That is, if a moving clock is brought back to its starting position it
should show a difference in the time registered compared to a stationery observer. The slowing down of
travelling clocks has been confirmed by use of atomic clocks, etc.
One cannot really explain it on the basis of the finite speed of light, or issues of simultaneity, etc., because
the travelling clock could easily retrace its steps to end up in its starting position without any communication
or interaction between the two clocks. And given that special relativity postulates that all reference frames
travelling at constant speed are equivalent as far as the laws of physics are concerned, there is no real
reason why the two clocks should move forward at different rates. There has to be something different
about the travelling clock that makes it 'tick' more slowly. One might suppose for example, as standard
theory does, that the explanation lies in the fact that the travelling clock has to first accelerate to reach a
certain speed, and it is this acceleration which 'causes' the slowing down of the travelling clock.
However this is inadequate, as the total time difference is dependent on how long the clock moves at
constant speed and not on how that speed was reached, which is dependant on the acceleration. In other
words, we could have two moving clocks each of which receives the same acceleration and reaches the
same velocity but where one travels at that constant velocity for much longer than the other before returning.
This gives rise to the situation where the two clocks would show different times relative to the stay at home
clock even though they underwent exactly the same acceleration.
Is time dilation caused by acceleration, or relative motion? If the time difference were due to the
acceleration, then the relativistic formula should be expressed as a function of the acceleration and not a
function of the velocity.
We can also consider a variation of the twin paradox thought experiment. Suppose we have two identical
twins, having identical rockets, who both accelerate in opposite directions for the same amount of time and
then return back to their original positions. Special relativity predicts that each twin will see his brother as
being younger. The standard twin paradox is explained away by pointing to the fact that one twin is
accelerating and the other is not. However in this example both twins experience the same accelerations
and velocities - the paradox still remains.
In any case it is not too difficult to come up with a scenario where the acceleration is completely taken out of
the picture and special relativity still predicts a time difference [78]. When the equations describing time
dilation have no connection with its supposed cause (acceleration) is it any wonder that we encounter
paradoxical situations?
In the next section we will look at time dilation from an aether perspective and show that the twin paradox
can only be satisfactorily resolved by assuming a universal reference frame or a medium that transmits light.
The introduction of the aether brings back common sense to relativity, sparing us the need to perform
mathematical contortions to make the speed of light be a constant for all observers.
Aether, Time Dilation and Special Relativity

Time is a consequence of the rate of change of processes which are used to measure it. The most plausible
explanation of time dilation is that the slowing down of the travelling clock is caused by it's interaction with its
surroundings. In particular a slowing down of these internal processes with motion relative to an underlying
medium such as the aether. In a Caesium atomic clock for example, it would be the emission frequency of a
particular electron orbital in the Caesium atom. We should really be talking about clock dilation rather than
the dilation of time as is normally interpreted from special relativity. Time has no meaning divorced from
some cyclic process whose rate of change is used to measure it.
In deriving the time dilation effects for an aether case, we will consider the example that is often used in
standard texts on relativity, the motion of a light clock. The light clock in its most simplified form, consists of
a source and detector of light at one end of a rod, and a mirror at the other, as shown in Fig 10.1(a). The
time it takes light to travel from the light source to the mirror and back again will be our unit of time or 'tick' of
the clock.
Fig 10.1 The light clock for two cases:

(a) The clock is stationary relative to the aether.
(b) The clock moves to the right at velocity v relative to the aether.
We consider the two cases where the clock is stationary, shown as situation (a) in Fig 10.1, and when it
travels at velocity v relative to the aether, at right angles to the clock axis, shown as situation (b) in Fig 10.1.
Given that light will always travel at speed c relative to the aether, we have the following clock times (1 tick)
for stationary and moving cases:
where L = length of the clock and c = speed of light
where H = diagonal length given by
It can be shown that the above values lead to the following relationship between the two clock times as a
function of the velocity:
The proportionality factor being given by the standard relativistic factor - a factor that has its origins in
electromagnetism and was first derived by Lorentz. So for a travelling light clock, time as measured by each
tick of the clock would actually slow down compared to a stationary one. It is a real effect that follows
directly from the constancy of light speed relative to the aether (independent of the speed of the source), and
the fact that light has to travel paths of different length through the aether to complete one cycle of the clock
(red lines in Fig 10.1).
The derivation of the formula is similar to the standard theory, the difference being that in the present
example the speed of light is constant relative to the aether whereas in the standard theory it is assumed to
be constant relative to any observer. This assumption leads to the contradictions inherent in the standard
theory, such as the twin paradox example discussed in the previous section.
In the aether model we have no such contradictions. Time dilations only occur for the clock moving relative
to the aether, so the twins will both agree on the differences registered by their light clocks. In the case
where both twins travel equal amounts relative to the aether they will both time dilate by the same amounts,
so their clocks will show the same time, which would be different to a stationary clock, when they get back
together.
The next question that arises is, will the time dilation derived above apply to any type of clock, and any type
of process? Will the travelling twin actually look younger, if enough time passes? A clock can be anything
that has a cyclic process. Let us consider one of the simplest types of clock, a rotor consisting of a ball
(green) at the end of a rigid arm that rotates at a constant angular speed, as shown in Fig 10.2.
Fig 10.2 The rotor clock for two cases.

(a) The clock is stationary relative to the aether.
(b) The clock moves to the right at velocity v relative to the aether.
Doing the same analysis as for the light clock, we have that the time it takes for the ball to complete one
cycle of rotation will be our unit of time measurement. Again we compare the case where the clock is
stationary, Fig 10.2(a), with the one where the whole unit moves at velocity v relative to the aether, Fig
10.2(b). The rate of rotation is assumed to be the same for the two cases.
For ease of analysis we will assume that v in situation (b) above, is the same as the rotational velocity of the
ball (equivalent to cycloid motion), however a similar argument will apply for any v. For the case (a), one tick
of the clock will correspond to the circumference, given by , divided by the velocity of the rotating ball.
Given that the rotation rates are the same for both clocks, one tick for clock (b) will correspond to the case
where the clock moves a distance , Fig 10.2(b), equivalent to the distance the rotating ball moves in
case (a). We can see from Fig 10.2(b), that in the equivalent time, the rotating ball of (b) will have travelled
a larger distance through the aether (red line) compared to case (a).
Therefore, if we had an equivalent condition as for the light clock that the rotating ball moved at a constant
velocity relative to the aether we would again have time dilation. The larger the value of v the greater the
ball path compared to the stationary case (a). However, clearly the ball will not travel at a constant velocity
relative to the aether. The rigid arm will sometimes pull the ball through the aether faster and sometimes
slower, depending on which part of the cycle it is on.
But we do not need to be concerned about this, because the fact that the rigid arm rotates at the same rate
for both clocks, means that the clock cycles must also be the same for both. Therefore we can conclude that
for a rigid rotating clock there will be no time dilation.
What happens if the arm is not rigid, such as for an electron spinning around an atom? In that case there
can certainly be a slowing down of the rotating electron, at least in parts of the cycle, leading to time dilation.
It is difficult to determine exactly what should happen as we do not know the details of what goes on inside
an atom, however we would expect some type of disturbance of the electrons when an atom moves through
the aether.
This would seem to be supported by experiments [87] which showed differences in the forces between
strongly charged bodies when moving as compared to the stationary case (see also Chapter 3). For a
neutral object, the effects of moving negative charges will be cancelled by the positive charges on a macro
scale. However, at an atomic scale, the charges are separated and one would therefore expect small
differences in the forces within an atom for moving objects compared to stationary ones.
Various time dilation experiments involving such things as atomic clocks, particle decay rates, etc., show that
there is indeed time dilation at the atomic level. Furthermore, that atomic time dilation seems to follow the
standard relativistic formula, as for the light clock discussed above. Time dilation at the atomic level is in fact
an additional argument for the existence of the aether. From the rotor clock arguments above, if there were
no aether or medium there would be nothing to affect the motion of the electrons and therefore the times for
each cycle of the clock. Given that special relativity postulates that all reference frames travelling at
constant speed are equivalent as far as the laws of physics are concerned, without something like an aether
there could not be any time dilation at the atomic level!
It also follows from the above argument, that the reverse situation of a stationary object and a moving aether
should also produce changes in the internal processes. The aether movement through an atom should
interact in some way with the vortex motions that we are associating with charged particles. One would
therefore expect that motions of the aether relative to an object, such as when surrounding objects are
accelerated or decelerated (see Chapter 6), should have an affect on a stationary object's internal processes
and therefore time as recorded by that object. There is support for this with the work of Dr. Kozyrev and
other Russian researchers [88] which showed that the torsion fields, discussed in Chapter 6, have produced
changes in time measurements. In fact the torsion fields were referred to as ‘time flow energy’ by Dr.
Kozyrev.
2
Relativistic Mass and E=mc
Probably the most recognised equations in physics, and which have made Einstein famous, are the mass-
energy conversion equations as follows:
where E = energy content

m = relativistic mass
mo = rest mass
v = velocity of particle
c = speed of light
These state that mass and energy are basically the same thing - one can be converted into the other. If a
body gains energy, its mass is increased, and vice versa. However, Einstein was not the first to come up
2
with these formulas. Poincare derived the E = mc formula prior to Einstein based on arguments relating to
the way electromagnetic waves interact with particles and conservation of momentum principles, which had
little to do with relativity.
Also, Lorentz derived the mass increase with speed formula for an electron, prior to Einstein. He derived
this on the basis of electromagnetic theory and the assumption of the existence of an aether. The picture
emerging at the time, was that there were two components of the electron mass, the rest mass (mo) and an
electromagnetic mass (melec): m = mo + melec
It is well known in electrodynamics, that a moving charge creates a magnetic field which then resists further
attempts to increase its speed. It is this resistance or inertia that was then considered to constitute the
electromagnetic mass. That is, this resistance was thought to be responsible for the increase of the
electron's mass with speed over and above the rest mass. This also makes sense from the perspective of
our aether model. We are assuming that when a charged particle moves relative to the aether, it creates a
type of rotation of the aether around the direction of motion (see Chapter 3). It would make sense then, that
this rotation would change the particle's ability to move through the aether.
The kinetic energy of motion is converted into the energy of the rotary aether motion, or the electromagnetic
field in classical terms. That rotary aether motion or energy, can be converted back into kinetic energy, or
alternatively given off as light, when the electron slows down relative to the aether. The conversion of
2
energy to electromagnetic mass and vice versa can be shown to be consistent with the E = mc formula
using classical arguments having little to do with special relativity.
The question then arises - what about the rest mass? Einstein's contribution was to assume that all mass,
2
rest and electromagnetic, can be converted according to E = mc . He presented a relativistic derivation of
these equations. However, Milan Pavlovic has carefully analysed Einstein's derivation in his original 1905
paper and found many logical inconsistencies and even mathematical errors, some of which were first
pointed out by Ives [89] in the 1950's.
This makes it very doubtful that a purely relativistic argument can be used to derive the energy conversion
formulas. This is especially so, since these formulas can be derived non-relativistically (as Milan Pavlovic
has shown in some detail [90]).
A further argument against Einstein's relativistic mass-energy equivalence principle, is provided by electron-
positron annihilation. That is, where an electron and a positron combine to annihilate each other,, leaving a
2
burst of light energy that accords with the E = mc equation. This is normally considered to constitute the
best proof of the correctness of Einstein's theory. However, on closer examination, we find that this is not
the case. Milan Pavlovic has shown [91] that the kinetic/electromagnetic energy, resulting from electrostatic
attraction, of the electron-positron pair just before their collision, (assuming a nominal electron radius derived
from electromagnetic theory), is close to the energy of the emitted light given off after the annihilation. This
strongly suggests, that the energy of the emitted radiation is due to the electromagnetic mass component of
the electron-positron pair, rather than their rest masses as is normally assumed. Therefore, if both the
electron and positron had their rest masses (2x~0.51MeV) converted to energy, we would expect the emitted
light to have twice the energy than is observed, equivalent to the rest energy plus the electromagnetic
energy. Certainly, it should be greater than is observed. So we have to conclude that Einstein's theory does
not apply to electron-positron annihilation.
However, the notion that the energy of the emitted light in an electron-positron annihilation is solely due to
the electromagnetic mass, has its own difficulties. If that were the case, the electron and positron should not
disappear from the scene! In order to get around this problem, Milan Pavlovic has postulated that the
electron and positron do not get annihilated, but form a bound pair which stays around until something like a
high energy photon breaks them up to liberate the original particles [91].
However, this model has its own problems which only get worse when one considers the annihilation of a
proton-antiproton pair, as there is more mass to account for after the 'annihilation'. An even more difficult
problem with the proton-antiproton pair, is that the energy of the emitted radiation from an 'annihilation' is
about 2,000 times greater than with the electron-positron case. Given that the proton charge is the same
magnitude as for the electron, the electromagnetic mass of the proton-antiproton collision should be about
the same as for the electron-positron one. Therefore, if the emitted light energy is due solely to
electromagnetic mass conversion, the light energy should be about the same as for an electron-positron
annihilation. Clearly, there is something else going on in these processes. We would like to present an
alternative explanation, consistent with our aether model, that gets around these difficulties in a natural way.
Firstly, the electron-positron annihilation can readily be shown to be consistent with our aether model. As
described in Chapter 2, the electron is viewed as a vortex into the 4th dimension which creates a preferential
aether rotation around the direction of its motion in 3D - the rotation being equated to the magnetic field.
The positron is the same as the electron but with the spin directions reversed.
Therefore, in an electron-positron annihilation we have the two particles both creating magnetic type aether
spins in the same direction. This is because, although their charges, and therefore spin directions, are
normally opposite they are moving in opposite directions with the result that they will both spin the aether in
the same direction around a line joining the two particles, as shown in Fig 10.3. The electron and positron
will accelerate towards one another under the influence of the electrostatic force, and will therefore create a
rapidly increasing rate of rotation of the aether just before the collision, (bearing in mind that there is a 4D
component to the aether rotation).
Fig 10.3 Electron-positron annihilation.
In accordance with our model for the creation of a photon, (see Chapter 4), this rotational aether disturbance
should give rise to an expanding photon ring, as shown in Fig 10.3. Note that, if our photon model is correct,
the two photons moving in opposite directions, that are normally detected with electron-positron annihilation
experiments, are not really two separate photons but the opposite ends of an expanding photon ring, as
shown in Fig 10.3.
Because the 4D aether vortexes are spinning in opposite sense for the electron and positron, the two will
simply cancel each other out when they meet, and will, in fact, be annihilated from existence, leaving nothing
but the aether rotational disturbance occurring prior to their collision.
Therefore, our model is consistent with the notion that it is the electromagnetic mass component that is
converted into the energy of the emitted radiation. What happens to the rest mass is not a problem in this
model, the two particles or 4D vortexes simply cancel leaving no excess energy. There is in fact no electron
rest mass as such. What are termed rest masses are really inertial masses which only show up upon
acceleration, or the effective vortex masses as discussed in Chapter 7.
The situation is a little different with proton-antiproton annihilations. In our aether mode,l the proton is
considered to be a condensation of the aether particles into a solid like state, somewhat like a liquid to solid
transition. The antiproton would simply be a proton which has an electron type vortex associated with it,
rather than the normal positive charge version. The proton would therefore require some minimum energy
input, in order to expand back to the normal, more rarefied aether state, somewhat like a solid to liquid
transition.
We postulate that the energy of the proton-antiproton collision, would be sufficient to re-expand the two
particles from a solid to the more rarefied state of the surrounding aether. The two particles would cease to
exist. We believe it is this sudden re-expansion of the condensed aether particles that creates a disturbance
of the surrounding aether giving rise to more energetic photon emission than can be explained by the
electromagnetic mass alone.
Unlike the electron, the proton does have a rest mass in the sense that there is a 'substance' there that is
converted to energy. Experiments with proton-antiproton annihilations suggest that this conversion process
2
follows the E = mc formula. This in turn implies that there is some unifying principle behind all the 'mass'
2
energy conversion processes that are described by the E = mc equation. However, for reasons already
discussed, we do not believe that special relativity is capable of providing that unifying principle.
Aetheric Doppler Shift

One of the other arguments that people use against the aether concept, is the fact that the observed Doppler
frequency shift for light agrees with the relativistic formula rather than the classical formula for waves carried
by a medium. We will show here that the Doppler shift for light is consistent with an aether model if we add
time dilation.
The standard formulas for the frequency shift of any wave carried by a medium, such as sound carried by
air, when the observer or source is moving relative to that medium are as follows.
Classic Doppler formula:
source moving
observer moving
f = observed frequency
fo = frequency when source and observer are both stationary relative to the medium
vs = velocity of source relative to the medium
vo = velocity of observer relative to the medium
Where vs and vo are assumed positive when the source or observer are receding, and negative if they are
approaching.
Relativistic Doppler formula:
where v = relative velocity between source and observer (+ve receding, -ve approaching) and c = speed of
light.
Let us now look more closely at what one would expect for the case of light being propagated through a
medium. Firstly, the classical Doppler shifts should apply. In addition, since we are postulating that atomic
processes are slowed for an object moving relative to the aether (as discussed in the above section), we
would expect that the frequency of the emitted radiation should also slow down for a moving source. In
other words, the frequency of emitted radiation should be reduced by the same relativistic factor that
appears in the time dilation formula.
Therefore, we expect the complete Doppler shift formula for a light source moving with respect to the aether
to be:
Similarly, the internal processes for an observer will slow down if moving with respect to the aether. Hence,
the moving observer will see a slightly higher frequency for the radiation relative to its own slowed down
processes than would be the case for an observer stationary with respect to the aether.
Therefore the complete formula for the moving observer case would be:
We can combine the above two formulas to give the Doppler shifts for the general case, where both the
source and observer are moving relative to the aether:
f = observed frequency
fo = frequency when source and observer are both stationary relative to the aether
vs = velocity of source relative to the aether (+ve receding, -ve approaching)
vo = velocity of observer relative to the aether (+ve receding, -ve approaching)
c = speed of light
We will consider some consequences of this formula. Firstly, we note that if either the source or the
observer is at rest relative to the aether (i.e. vs or vo is zero), the above formula will be identical to the
relativistic formula. Since we are postulating that the aether is entrained by the earth, and is therefore
stationary with respect to observers on the surface of the earth, any experiments where the observer is
stationary on the earth's surface (vo = 0) and the source is moving (most experiments are of this type) will
therefore show a Doppler shift equivalent to the relativistic formula. The aetheric formula will differ from the
relativistic one if both the observer and source move with respect to the aether. This would be one way the
formula could be tested.
We note also, that for extraterrestrial Doppler shift measurements, such as the red-shift of stars, the aetheric
formula will give values that depend on the speed of the source relative to its local aether, which generally
will not be the same as the speed relative to the earthbound aether. The difference between the two
formulas will depend on how much movement there is between the earthbound aether and the aether local
to the source. This could help explain some of the anomalies which have been observed with astronomical
observations, as discussed in the next section.
Big Bang and the Stellar Red-shift

There are many discrepancies between observation of the red-shift of stars and the theory of the expansion
of the universe based on the Big Bang scenario. David Pratt has highlighted many of these, [92], see also
[93], [94], [95], and [96].
It seems that the more we look, the more inconsistencies we find, (see [97] for the latest problem), and we
have to introduce ad-hoc factors, such as “dark matter” and “dark energy”, in order to save the standard
theory. Apart from experimental discrepancies, there are also conceptual and philosophical difficulties with
the Big Bang idea.
Current theory has it that the universe is expanding from an origin point as a result of space itself expanding
in all directions. However, for space to expand, there needs to be something like aether particles to define
the expansion. Without something to define space it becomes meaningless to talk about its expansion.
However, this in turn leads to other difficulties with the Big Bang scenario. If you run the expansion
backwards what happens to these 'particles' at the singularity before the Big Bang explosion?
While solutions to these difficulties may be found in the future, it seems to this author that a much simpler
explanation would be that the Big Bang never happened, the red-shift can be explained in other ways.
According to standard theory, the amount that light from a star is red-shifted, is proportional to the velocity at
which it is moving away from us, due to the Doppler frequency shift. The general picture is of a universe that
resembles a balloon which is expanding from a central point of the Big Bang, with the result that all parts are
moving away from each other. This is said to explain why there is a general red-shift rather than a blue-shift
or a mixture of the two.
An alternative explanation for the red-shift is the so called Tired Light model. This assumes that the
frequency shift of starlight is caused, not by recession velocities, but by the interaction of light with electrons
that exist at low densities in interstellar space. The further away the source, the more interactions light
undergoes before reaching us, and therefore the more red-shifted it is. See Lyndon Ashmore's work [98] for
a more detailed discussion in support of this theory.
We would also like to present here an intriguing alternative theory for explaining the general red-shift of stars
- one that does not involve an expansion of the universe. This possibility is based on the idea that our
universe forms a sphere when viewed from the 4th dimension. That is, the thin (along the 4th dimension)
membrane containing our physical 3D universe curves around to form an enormous 4D sphere (see the
discussion in Chapter 2).
Fig 10.4 4D hypersphere model, giving an alternative explanation for the

red-shift usually attributed to the expansion of the universe.
If light from distant objects reaches us by going through the body of the sphere rather than travelling along
its surface, it will create an angle of incidence for the light as it hits 3D space at our location, as shown in Fig
10.4. This is because the tangent to the surface of the 4D sphere, (red lines in Fig 10.4), along which 3D
objects vibrate to create light, will be at a different angle in our part of the universe compared to that of a
distant galaxy. What we see when that light reaches us, is not the original light wave but a projection of it on
to the 3D plane, giving rise to longer wavelengths. The further away the source is, the greater the difference
in angle, and therefore the greater the red-shift.
Chapter 11. Free-Energy Roadmap
The Objective
The objective of this work is to do research and development with a view to moving closer to the goal of free-
energy for all. The impact on humanity of achieving such a goal would be enormous. Apart from the
obvious advantage to our environment and health, a clean and limitless energy source would help eradicate
poverty and suffering. A self-contained energy source would be particularly beneficial to third world
countries that haven’t got the resources or infrastructure to develop technologies or build energy delivery
systems to meet even the basic needs.
Many billions of dollars have been spent in the past 50 years on fusion technologies but as yet we have not
seen a kilowatt of useful energy from it. The tragedy is that there exist devices (some patented) that have
been shown to produce ‘free energy’ but only a minuscule amount of money is being directed towards them.
The next section gives some examples of these devices.
We should clarify right at the outset that by free-energy we do not mean creating energy out of nothing – a
thought that would horrify traditional scientists. In the same way that solar cells tap into the ‘free-energy’ of
the sun without any input from us, free-energy devices tap into cosmic energy reserves.
There are 3 components of the work being proposed:
Theoretical investigation in order to develop a framework to better understand the underlying

mechanisms.
Investigate current devices and try to fit the findings to the theoretical investigation, which would in turn
suggest ways of improving on some of them.
Use the understanding from the theoretical investigation to come up with novel devices.
Challenges and Obstacles

These can be divided into 2 main categories:
(1) Technological
The challenge is to produce viable technological devices that generate over unity outputs, that is they
produce more usable energy than we put into them. This is not just a fanciful wish. There is enough
evidence around to suggest that this is viable.
A very good example is the Roschin & Godin device that clearly demonstrates over excess energy outputs in
a reproducible way (www.rialian.com/rnboyd/godin-roschin.htm).
Another example is the transformer-based “Motionless Electrical Generator” from the Tom Bearden group at
(www.cheniere.org).
Bruce De Palma has produced a working over-unity motor (www.depalma.pair.com).
The Lutec1000 motor by the Australian pair John Christie and Lou Brits looks promising (www.lutec.com.au),
to name but a few.
One of the latest examples is the Steorn device (www.steorn.net) which is based on a magnetic motor
operation. They are so confident of their claim of free-enegy that they have challenged the world’s top
scientists to test their device and prove them right or wrong.
See also www.zpenergy.com/downloads/winmotor.wmv for a demonstration of a magnetic motor running on

its own power.
We believe that the best solution would be a solid-state device, with no moving parts, as this would reduce
the complexity of construction and minimise wear and tear and therefore maintenance. We think that one
such possibility involves taking advantage of the properties of quartz crystal at resonant frequencies.
(2) Commercial
Following on from (1), is the challenge of producing a commercially viable device. That is, one that can be
produced at a cost and energy output that competes with existing energy utilities. The degree of energy gain
is important here. If a device produces a large output without a lot of complexity in its construction it makes
the commercial viability a lot easier to achieve. To this end, the theoretical investigation mentioned in the
previous section becomes important. If we have a sound theoretical framework and understanding of what
is going on underneath, we will be in a much better position to produce such a commercial device.
See also the article by Peter Lindemann ("The World of Free Energy") which highlights some of the political
obstacles to the commercialisation of free energy devices. Take a look also at the YouTube video:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=hcXLFDuAJNE.
Plan of Action
The first step must necessarily be one of coming up with a technological solution for an over-unity device.
We will now set out in more detail the proposed components that were outlined at the start as a way of
moving closer to our objective. These would be worked on in parallel and would naturally complement one
another.
(1) Theoretical Investigation

There has already been some interesting theories put forward to explain the nature of reality in a more
intuitive way than current Physics allows. Most of these relate to the concept of an all pervading aether from
which all matter forms. The most interesting of all is the information which explains physical matter,
including electromagnetism and gravity, as different manifestations or states of a hyperdimensional aether.
Our first objective would be to extend this theory with our own investigations. The aim being to unify what
has been done with what we know from Physics experiments and our own ideas. We have a number of
experiments in mind that would help to clarify the situation and hopefully lead to a theoretical framework that
would then allow us to make predictions about how a new configuration will behave.
One of the main initial aims would be to design experiments that would either demonstrate or deny the
existence of the aether. A lot of modern Physics has been built on the assumption of the non-existence of a
medium such aether. If this proves to be incorrect it would have important implications to our understanding
of the universe. We believe that a lot more effort should be spent on ensuring that our foundations are solid
before we build all sorts of theoretical structures on top of them.
One example of such experiments would be to look at the forces between highly charged plates when the
plates are moving. It has been reported by some, that the forces are different depending on whether the
plates are moving or stationary. If this proves to be correct it would point strongly to the existence of an
aether.
(2) Investigation of Existing Devices

There are at least a dozen devices/set-ups that show excess output power, that warrant further investigation.
A lot of these are related to electromagnetism in one way or another.
Our second objective is to investigate some of these with a view to gaining a better understanding of the
principles and at the same time to try and fit these observations into the theoretical framework being
developed concurrently. These would help in the development of the theory which would in turn suggest
ways of improving some of these devices.
This is not limited to only ‘free-energy’ devices, but to a variety of phenomena including anti-gravitational
effects. As an example, David Hamel has reported constructing a device which consists of an arrangement
of three layers of rotating magnets (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/hammnu.htm). When the self-contained unit is
set spinning, it reaches a point where the whole thing just shoots up into the air and disappears into the sky.
These amazing reports need to be investigated further.
(3) Design of New and Novel Devices

With a better understanding of the underlying nature of the physical universe, it becomes a lot easier to
come up with new and novel designs that no one has thought of. Inventors have spent years coming up with
solutions, sometimes by trial and error.
There are a number of areas that show unusual behaviour and are fertile grounds for further research. One
of the main ones being with magnets, particularly rotating magnets. Not much is really known about the
behaviour of rotating magnets.
Another area is with high voltages. Some strange phenomena have been observed when high voltages are
involved, e.g. anomalous energy outputs and antigravity effects, among others.
Also, rapidly spinning objects have shown unusual behaviour. Weight loss has been reported in certain
cases. In other words anti gravitational effects, which could potentially be used to generate energy -
behaviour that is not accounted for by current theories.
There are also reports of extraordinary effects that have been observed by John Hutchison under certain
conditions, see www.hutchisoneffectonline.com. Apart form objects being suspended in mid air, this site
shows pictures of metals being cut and ‘melted’ without any heat being used. Particularly interesting is a
picture showing a piece of wood embedded into metal without any visible damage to the wood. This has all
been done by a combination of high voltages and radio frequency beams. At present, these effects are not
well understood – John Hutchison says he cannot always produce them.
There is a lot of scope for further investigation and the potential for all sorts of new and amazing
applications.
References
Chapter 1.
[1] Milan R. Pavlovic, “Einstein's Theory of Relativity - Scientific Theory or Illusion?",
milanrpavlovic.freeservers.com
[2] G. Burniston Brown, “What is wrong with relativity?",
homepage.ntlworld.com/academ/whatswrongwithrelativity.html
[3] Marcus Coleman, "The Trouble with Relativity", www.wbabin.net/physics/marcus.htm
[4] Webster Kehr, "The Detection of Ether", www.teslaphysics.com
[5] Harold Aspden, "The Aspden Effect", New Energy News, Feb 1995, see
www.aspden.org/papers/bib/1995f.htm
[6] Thomas Valone, “Understanding Zero Point Energy", users.erols.com/iri/ZPEpaper.html
[7] Haisch B., Rueda A., Puthoff H.E., “Physics of the zero-point field: implications for inertia, gravitation
and mass", Speculations in Science and Technology, 20, 99-114 (1997), copy available at
www.earthtech.org/publications/spec_sci_tech.pdf
[8] Jacobson T. A. & Parentani R., "An Echo of Black Holes", Scientific American, p48, Dec 2005
[9] James DeMeo, "Dayton Miller's Ether-Drift Experiments", www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm
[10] Bryan G. Wallace, “Radar Testing of the Relative Velocity of Light in Space”, Spectroscopic Letters
2:361 1969
[11] Yu. M. Galaev, “The Measuring of Ether-Drift Velocity and Kinematic Ether Viscosity within Optical
Wave Bands", Spacetime & Substance, Vol 3 (2002), No 5 (15), pp. 207-224
www.mountainman.com.au/aether_6.htm
[12] Lee Y., Haard T.M., Halperin W.P., Souls J.A., “Discovery of the Acoustic Faraday effect in
Superfluid 3He-B”, Nature 400, 431-433 (July 1999)
[13] Robert Neil Boyd, "Physics" www.rialian.com/rnboyd/physics.htm
[14] Paul A. LaViolette, "Subquantum Kinetics" www.etheric.com
[15] R.F. Norgan, "Einstein was Wrong, the Aether Exists" www.aethertheory.co.uk
[16] David Wilcock, “The Divine Cosmos", www.divinecosmos.com
[17] Steven Rado, “Aethro Kinematics”, Aethron Publishing Company, Los Angeles 1994, see also
www.aethro-kinematics.com
[18] Caroline H.Thompson, Website freespace.virgin.net/ch.thompson1
[19] Gabriel LaFraniere, "Matter is Made of Waves" www.glafreniere.com/matter.htm
Chapter 2.
[20] Maurice B. Cooke, “Einstein Doesn’t Work Here Any More”, Marcus Books, PO Box 327, Queensville,
Ontario, Canada L0G 1R0, 1983 (copies available here)
[22] J.A. Wheeler, "Geometrodynamics", Academic Press, NY, 1962, see also
www.rialian.com/rnboyd/maxwell-aether.htm
[23] Al Bielek, "The Philadelphia Experiment", www.philadelphia-experiment.com
[24] K.L. Corum, J.F. Corum & J.F.X. Daum, "Radar Backscatter Absorption Experiment",
www.ussdiscovery.com/philadelphia_experiment.htm
[25] John Hutchison's website, www.hutchisoneffectonline.com
Chapter 3.
[26] Sir Edmund Whittaker, “History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity”, Nelson LTD, N.Y. 1953
(copies available here)
[27] Feynman R.P., Leighton, R.B., Sands M., “The Feynman Lectures on Physics”, Addison-Wesley,
Vol II, Sec 40-42 (copies available here)
[28] Charles R. Morton, "Velocity Alters Electric Field", www.amasci.com/freenrg/morton1.html
Chapter 4.
[29] Lee Y., Haard T.M., Halperin W.P., Souls J.A., “Discovery of the Acoustic Faraday effect in
Superfluid 3He-B”, Nature 400, 431-433 (July 1999)
[30] Richard P. Feynman, “QED The Strange Theory of Light and Matter”, Princeton University Press,
41 William St, Princeton, New Jersey, 1985 (copies available here)
[31] Feynman R.P., Leighton, R.B., Sands M., “The Feynman Lectures on Physics”, Addison-Wesley,
Vol I, Sec 30-31 (copies available here)
Chapter 5.
[32] Mathew Edwards (ed), "Pushing Gravity", Apeiron 2002 (copies available here)
[33] Maurice B. Cooke, “Einstein Doesn’t Work Here Anymore”, Marcus Books, PO Box 327, Queensville,
[34] Tom Van Flandern, “Relativity with Flat Spacetime", MetaRes.Bull. 3,9-13 1994, see
www.metaresearch.org
[35] Tom Van Flandern, “The Speed of Gravity - What the Experiments Say",
www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/speed_of_gravity.asp
[36] Eugene Podkletnov, "Superconductors and Gravity-Modification",
www.americanantigravity.com/articles/40/1/Eugene-Podkletnov%2C-Pt.-1
[37] Jordan Maclay, “Vacuum Energy”, see article at www.quantumfields.com/ZPV.htm
Chapter 6.
[39] Haisch B., Rueda A., Puthoff H.E., “Physics of the zero-point field: implications for inertia, gravitation
and mass", Speculations in Science and Technology, 20, 99-114 (1997), copy available at
www.earthtech.org/publications/spec_sci_tech.pdf
[40] Maurice B. Cooke, “Einstein Doesn’t Work Here Anymore”, Marcus Books, PO Box 327, Queensville,
[41] David Wilcock, “Divine Cosmos", www.divinecosmos.com
[42] R. Hoagland and D. Wilcock, "Interplanetary Day After Tommorow",
www.enterprisemission.com/_articles/05-27-2004/InterplanetaryDayAfter-Part2.htm
Chapter 7.
[43] Marcus Hollingshead, "The Marcus Device", www.americanantigravity.com
[44] Harold Puthoff, “Quantum Fluctuations in Empty Space", www.sumeria.net/free/zpe1.html
[45] R.M. Kiehn, "Nanometer Vortexes", www22.pair.com/csdc/car/carfre85.htm
[47] Charles Hinton, “Recognition of the Fourth Dimension", www.eldritchpress.org/chh/hinton.html
[48] Website devoted to String Theory, superstringtheory.com
[49] Kheper, "Super-membranes", www.kheper.net/cosmos/quantum_physics/branes.html
Chapter 8.
[51] Quantum Fields LLC, “R & D in Vacuum Fluctuations”, www.quantumfields.com
[52] Tom Bearden Website, www.cheniere.org
[53] Tom Bearden, “John Bedini's Negative Resistors", www.keelynet.com/bedmot/bedbear.htm
[54] Moray B. King, “Tapping Zero-Point Energy", www.fortunecity.com/roswell/avebury/50/zpe3.htm
[55] A. Smokhin, “Vacuum Energy from Plasmas", Spec. Sci. Tech. 13 (4), 273, 1990, see also
www.alternativescience.com/eric-laithwaite.htm
[56] V. Roschin, S. Godin, "Magneto-Gravitational Converter", www.rialian.com/rnboyd/godin-roschin.htm
[57] J. R. R. Searl, “Searl-Effect Generator", www.americanantigravity.com/searleffect.html
[58] R. Adams, “The Adams Motor", www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm
[59] J. W. Newman, “Energy Generation System", www.josephnewman.com
[60] H. Johnson, “Magnet Motor", freeenergynews.com/Directory/Howard_Johnson_Motor/index.html
[61] J. Christie and L. Brits, “The Lutec1000 Motor", www.lutec.com.au
[62] Bruce DePalma, “Spinning Ball Experiment & N1 Homopolar Generator", www.depalma.pair.com
[63] K. Gerber, R.F. Merritt, “Gyro Drop Experiment", www.depalma.pair.com/gyrodrop.html
[64] Paramahamsa Tewari, “The Space Power Generator", www.tewari.org
[65] B. Frokjaer-Jensen, “The Implosion Theory of Victor Schauberger", Proc. First International
Symposium on Nonconventional Energy Technology, Toronto, pp. 78-96, 1981. see also
www.frank.germano.com/viktorschauberger_3b.htm
[66] Alexander Frolov, “Water Vortex Propulsion Device", www.faraday.ru/projects.htm
[67] Arie DeGeus, “IEC Fusion & ZPE Technologies", www.americanantigravity.com
Chapter 9.
[68] V. Roschin, S. Godin, "Antigravity Experiment", www.rialian.com/rnboyd/godin-roschin.htm
[69] J. R. R. Searl, “Searl-Effect Generator", www.americanantigravity.com/searleffect.html
[70] Jean-Louis Naudin, "The Hamel Technologies",jnaudin.free.fr/html/hammnu.htm
[71] "The Podkletnov Gravitational-Shield", www.americanantigravity.com/podkletnov.html
[72] H. Hayasaka & S. Takeuchi, “Anomolous Weight Reduction on a Gyroscope's Right Rotations
around the Vertical Axis on the Earth", Phys Rev Lett Vol 12, No 25
[73] Townsend Brown, "How I Control Gravitation", www.rexresearch.com/gravitor/gravitor.htm
[74] "Kowsky-Frost Quartz Levitation", www.keelynet.com/gravity/KFrost.htm
[75] John Hutchison's website, www.hutchisoneffectonline.com/photogallery_HESamples.htm
[76] "The Marcus Device", www.americanantigravity.com/marcus.html
Chapter 10.
[77] Milan R. Pavlovic, “Einstein's Theory of Relativity - Scientific Theory or Illusion?", users.net.yu/~mrp
[78] G. Burniston Brown, “What is wrong with relativity?",
homepage.ntlworld.com/academ/whatswrongwithrelativity.html
[79] Marcus Coleman, "The Trouble with Relativity", www.wbabin.net/physics/marcus.htm
[80] G. O. Mueller, "95 Years of Criticism of the Special Theory of Relativity",
www.wbabin.net/science/mueller.pdf
[81] James DeMeo, "Dayton Miller's Ether-Drift Experiments", www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm
[83] CNN.comNewsNet, "Light can break it's own speed limit",
archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/space/07/20/speed.of.light.ap
[84] Eugene Podkletnov, "Superconductors and Gravity-Modification",
www.americanantigravity.com/articles/40/1/Eugene-Podkletnov%2C-Pt.-1
[85] Anti-Relativity website, www.anti-relativity.com
[86] Webster Kehr, "The Detection of Ether", www.teslaphysics.com
[87] Charles R. Morton, "Velocity Alters Electric Field", www.amasci.com/freenrg/morton1.html
[88] David Wilcock, “Divine Cosmos", www.divinecosmos.com
[89] H. E. Ives, 1952, J. Opt. Soc. Amer., 42, 540—3
[90] Milan R. Pavlovic, “Mass and Energy", Ch. 23, users.net.yu/~mrp/chapter23.html
[91] Milan R. Pavlovic, “Antimatter and the Annihilation of Matter and Antimatter Do Not Exist", Ch. 26,
users.net.yu/~mrp/chapter26.html
[92] David Pratt, "Cosmology and the Big Bang", ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/cosmo.htm
[93] "An Open Letter to the Scientific Community", New Scientist, May 22 2004
see www.cosmologystatement.org
[94] Donald E. Scott, "Redshift", www.electric-cosmos.org/arp.htm
[95] Meta Research, "The Top 30 Problems with the Big Bang", see
www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/BB-top-30.asp
[96] Paul Marmet, "Newton Physics", www.newtonphysics.on.ca
[97] Physorg.com, "Big Bang's Afterglow Fails an Intergalactic Shadow Test",
www.physorg.com/news76314500.html
[98] Lyndon Ashmore, "Tired Light Model", www.lyndonashmore.com
FEASIBILITY STUDY
OF ZERO-POINT ENERGY EXTRACTION
FROM THE QUANTUM VACUUM FOR THE
PERFORMANCE OF USEFUL WORK
Copyright © 2004
by
Thomas Valone, Ph.D., P.E.
Integrity Research Institute
1220 L Street NW, Suite 100-232
Washington DC 20005
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE.............................................................................................................5
CHAPTER 1..........................................................................................................7
Introduction .......................................................................................................7
Zero-Point Energy Issues ..............................................................................7
Statement of the Problem ............................................................................21
Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................24
Importance of the Study...............................................................................24
Rationale of the Study .................................................................................27
Definition of Terms.......................................................................................28
Overview of the Study..................................................................................30
CHAPTER 2........................................................................................................32
Review of Related Literature ...........................................................................32
Historical Perspectives ................................................................................32
Casimir Predicts a Measurable ZPE Effect..................................................35
Ground State of Hydrogen is Sustained by ZPE..........................................36
Lamb Shift Caused by ZPE .........................................................................37
Experimental ZPE........................................................................................38
2
ZPE Patent Review......................................................................................40
ZPE and Sonoluminescence........................................................................43
Gravity and Inertia Related to ZPE ..............................................................44
Heat from ZPE .............................................................................................45
Summary .....................................................................................................46
CHAPTER 3........................................................................................................49
Methodology....................................................................................................49
Approach .....................................................................................................49
What is a Feasibility Study?.........................................................................50
Data Gathering Method ...............................................................................52
Database Selected for Analysis ...................................................................52
Analysis of Data...........................................................................................53
Validity of Data.............................................................................................53
Uniqueness and Limitations of the Method ..................................................53
Summary .....................................................................................................54
CHAPTER 4........................................................................................................55
Analysis...........................................................................................................55
Introduction to Vacuum Engineering............................................................55
Electromagnetic Energy Conversion............................................................55

3
Microsphere Energy Collectors....................................................................65
Nanosphere Energy Scatterers....................................................................73
Picosphere Energy Resonators ...................................................................77
Quantum Femtosphere Amplifiers ...............................................................84
Deuteron Femtosphere ................................................................................88
Electron Femtosphere .................................................................................91
Casimir Force Electricity Generator .............................................................94
Cavity QED Controls Vacuum Fluctuations ...............................................100
Spatial Squeezing of the Vacuum..............................................................102
Focusing Vacuum Fluctuations..................................................................104
Stress Enhances Casimir Deflection..........................................................105
Casimir Force Geometry Design................................................................107
Vibrating Cavity Photon Emission..............................................................113
Fluid Dynamics of the Quantum Vacuum ..................................................115
Quantum Coherence Accesses Single Heat Bath .....................................120
Thermodynamic Brownian Motors .............................................................126
Transient Fluctuation Theorem ..................................................................132
Power Conversion of Thermal Fluctuations ...............................................135
Rectifying Thermal Noise...........................................................................137

4
Quantum Brownian Nonthermal Recifiers..................................................142
Vacuum Field Amplification .......................................................................146
CHAPTER 5......................................................................................................148
Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations............................................148
Summary ...................................................................................................148
Electromagnetic Conversion ......................................................................149
Mechanical Casimir Force Conversion ......................................................152
Fluid Dynamics ..........................................................................................153
Thermodynamic Conversion ......................................................................154
Conclusions ...............................................................................................159
Recommendations.....................................................................................160
FIGURE CREDITS............................................................................................163
REFERENCES .................................................................................................168
5
PREFACE
Today this country faces a destabilizing dependency on irreplaceable
fossil fuels which are also rapidly dwindling. As shortages of oil and natural gas
occur with more frequency, the “New Energy Crisis” is now heralded in the news
media.1 However, an alternate source of energy that can replace fossil fuels has
not been reliably demonstrated. A real need exists for a portable source of power
that can compete with fossil fuel and its energy density. A further need exists on
land, in the air, and in space, for a fuelless source of power which, by definition,
does not require re-fueling. The future freedom, and quite possibly the future
survival, of mankind depend on the utilization of such a source of energy, if it
exists.
However, ubiquitous zero-point energy is known to exist. Yet, none of the
world’s physicists or engineers are participating in any national or international
energy development project beyond nuclear power. It is painfully obvious that
zero-point energy does not appear to most scientists as the robust source of
energy worth developing. Therefore, an aim of this study is to provide a clear
understanding of the basic principles of the only known candidate for a limitless,
fuelless source of power: zero-point energy. Another purpose is to look at the
feasibility of various energy conversion methods that are realistically available to
modern engineering, including emerging nanotechnology, for the possible use of
zero-point energy.
6
To accomplish these proposed aims, a review of the literature is provided,
which focuses on the major, scientific discoveries about the properties of zero-
point energy and the quantum vacuum. Central to this approach is the discerning
interpretation of primarily physics publications in the light of mechanical, nuclear,
thermal, electronic and electrical engineering techniques. Applying an
engineering analysis to the zero-point energy literature places more emphasis
the practical potential for its energy conversion, especially in view of recent
advances in nanotechnology.
With primary reference to the works of H. B. G. Casimir, Fabrizio Pinto,
Frank Mead and Peter Milonni, key principles for the proposed extraction of
energy for useful work are identified and analyzed. These principles fall into the
thermodynamic, fluidic, mechanical, and electromagnetic areas of primary,
forcelike quantities that apply to all energy systems. A search of zero-point
energy literature reveals that these principles also apply to the quantum level.
The most feasible modalities for the conversion of zero-point energy into useful
work, such as the fluctuation-driven transport of an electron ratchet, the quantum
Brownian nonthermal rectifiers, and the Photo-Carnot engine are also explored in
more detail. Specific suggestions for further research in this area conclude this
study with a section devoted to summary, conclusions and recommendations.

7
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Zero-Point Energy Issues
Zero-point energy (ZPE) is a universal natural phenomenon of great
significance which has evolved from the historical development of ideas about
the vacuum. In the 17th century, it was thought that a totally empty volume of
space could be created by simply removing all gases. This was the first
generally accepted concept of the vacuum. Late in the 19th century, however, it
became apparent that the evacuated region still contained thermal radiation. To
the natural philosophers of the day, it seemed that all of the radiation might be
NASA: www.grc.nasa.gov
Figure 1
8
eliminated by cooling. Thus evolved the second concept of achieving a real
vacuum: cool it down to zero temperature after evacuation. Absolute zero
temperature (-273C) was far removed from the technical possibilities of that
century, so it seemed as if the problem was solved. In the 20th century, both
theory and experiment have shown that there is a non-thermal radiation in the
vacuum that persists even if the temperature could be lowered to absolute zero.
This classical concept alone explains the name of "zero-point" radiation2.
In 1891, the world’s greatest electrical futurist, Nikola Tesla, stated,
“Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static our
hopes are in vain; if kinetic – and 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. Many generations may pass, but in time our machinery will
be driven by a power obtainable at any point in the Universe.”3
“From the papers studied the author has grown increasingly convinced as
to the relevance of the ZPE in modern physics. The subject is presently being
tackled with appreciable enthusiasm and it appears that there is little
disagreement that the vacuum could ultimately be harnessed as an energy
source. Indeed, the ability of science to provide ever more complex and subtle
methods of harnessing unseen energies has a formidable reputation. Who would
have ever predicted atomic energy a century ago?”4
A good experiment proving the existence of ZPE is accomplished by
cooling helium to within microdegrees of absolute zero temperature. It will still

9
remain a liquid. Only ZPE can account for the source of energy that is preventing
helium from freezing.5
Besides the classical explanation of zero-point energy referred to above,
there are rigorous derivations from quantum physics that prove its existence. “It
is possible to get a fair estimate of the zero point energy using the uncertainty
principle alone.”6 As stated in Equation (1), Planck’s constant h (6.63 x 10-34
joule-sec) offers physicists the fundamental size of the quantum. It is also the
primary ingredient for the uncertainty principle. One form is found in the minimum
uncertainty of position x and momentum p expressed as
Δx Δp > h/4π . (1)
In quantum mechanics, Planck’s constant also is present in the description
of particle motion. “The harmonic oscillator reveals the effects of zero-point
Figure 2
10
radiation on matter. The oscillator consists of an electron attached to an ideal,
frictionless spring. When the electron is set in motion, it oscillates about its point
of equilibrium, emitting electromagnetic radiation at the frequency of oscillation.
The radiation dissipates energy, and so in the absence of zero-point radiation
and at a temperature of absolute zero the electron eventually comes to rest.
Actually, zero-point radiation continually imparts random impulses to the electron,
so that it never comes to a complete stop [as seen in Figure 2]. Zero-point
radiation gives the oscillator an average energy equal to the frequency of
oscillation multiplied by one-half of Planck's constant.”7
However, a question regarding the zero-point field (ZPF) of the vacuum
can be asked, such as, “What is oscillating and how big is it?” To answer this, a
background investigation needs to be done. The derivation which follows uses
well-known physics parameters. It serves to present a conceptual framework for
the quantum vacuum and establish a basis for the extraordinary nature of ZPE.
In quantum electrodynamics (QED), the fundamental size of the quantum
is also reflected in the parton size. “In 1969 Feynman proposed the parton model
of the nucleon, which is reminiscent of a model of the electron which was extant
in the late 19th and early 20th centuries: The nucleon was assumed to consist of
extremely small particles—the partons—which fill the entire space within a
nucleon. All the constituents of a nucleon are identical, as are their electric
charges. This is the simplest parton model.”8
The derivation of the parton mass gives us a theoretical idea of how small
the structure of the quantum vacuum may be and, utilizing E = mc2, how large
11
ZPE density may be. For convenience, we substitute h = “hbar“ = h/2π for which
the average ZPE = ½ hf = ½ hω, since the angular frequency ω = 2πf.
The Abraham-Lorentz radiation reaction equation contains the relevant
quantity, since the radiation damping constant Γ for a particle’s self-reaction is
intimately connected to the fluctuations of the vacuum.9 The damping constant is
Γ = % e2 / moc3 (2)
where mo is the particle mass.10 It is also known in stochastic electrodynamics
(SED) that the radiation damping constant can be found from the ZPE-
determined inertial mass associated with the parton oscillator.11 It is written as
Γ = π mo c2 / hωc2 (3)
Here ωc is the zero-point cut-off frequency which is regarded to be on the order of
the Planck cut-off frequency (see eq. 8), given by
ωc =√ π c5 / hG (4)
Equating (2) and (3), substituting Equation (4) and rearranging for mo gives
mo = e √ % / G (5)
Therefore, the parton mass is calculated to be
mo ≈ 0.16 kg . (6)
For comparison, the proton rest mass is approximately 10-27 kg, with a mass
density of 1014 g/cc. Though “it might be suggested that quarks play the role of
12
partons” the quark rest mass is known to be much smaller than loosely bound
protons or electrons.12 Therefore, Equation (6) suggests that partons are
fundamentally different.
The answer to the question of how big is the oscillatory particle in the ZPF
quantum vacuum comes from QED. “The length at which quantum fluctuations
are believed to dominate the geometry of space-time” is the Planck length:13
Planck length = √ Gh/2πc3 ≈ 10-35 m (7)
The Planck length is therefore useful as a measure of the approximate size of a
parton, as well as “a spatial periodicity characteristic of the Planck cutoff
frequency.”14 Since resonant wavelength is classically determined by length or
particle diameter, we can use the Planck length as the wavelength λ in the
standard equation relating wavelength and frequency,
c = f λ = ωc λ /2π (8)
and solving for ωc to find the Planck cutoff frequency ωc ≈ 1043 Hz.15 This value
sets an upper limit on design parameters for ZPE conversion, as reviewed in the
later chapters. Taking Equation (6) divided by Equation (7), the extraordinary
ZPF mass density estimate of 10101 g/cc seems astonishing, though, like
positrons (anti-electrons), the ZPF consists mostly of particles in negative energy
states. This derived density also compares favorably with other estimates in the
literature: Robert Forward calculates 1094 g/cc if ZPE was limited to particles of
slightly larger size, with a ZPF energy density of 10108 J/cc.16 (NASA has a much
smaller but still “enormous” estimate revealed in Figure 1.)

13
Another area of concern to the origin of the theoretical derivation of ZPE is
a rudimentary understanding of what meaning Planck attributed to “the average
value of an elementary radiator.”17 “The absorption of radiation was assumed to
proceed according to classical theory, whereas emission of radiation occurred
discontinuously in discrete quanta of energy.”18 Planck’s second theory,
published in 1912, was the first prediction of zero-point energy.19 Following
Boltzmann, Planck looked at a distribution of harmonic oscillators as a composite
model of the quantum vacuum. From thermodynamics, the partial differential of
entropy with respect to potential energy is ∂S/∂U = 1/T. Max Planck used this to
obtain the average energy of the radiators as
U = ½hf + hf /(e hf/ kT – 1) (9)
where here the ZPE term ½hf is added to the radiation law term of his first theory.
Using this equation, “which marked the birth of the concept of zero-point energy,”
it is clear that as absolute temperature T Æ 0 then U Æ ½hf, which is the
average ZPE.20
Interestingly, the ground state energy of a simple harmonic oscillator
(SHO) model can also be used to find the average value for zero-point energy.
This is a valuable exercise to show the fundamental basis for zero-point energy
parton oscillators. The harmonic oscillator is used as the model for a particle with
mass m in a central field (the “spring” in Figure 2). The uncertainty principle
provides the only requisite for a derivation of the minimum energy of the simple
harmonic oscillator, utilizing the equation for kinetic and potential energy,
14
E = p2/2m + ½ m ω2 x2 . (10)
Solving the uncertainty relation from Equation (1) for p, one can substitute
it into Equation (10). Using a calculus approach, one can take the derivative with
respect to x and set the result equal to zero. A solution emerges for the value of x
that is at the minimum energy E for the SHO. This x value can then be placed
into the minimum energy SHO equation where the potential energy is set equal
to the kinetic energy. The ZPE solution yields ½hf for the minimum energy E.21
This simple derivation reveals the profoundly fundamental effect of zero-
point radiation on matter, even when the model in only a SHO. The oscillator
consists of a particle attached to an ideal, frictionless spring. When the parton is
in motion, it accelerates as it oscillates about its point of equilibrium, emitting
radiation at the frequency of oscillations. The radiation dissipates energy and so
in the absence of zero-point radiation and at a temperature of absolute zero the
particle would eventually comes to rest. In actuality, zero-point radiation
continually imparts random impulses to the particle so that it never comes to rest.
This is Zitterbewegung motion. The consequence of this Zitterbewegung is the
averaged energy of Equation (15) imparted to the particle, which has an
associated long-range, van der Waals, radiation field which can even be
identified with Newtonian gravity. Information on this discovery is reviewed in
Chapter 2.
In QED, the employment of perturbation techniques amounts to treating
the interaction between the electron and photon (between the electron-positron
field and the electromagnetic field) as a small perturbation to the collection of the
15
‘free’ fields. In the higher order calculations of the resulting perturbative
expansion of the S-matrix (Scattering matrix), divergent or infinite integrals are
encountered, which involve intermediate states of arbitrarily high energies. In
standard QED, these divergencies are circumvented by redefining or
‘renormalizing’ the charge and the mass of the electron. By the renormalization
procedure, all reference to the divergencies are absorbed into a set of infinite
bare quantities. Although this procedure has made possible some of the most
precise comparisons between theory and experiment (such as the g - 2
determinations) its logical consistency and mathematical justification remain a
subject for controversies.22 Therefore, it is valuable to briefly review how the
renormalization process is related to the ZPE vacuum concept in QED.
The vacuum is defined as the ground state or the lowest energy state of
the fields. This means that the QED vacuum is the state where there are no
photons and no electrons or positrons. However, as we shall see in the next
section, since the fields are represented by quantum mechanical operators, they
do not vanish in the vacuum state but rather fluctuate. The representation of the
fields by operators also leads to a vacuum energy (sometimes referred to as
vacuum zero-point energy).
When interactions between the electromagnetic and the electron-positron
field in the vacuum are taken into account, which amounts to consider higher
order contributions to the S-matrix, the fluctuations in the energy of the fields lead
to the formation of so-called virtual electron-positron pairs (since the field
operators are capable of changing the number of field quanta (particles) in a

16
system). It is the evaluation of contributions like these to the S-matrix that lead to
the divergencies mentioned above and prompt the need for renormalization in
standard QED.
The vacuum state contains no stable particles. The vacuum in QED is
believed to be the scene of wild activity with zero-point energy and particles/anti-
particles pairs constantly popping out of the vacuum only to annihilate again
immediately afterwards. This affects charged particles with oppositely charged
virtual particles and is referred to as “vacuum polarization.” Since the 1930's, for
example, theorists have proposed that virtual particles cloak the electron, in
effect reducing the charge and electromagnetic force observed at a distance.
“Vacuum polarization is, however, a relativistic effect involving electron-
positron pairs, as the hole-theoretic interpretation assumes: an electrostatic field
causes a redistribution of charge in the
Dirac sea and thus polarizes the vacuum. A
single charged particle, in particular, will
polarize the vacuum near it, so that its
observed charge is actually smaller than its

Figure 3
‘bare charge.’ A proton, for instance, will
attract electrons and repel positrons of the Dirac sea, resulting in a partial
screening of its bare charge and a modification of the Coulomb potential in the
hydrogen atom.”23 Even “an atom, for instance, can be considered to be
‘dressed’ by emission and reabsorption of ‘virtual photons’ from the vacuum.”24
This constant virtual particle flux of the ZPE is especially noticeable near the
17
boundaries of bigger particles, because the intense electric field gradient causes
a more prodigious “decay of the vacuum.”25
In a notable experiment designed to penetrate the virtual particle cloud
surrounding the electron, Koltick used a particle accelerator at energies of 58
GeV (gigaelectronvolts) without creating other particles.26 From his data, a new
value of the fine structure constant was obtained (e2/hc = 1/128.5), while a
smaller value of 1/137 is traditionally observed for a fully screened electron. This
necessarily means that the value for a naked electron charge is actually larger
than textbooks quote for a screened electron.
Often regarded as merely an artifact of a sophisticated mathematical
theory, some experimental verification of these features of the vacuum has
already been obtained, such as with the Casimir pressure effect (see Figure 6).
An important reason for investigating the Casimir effect is its manifestation before
interactions between the electromagnetic field and the electron/positron fields are
taken into consideration. In the language of QED, this means that the Casimir
effect appears already in the zeroth order of the perturbative expansion. In this
sense the Casimir effect is the most evident feature of the vacuum. On the
experimental side, the Casimir effect has been tested very accurately.27
Some argue that there are two ways of looking at the Casimir effect:
1) The boundary plates modify an already existing QED vacuum. That is,
the introduction of the boundaries (e.g. two electrically neutral, parallel plates)
modify something (a medium of vacuum zero-point energy/vacuum fluctuations)
which already existed prior to the introduction of the boundaries.

18
2) The effect is due to interactions between the microscopic constituents
in the boundary plates. That is, the boundaries introduce a source which give rise
to the effect. The atomic or molecular constituents in the boundary plates act as
fluctuating sources that generate the interactions between the constituents. The
macroscopic attractive force between the two plates arises as an integrated
effect of the mutual interactions between the many microscopic constituents in
these boundary plates.28
The second view is based on atoms within the boundary plates with
fluctuating dipole moments that normally give rise to van der Waals forces.
Therefore, the first view, I believe, is the more modern version, acknowledging
the transformative effect of the introduction of the “Dirac sea” on modern QED
and its present view of the vacuum.29
To conclude this introductory ZPE issues section, it is essential to review
the fluctuation-dissipation theorem, which is prominently featured in QED,
forming the basis for the treatment of an oscillating particle in equilibrium with the
vacuum. It was originally presented in a seminal paper by Callen et al. based on
systems theory, offering applications to various systems including Brownian
motion and also electric field fluctuations in a vacuum.30 In this theorem, the
vacuum is treated as a bath coupled to a dissipative force.
“Generally speaking, if a system is coupled to a ‘bath’ that can take energy
from the system in an effectively irreversible way, then the bath must also cause
fluctuations. The fluctuations and the dissipation go hand in hand; we cannot
have one without the other…the coupling of a dipole oscillator to the

19
electromagnetic field has a dissipative component, in the form of radiation
reaction, and a fluctuation component, in the form of zero-point (vacuum) field;
given the existence of radiation reaction, the vacuum field must also exist in
order to preserve the canonical commutation rule and all it entails.”31
The fluctuation-dissipation theorem is a generalized Nyquist relation.32 It
establishes a relation between the “impedance” in a general linear dissipative
system and the fluctuations of appropriate generalized “forces.”
The theorem itself is expressed as a single equation, essentially the same
as the original formula by Johnson from Bell Telephone Laboratory who, using
kBT with equipartition, discovered the thermal agitation “noise” of electricity,33
< V2 > = 2/π R(ω) E(ω,T) dω . (11)
Here < V2 > is the root mean square (RMS) value of the spontaneously
fluctuating force, R(ω) is the generalized impedance of the system and E(ω,T) is
the mean energy at temperature T of an oscillator of natural frequency ω,
E (ω,T) = ½ hω + hω/(e hω/kT – 1) (12)
which is the same Planck law as Equation (9). The use of the theorem’s Equation
(11) applies exclusively to systems that have an irreversible linear dissipative
portion, such as an impedance, capable of absorbing energy when subjected to a
time-periodic perturbation. This is an essential factor to understanding the
theorem’s applicability.
“The system may be said to be linear if the power dissipation is quadratic
in the magnitude of the perturbation.”34 If the condition of irreversibility is

20
satisfied, such as with resistive heating, then the theorem predicts that there
must exist a spontaneously fluctuating force coupled to it in equilibrium. This
constitutes an insight into the function of the quantum vacuum in a rigorous and
profound manner. “The existence of a radiation impedance for the
electromagnetic radiation from an oscillating charge is shown to imply a
fluctuating electric field in the vacuum, and application of the general theorem
yields the Planck radiation law.”35
Applying the theorem to ZPE, Callen et al. use radiation reaction as the
dissipative force for electric dipole radiation of an oscillating charge in the
vacuum. Based on Equation (2), we can express this in terms of the radiation
damping constant and the change in acceleration (2nd derivative of velocity),
Fd = (% e2/c3) ∂2v/∂t2 = Γ m ∂2v/∂t2 (13)
which is also the same equation derived by Feynman with a subtraction of
retarded and advanced fields, followed by a reduction of the particle radius Æ 0
for the radiation resistance force Fd.36 Then, the familiar equation of motion for
the accelerated charge with an applied force F and a natural frequency ωo is
F = m ∂v/∂t + m ωo2 x + Fd . (14)
For an oscillating dipole and dissipative Equation (13), Callen et al. derive the
real part of the impedance from the “ratio of the in-phase component of F to v,”
which can also be expressed in terms of the radiation damping constant37
R(ω) = % ω2e2/c3 = Γ m ω2 (15)

21
which is placed, along with Equation (12), into Equation (11). This causes < V2 >
to yield the same value as the energy density for isotropic radiation. Interestingly,
V must then be “a randomly fluctuating force eE on the charge” with the
conclusion regarding the ZPF, “hence a randomly fluctuating electric field E.”38
This intrinsically demonstrates the vital relationship between the vacuum
fluctuation force and an irreversible, dissipative process. The two form a
complimentary relationship, analogous to Equation (1), having great fundamental
significance.
Statement of the Problem
The engineering challenge of converting or extracting zero-point energy
for useful work is, at the turn of this century, plagued by ignorance, prejudice and
disbelief. The physics community does not in general acknowledge the emerging
opportunities from fundamental discoveries of zero-point energy. Instead, there
are many expositions from prominent sources explaining why the use of ZPE is
forbidden.
A scientific editorial opinion states, “Exactly how much ‘zero-point energy’
resides in the vacuum is unknown. Some cosmologists have speculated that at
the beginning of the universe, when conditions everywhere were more like those
inside a black hole, vacuum energy was high and may have even triggered the
big bang. Today the energy level should be lower. But to a few optimists, a rich
supply still awaits if only we knew how to tap into it. These maverick proponents
have postulated that the zero-point energy could explain ‘cold fusion,’ inertia, and
22
other phenomena and might someday serve as part of a ‘negative mass’ system
for propelling spacecraft. In an interview taped for PBS’s Scientific American
Frontiers, which aired in November (1997), Harold E. Puthoff, the director of the
Institute for Advanced Studies, observed: ‘For the chauvinists in the field like
ourselves, we think the 21st century could be the zero-point-energy age.’ That
conceit is not shared by the majority of physicist; some even regard such
optimism as pseudoscience that could leech funds from legitimate research. The
conventional view is that the energy in the vacuum is miniscule.”39
Dr. Robert Forward, who passed away in 2002, said, “Before I wrote the
paper40 everyone said that it was impossible to extract energy from the vacuum.
After I wrote the paper, everyone had to acknowledge that you could extract
energy from the vacuum, but began to quibble about the details. The spiral
design won't work very efficiently... The amount of energy extracted is extremely
small... You are really getting the energy from the surface energy of the
aluminum, not the vacuum... Even if it worked perfectly, it would be no better per
pound than a regular battery... Energy extraction from the vacuum is a
conservative process, you have to put as much energy into making the leaves of
aluminum as you will ever get out of the battery... etc... etc...Yes, it is very likely
that the vacuum field is a conservative one, like gravity. But, no one has proved it
yet. In fact, there is an experiment mentioned in my Mass Modification [ref. 15]
paper (an antiproton in a vacuum chamber) which can check on that. The
amount of energy you can get out of my aluminum foil battery is limited to the
total surface energy of all the foils. For foils that one can think of making that are
23
thick enough to reflect ultraviolet light, so the Casimir attraction effect works, say
20 nm (70 atoms) thick, then the maximum amount of energy you get out per
pound of aluminum is considerably less than that of a battery. To get up to
chemical energies, you will have to accrete individual atoms using the van der
Waals force, which is the Casimir force for single atoms instead of conducting
plates. My advice is to accept the fact that the vacuum field is probably
conservative, and invent the vacuum equivalent of the hydroturbine generator in
a dam.”41
Professor John Barrow from Cambridge University insists that, “In the last
few years a public controversy has arisen as to whether it is possible to extract
and utilise the zero-point vacuum energy as a source of energy. A small group of
physicists, led by American physicist Harold Puthoff have claimed that we can
tap into the infinite sea of zero-point fluctuations. They have so far failed to
convince others that the zero-point energy is available to us in any sense. This is
a modern version of the old quest for a perpetual motion machine: a source of
potentially unlimited clean energy, at no cost….The consensus is that things are
far less spectacular. It is hard to see how we could usefully extract zero-point
energy. It defines the minimum energy that an atom could possess. If we were
able to extract some of it the atom would need to end up in an even lower energy
state, which is simply not available.”42
With convincing skeptical arguments like these from the experts, how can
the extraction of ZPE for the performance of useful work ever be considered
feasible? What engineering protocol can be theoretically developed for the

24
extraction of ZPE if it can be reasonably considered to be feasible? These are
the central problems that are addressed by my thesis.
Purpose of the Study
This study is designed to propose a defensible feasibility argument for the
extraction of ZPE from the quantum vacuum. Part of this comprehensive
feasibility study also includes an engineering analysis of areas of research that
are proving to be fruitful in the theoretical and experimental approaches to zero-
point energy extraction. A further purpose is to look at energy extraction systems,
in their various modalities, based on accepted physics and engineering
principles, which may provide theoretically fruitful areas of discovery. Lastly, a
few alternate designs which are reasonable prototypes for the extraction of zero-
point energy, are also proposed.
Importance of the Study
It is unduly apparent that a study of this ubiquitous energy is overdue. The
question has been asked, “Can new technology reduce our need for oil from the
Middle East?”43 More and more sectors of our society are demanding
breakthroughs in energy generation, because of the rapid depletion of oil
reserves and the environmental impact from the combustion of fossil fuels.
“In 1956, the geologist M. King Hubbert predicted that U.S. oil production
would peak in the early 1970s. Almost everyone, inside and outside the oil
industry, rejected Hubbert’s analysis. The controversy raged until 1970, when the
U.S. production of crude oil started to fall. Hubbert was right. Around 1995,
25
several analysts began applying Hubbert’s method to world oil production, and
most of them estimate that the peak year for world oil will be between 2004 and
2008. These analyses were reported in some of the most widely circulated
Figure 4
sources: Nature, Science and Scientific American. None of our political leaders
seem to be paying attention. If the predictions are correct, there will be enormous
effects on the world economy.”44 Figure 4 is taken from the Deffeyes book
showing the Hubbert method predicting world peak oil production and decline.
It is now widely accepted, especially in Europe where I participated in the
World Renewable Energy Policy and Strategy Forum, Solar Energy Expo 2002
and the Innovative Energy Technology Conference, (all in Berlin, Germany), that
the world oil production peak will probably only stretch to 2010, and that global
warming is now occurring faster than expected. Furthermore, it will take decades
to reverse the damage already set in motion, without even considering the future
impact of “thermal forcing” which the future greenhouse gases will cause from
generators and automobiles already irreversibly set in motion. The Kyoto
Protocol, with its 7% decrease to 1990 levels of emissions, is a small step in the
26
right direction but it does not address the magnitude of the problem, nor attempt
to reverse it. “Stabilizing atmospheric CO2 concentrations at safe levels will
require a 60 – 80 per cent cut in carbon emissions from current levels, according
to the best estimates of scientists.”45 Therefore, renewable energy sources like
solar and wind power have seen a dramatic increase in sales every single year
for the past ten years as more and more people see the future shock looming on
the horizon. Solar photovoltaic panels, however, still have to reach the wholesale
level in their cost of electricity that wind turbines have already achieved.
Another emerging problem that seems to have been unanticipated by the
environmental groups is that too much proliferation of one type of machinery,
such as windmills, can be objectionable as well. Recently, the Alliance to Protect
Nantucket Sound filed suit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to stop
construction of a 197-foot tower being built to collect wind data for the
development of a wind farm 5 miles off the coast of Massachusetts. Apparently,
the wealthy residents are concerned that the view of Nantucket Sound will be
spoiled by the large machines in the bay.46 Therefore, it is likely that only a
compact, distributed, free energy generator will be acceptable by the public in the
future. Considering payback-on-investment, if it possessed a twenty-five year
lifespan or more, while requiring minimum maintenance, then it will probably
please most of the people, most of the time. The development of a ZPE
generator theoretically would actually satisfy these criteria.
Dr. Steven Greer of the Disclosure Project has stated, “classified above
top-secret projects possess fully operational anti-gravity propulsion devices and

27
new energy generation systems, that, if declassified and put to peaceful uses,
would empower a new human civilization without want, poverty or environmental
damage.”47 However, since the declassification of black project, compartmented
exotic energy technologies is not readily forthcoming, civilian physics research is
being forced to reinvent fuelless energy sources such as zero-point energy
extraction.
Regarding the existing conundrum of interplanetary travel, with our
present lack of appropriate propulsion technology and cosmic ray bombardment
protection, Arthur C. Clarke has predicted, that in 3001 the “inertialess drive” will
most likely be put to use like a controllable gravity field, thanks to the landmark
paper by Haisch et al.48 “…if HR&P’s theory can be proved, it opens up the
prospect—however remote—of antigravity ‘space drives,’ and the even more
fantastic possibility of controlling inertia.”49
Rationale of the Study
The hypothesis of the study is centered on the accepted physical basis for
zero-point energy, its unsurpassed energy density, and the known physical
manifestations of zero-point energy, proven by experimental observation.
Conversion of energy is a well-known science which can, in theory, be applied to
zero-point energy.
The scope of the study encompasses the known areas of physical
discipline: mechanical, thermal, fluidic, and electromagnetic. Within these
disciplines, the scope also extends from the macroscopic beyond the
28
microscopic to the atomic. This systems science approach, which is fully
discussed and analyzed in Chapter 4, includes categories such as:
1. Electromagnetic conversion of zero-point energy radiation
2. Fluidic entrainment of zero-point energy flow through a gradient
3. Mechanical conversion of zero-point energy force or pressure
4. Thermodynamic conversion of zero-point energy.
Definition of Terms
Following are terms that are used throughout the study:
1. Bremsstrahlung: Radiation caused by the deceleration of an electron. Its
energy is converted into light. For heavier particles the retardations are
never so great as to make the radiation important.50
2. Dirac Sea: The physical vacuum in which particles are trapped in negative
energy states until enough energy is present locally to release them.
3. Energy: The capacity for doing work. Equal to power exerted over time (e.g.
kilowatt-hours). It can exist in linear or rotational form and is quantized in the
ultimate part. It may be conserved or not conserved, depending upon the
system considered. Mostly all terrestrial manifestations can be traced to
solar origin, except for zero-point energy.
4. Lamb Shift: A shift (increase) in the energy levels of an atom, regarded as a
Stark effect, due to the presence of the zero-point field. Its explanation
marked the beginning of modern quantum electrodynamics.

29
5. Parton: The fundamental theoretical limit of particle size thought to exist in
the vacuum, related to the Planck length (10-35 meter) and the Planck mass
(22 micrograms), where quantum effects dominate spacetime. Much smaller
than subatomic particles, it is sometimes referred to as the charged point
particles within the vacuum that participate in the ZPE Zitterbewegung.
6. Planck’s Constant: The fundamental basis of quantum mechanics which
provides the measure of a quantum (h = 6.6 x 10-34 joule-second), it is also
the ratio of the energy to the frequency of a photon.
7. Quantum Electrodynamics: The quantum theory of light as electromagnetic
radiation, in wave and particle form, as it interacts with matter. Abbreviated
“QED.”
8. Quantum Vacuum: A characterization of empty space by which physical
particles are unmanifested or stored in negative energy states. Also called
the “physical vacuum.”
9. Uncertainty Principle: The rule or law that limits the precision of a pair of
physical measurements in complimentary fashion, e.g. the position and
momentum, or the energy and time, forming the basis for zero-point energy.
10. Virtual Particles: Physically real particles emerging from the quantum
vacuum for a short time determined by the uncertainty principle. This can be
a photon or other particle in an intermediate state which, in quantum
mechanics (Heisenberg notation) appears in matrix elements connecting

30
initial and final states. Energy is not conserved in the transition to or from
the intermediate state. Also known as a virtual quantum.
11. Zero-point energy: The non-thermal, ubiquitous kinetic energy (averaging
½hf) that is manifested even at zero degrees Kelvin, abbreviated as “ZPE.”
Also called vacuum fluctuations, zero-point vibration, residual energy,
quantum oscillations, the vacuum electromagnetic field, virtual particle flux,
and recently, dark energy.
12. Zitterbewegung: An oscillatory motion of an electron, exhibited mainly when
it penetrates a voltage potential, with frequency greater than 1021 Hertz. It
can be associated with pair production (electron-positron) when the energy
of the potential exceeds 2mc2 (m = electron mass). Also generalized to
represent the rapid oscillations associated with zero-point energy.
Overview of the Study
In all of the areas of investigation, so far no known extractions of zero-
point energy for useful work have been achieved, though it can be argued that
incidental ZPE extraction has manifested itself macroscopically. By exploring the
main physical principles underlying the science of zero-point energy, certain
modalities for energy conversion achieve prominence while others are regarded
as less practical. Applying physics and engineering analysis, a scientific research
feasibility study of ZPE extraction, referenced by rigorous physics theory and
experiment is generated.
31
With a comprehensive survey of conversion modalities, new alternate,
efficient methods for ZPE extraction are presented and analyzed. Comparing the
specific characteristics of zero-point energy with the known methods of energy
conversion, the common denominators should offer the most promising feasibility
for conversion of zero-point energy into useful work. The advances in
nanotechnology are also examined, especially where ZPE effects are already
identified as interfering with mechanical and electronic behavior of nanodevices.

32
CHAPTER 2
Review of Related Literature
Historical Perspectives
Reviewing the literature for zero-point energy necessarily starts with the
historical developments of its discovery. In 1912, Max Planck published the first
journal article to describe the discontinuous emission of radiation, based on the
discrete quanta of energy.51 In this paper, Planck’s now-famous “blackbody”
radiation equation contains the residual energy factor, one half of hf, as an
additional term (½hf), dependent on the frequency f, which is always greater than
zero (where h = Planck’s constant). It is therefore widely agreed that “Planck’s
equation marked the birth of the concept of zero-point energy.”52 This mysterious
factor was understood to signify the average oscillator energy available to each
field mode even when the temperature reaches absolute zero. In the meantime,
Einstein had published his “fluctuation formula” which describes the energy
fluctuations of thermal radiation.53 Today, “the particle term in the Einstein
fluctuation formula may be regarded as a consequence of zero-point field
energy.”54
During the early years of its discovery, Einstein55,56 and Dirac57,58 saw the
value of zero-point energy and promoted its fundamental importance. The 1913
paper by Einstein computed the specific heat of molecular hydrogen, including
zero-point energy, which agreed very well with experiment. Debye also made
33
calculations including zero-point energy (ZPE) and showed its effect on
Roentgen ray (X-ray) diffraction.59
Throughout the next few decades, zero-point energy became intrinsically
important to quantum mechanics with the birth of the uncertainty principle. “In
1927, Heisenberg, on the basis of the Einstein-de Broglie relations, showed that
it is impossible to have a simultaneous knowledge of the [position] coordinate x
and its conjugate momentum p to an arbitrary degree of accuracy, their
uncertainties being given by the relation Δx Δp > h / 4π.”60 This expression of
Equation (1) is not the standard form that Heisenberg used for the uncertainty
principle, however. He invented a character h called “h-bar,” which equals h/2π
(also introduced in Chapter 1). If this shortcut notation is used for the uncertainty
principle, it takes the form Δx Δp > h / 2 or ΔE Δt > h / 2, which is a more familiar
equation to physicists and found in most quantum mechanics texts.
By 1935, the application of harmonic oscillator models with various
boundary conditions became a primary approach to quantum particle physics
and atomic physics.61 Quantum mechanics also evolved into “wave mechanics”
and “matrix mechanics” which are not central to this study. However, with the
evolution of matrix mechanics came an intriguing application of matrix “operators”
and “commutation relations” of x and p that today are well known in quantum
mechanics. With these new tools, the “quantization of the harmonic oscillator” is
all that is required to reveal the existence of the zero-point ground state energy.62
“This residual energy is known as the zero-point energy, and is a direct
consequence of the uncertainty principle. Basically, it is impossible to completely

34
stop the motion of the oscillator, since if the motion were zero, the uncertainty in
position Δx would be zero, resulting in an infinitely large uncertainty in
momentum (since Δp = h / 2Δx). The zero-point energy represents a sharing of
the uncertainty in position and the uncertainty in momentum. The energy
associated with the uncertainty in momentum gives the zero-point energy.”63
Another important ingredient in the development of the understanding of
zero-point energy came from the Compton effect. “Compelling confirmation of the
concept of the photon as a concentrated bundle of energy was provided in 1923
by A. H. Compton who earned a Nobel prize for this work in 1927.”64 Compton
scattering, as it is now known, can only be understood using the energy-
frequency relation E = hf that was proposed previously by Einstein to explain the
photoelectric effect in terms of Planck’s constant h.65
Ruminations about the zero-point vacuum field (ZPF), in conjunction with
Einstein’s famous equation E = mc2 and the limitations of the uncertainty
principle, suggested that photons may also be created and destroyed “out of
nothing.” Such photons have been called “virtual” and are prohibited by classical
laws of physics. “But in quantum mechanics the uncertainty principle allows
energy conservation to be violated for a short time interval Δt = h / 2ΔE. As long
as the energy is conserved after this time, we can regard the virtual particle
exchange as a small fluctuation of energy that is entirely consistent with quantum
Figure 5
35
mechanics.”66 Such virtual particle exchanges later became an integral part of an
advanced theory called quantum electrodynamics (QED) where “Feynmann
diagrams,” developed by Richard Feynmann to describe particle collisions, often
show the virtual photon exchange between the paths of two nearby particles.67
Figure 5 shows a sample of the Compton scattering of a virtual photon as it
contributes to the radiated energy effect of bremsstrahlung.68
Casimir Predicts a Measurable ZPE Effect
In 1948, it was predicted that virtual particle appearances should exert a
force that is measurable.69 Casimir not only predicted the presence of such a
force but also explained why van der Waals forces dropped off unexpectedly at
long range separation between atoms. The Casimir effect was first verified
experimentally using a variety of conductive plates by Sparnaay.70
There was still an interest for an improved test of the Casimir force using
conductive plates as modeled in Casimir's paper to better accuracy than
Sparnaay. In 1997, Dr. Lamoreaux, from Los Alamos Labs, performed the
experiment with less than one micrometer (micron) spacing between gold-plated
parallel plates attached to a torsion pendulum.71 In retrospect, he found it to one
of the most intellectually satisfying experiments that he ever performed since the
results matched the theory so closely (within 5%). This event also elevated zero-
point energy fluctuations to a higher level of public interest. Even the New York
Times covered the event.72

36
The Casimir Effect has been posited as a force produced solely by activity
in the empty vacuum (see Figure 6). The Casimir force is also very powerful at
small distances. Besides being independent of temperature, it is inversely
proportional to the fourth power of the distance between the plates at larger
distances and inversely proportional to the third power of the distance between
the plates at short distances.73 (Its frequency dependence is a third power.)
Lamoreaux's results come as no surprise to anyone familiar with quantum
electrodynamics, but they serve as a material confirmation of a bazaar theoretical
prediction: that QED predicts the all-pervading vacuum continuously spawns
particles and waves that spontaneously
pop in and out of existence. Their time of
existence is strictly limited by the
uncertainty principle but they create
some havoc while they bounce around
during their brief lifespan. The churning Figure 6
quantum foam is believed to extend throughout the universe even filling the
empty space within the atoms in human bodies. Physicists theorize that on an
infinitesimally small scale, far, far smaller than the diameter of atomic nucleus,
quantum fluctuations produce a foam of erupting and collapsing, virtual particles,
visualized as a topographic distortion of the fabric of space time (Figure 7).
Ground State of Hydrogen is Sustained by ZPE
Looking at the electron in a set ground-state orbit, it consists of a bound
state with a central Coulomb potential that has been treated successfully in
37
physics with the harmonic oscillator model. However, the anomalous repulsive
force balancing the attractive
Coulomb potential remained a
mystery until Puthoff published a
ZPE-based description of the
Figure 7
hydrogen ground state.74 This
derivation caused a stir among physicists because of the extent of influence that
was now afforded to vacuum fluctuations. It appears from Puthoff’s work that the
ZPE shield of virtual particles surrounding the electron may be the repulsive
force. Taking a simplistic argument for the rate at which the atom absorbs energy
from the vacuum field and equating it to the radiated loss of energy from
accelerated charges, the Bohr quantization condition for the ground state of a
one-electon atom like hydrogen is obtained. “We now know that the vacuum field
is in fact formally necessary for the stability of atoms in quantum theory.”75
Lamb Shift Caused by ZPE
Another historically valid test in the verification of ZPE has been what has
been called the “Lamb shift.” Measured by Dr. Willis Lamb in the 1940's, it
actually showed the effect of zero point fluctuations on certain electron levels of
the hydrogen atom, causing a fine splitting of the levels on the order of 1000
MHz.76 Physicist Margaret Hawton describes the Lamb shift as “a kind of one
atom Casimir Effect” and predicts that the vacuum fluctuations of ZPE need only
occur in the vicinity of atoms or atomic particles.77 This seems to agree with the
discussion about Koltick in Chapter 1, illustrated in Figure 3.

38
Today, “the majority of physicists attribute spontaneous emission and the
Lamb shift entirely to vacuum fluctuations.”78 This may lead scientists to believe
that it can no longer be called "spontaneous emission" but instead should
properly be labeled forced or "stimulated emission" much like laser light, even
though there is a random quality to it. However, it has been found that radiation
reaction (the reaction of the electron to its own field) together with the vacuum
fluctuations contribute equally to the phenomena of spontaneous emission.79
Experimental ZPE
The first journal publication
to propose a Casimir machine for
"the extracting of electrical energy
from the vacuum by cohesion of
charge foliated conductors" is
summarized here.80 Dr. Forward
describes this "parking ramp" style
corkscrew or spring as a ZPE
battery that will tap electrical
energy from the vacuum and allow

Figure 8
charge to be stored. The spring
tends to be compressed from the Casimir force but the like charge from the
electrons stored will cause a repulsion force to balance the spring separation
distance. It tends to compress upon dissipation and usage but expand physically
with charge storage. He suggests using micro-fabricated sandwiches of ultrafine

39
metal dielectric layers. Forward also points out that ZPE seems to have a
definite potential as an energy source.
Another interesting experiment is the "Casimir Effect at Macroscopic
Distances" which proposes observing the Casimir force at a distance of a few
centimeters using confocal optical resonators within the sensitivity of laboratory
instruments.81 This experiment makes the microscopic Casimir effect observable
and greatly enhanced.
In general, many of the experimental journal articles refer to vacuum
effects on a cavity that is created with two or more surfaces. Cavity QED is a
science unto itself. “Small cavities suppress atomic transitions; slightly larger
ones, however, can enhance them. When the size of the cavity surrounding an
excited atom is increased to the point where it matches the wavelength of the
photon that the atom would naturally emit, vacuum-field fluctuations at that
wavelength flood the cavity and become stronger than they would be in free
space.”82 It is also possible to perform the opposite feat. “Pressing zero-point
energy out of a spatial region can be used to temporarily increase the Casimir
force.”83 The materials used for the cavity walls are also important. It is well-
known that the attractive Casimir force is obtained from highly reflective surfaces.
However, “…a repulsive Casimir force may be obtained by considering a cavity
built with a dielectric and a magnetic plate. The product r of the two reflection
amplitudes is indeed negative in this case, so that the force is repulsive.”84 For
parallel plates in general, a “magnetic field inhibits the Casimir effect.”85

40
An example of an idealized system with two parallel semiconducting
plates separated by an variable gap that utilizes several concepts referred to
above is Dr. Pinto’s “optically controlled vacuum energy transducer.”86 By
optically pumping the cavity with a microlaser as the gap spacing is varied, “the
total work done by the Casimir force along a closed path that includes
appropriate transformations does not vanish…In the event of no other alternative
explanations, one should conclude that major technological advances in the area
of endless, by-product free-energy production could be achieved.”87 More
analysis on this revolutionary invention will be presented in Chapter 4.
ZPE Patent Review
For any researcher reviewing the literature for an invention design such as
energy transducers, it is well-known in the art that it is vital to perform a patent
search. In 1987, Werner and Sven from Germany patented a “Device or method
for generating a varying Casimir-analogous force and liberating usable energy”
with patent #DE3541084. It subjects two plates in close proximity to a fluctuation
which they believe will liberate energy from the zero-point field.
In 1996, Jarck Uwe from France patented a “Zero-point energy power
plant” with PCT patent #WO9628882. It suggests that a coil and magnet will be
moved by ZPE which then will flow through a hollow body generating induction
through an energy whirlpool. It is not clear how such a macroscopic apparatus
could resonate or respond to ZPE effectively.
On Dec. 31, 1996 the conversion of ZPE was patented for the first time in
the United States with US patent #5,590,031. The inventor, Dr. Frank Mead,
41
Director of the Air Force Research Laboratory, designed receivers to be spherical
collectors of zero point radiation (see
Figure 9). One of the interesting
considerations was to design it for the
range of extremely high frequency that
ZPE offers, which by some estimates,
corresponds to the Planck frequency of
1043 Hz. We do not have any apparatus to
amplify or even oscillate at that frequency
currently. For example, gigahertz radar is Figure 9
only 1010 Hz or so. Visible light is about 1014 Hertz and gamma rays reach into
the 20th power, where the wavelength is smaller than the size of an atom.
However, that's still a long way off from the 40th power. The essential innovation
of the Mead patent is the “beat frequency” generation circuitry, which creates a
lower frequency output signal from the ZPE input.
Another patent that utilizes a noticeable ZPE effect is the AT&T “Negative
Transconductance Device” by inventor, Federico Capasso (US #4,704,622). It is
a resonant tunneling device with a one-dimensional quantum well or wire. The
important energy consideration involves the additional zero-point energy which is
available to the electrons in the extra dimensional quantized band, allowing them
to tunnel through the barrier. This solid state, multi-layer, field effect transistor
demonstrates that without ZPE, no tunneling would be possible. It is supported
by the virtual photon tunnel effect.88

42
Grigg's Hydrosonic Pump is another patent (U.S. #5,188,090), whose
water glows blue when in cavitation mode, that consistently has been measuring
an over-unity performance of excess heat energy output. It appears to be a
dynamic Casimir effect that contributes to sonoluminescence.89
Joseph Yater patented his “Reversible Thermoelectric Converter with
Power Conversion of Energy Fluctuations” (#4,004,210) in 1977 and also spent
years defending it in the literature. In 1974, he published “Power conversion of
energy fluctuations.”90 In 1979, he published an article on the “Relation of the
second law of thermodynamics to the power conversion of energy fluctuations”91
and also a rebuttal to comments on his first article.92 It is important that he
worked so hard to support such a radical idea, since it appears that energy is
being brought from a lower temperature reservoir to a higher one, which normally
violates the 2nd law. The basic concept is a simple rectification of thermal noise,
which also can be found in the Charles Brown patent (#3,890,161) of 1975,
“Diode array for rectifying thermal electrical noise.”
Many companies are now very interested in such processes for powering
nanomachines. While researching this ZPE thesis, I attended the AAAS
workshop by IBM on nanotechnology in 2000, where it was learned that R. D.
Astumian proposed in 1997 to rectify thermal noise (as if this was a new idea).93
This apparently has provoked IBM to begin a “nanorectifier” development
program.
Details of some of these and other inventions are analyzed in Chapter 4.

43
ZPE and Sonoluminescence
Does sonoluminescence (SL) tap ZPE? This question is based upon the
experimental results of ultrasound cavitation in various fluids which emit light and
extreme heat from bubbles 100 microns in diameter which implode violently
creating temperatures of 5,500 degrees Celsius. Scientists at UCLA have
recently measured the length of time that sonoluminescence flashes persist.
Barber discovered that they only exist for 50 picoseconds (ps) or shorter, which
is too brief for the light to be produced by some atomic process. Atomic
processes, in comparison, emit light for at least several tenths of a nanosecond
(ns). “To the best of our resolution, which has only established upper bounds, the
light flash is less than 50 ps in duration and it occurs within 0.5 ns of the
minimum bubble radius. The SL flashwidth is thus 100 times shorter than the
shortest (visible) lifetime of an excited state of a hydrogen atom.”94
Critical to the understanding of the nature of this light spectrum however,
is what other mechanism than atomic transitions can explain SL. Dr. Claudia
Eberlein in her pioneering paper "Sonoluminescence and QED" describes her
conclusion that only the ZPE spectrum matches the light emission spectrum of
sonoluminescence, and could react as quickly as SL.95 She thus concludes that
SL must therefore be a ZPE phenomena. It is also acknowledged that
“Schwinger proposed a physical mechanism for sonoluminescence in terms of
photon production due to changes in the properties of the quantum-
electrodynamic (QED) vacuum arising from a collapsing dielectric bubble.”96

44
Gravity and Inertia Related to ZPE
Another dimension of ZPE is found in the work of Dr. Harold Puthoff, who
has found that gravity is a zero-point-fluctuation force, in a prestigious Physical
Review article that has been largely uncontested.97 He points out that the late
Russian physicist, Dr. Sakharov regarded gravitation as not a fundamental
interaction at all, but an induced effect that's brought about by changes in the
vacuum when matter is present. The interesting part about this is that the mass
is shown to correspond to the kinetic energy of the zero-point-induced internal
particle jittering, while the force of gravity is comprised of the long ZPE
wavelengths. This is in the same category as the low frequency, long range
forces that are now associated with Van der Waal's forces.
Referring to the inertia relationship to zero-point energy, Haisch et al. find
that first of all, that inertia is directly related to the Lorentz Force which is used to
describe Faraday's Law.98 As a result of their work, the Lorentz Force now has
been shown to be directly responsible for an electromagnetic resistance arising
from a distortion of the zero-point field in an accelerated frame. They also explain
how the magnetic component of the Lorentz force arises in ZPE, its matter
interactions, and also a derivation of Newton’s law, F = ma. From quantum
electrodynamics, Newton’s law appears to be related to the known distortion of
the zero point spectrum in an accelerated reference frame.
Haisch et al. present an understanding as to why force and acceleration
should be related, or even for that matter, what is mass.99 Previously
misunderstood, mass (gravitational or inertial) is apparently more

45
electromagnetic than mechanical in nature. The resistance to acceleration
defines the inertia of matter but interacts with the vacuum as an electromagnetic
resistance. To summarize the inertia effect, it is connected to a distortion at high
frequencies of the zero-point field. Whereas, the gravitational force has been
shown to be a low frequency interaction with the zero point field.
Recently, Alexander Feigel has proposed that the momentum of the virtual
photons can depend upon the direction in which they are traveling, especially if
they are in the presence of electric or magnetic fields. His theory and experiment
offers a possible explanation for the accelerated expansion of distant galaxies.100
Heat from ZPE
In what may seem to appear as a major contradiction, it has been
proposed that, in principle, basic thermodynamics allows for the extraction of
heat energy from the zero-point field via the Casimir force. “However, the
contradiction becomes resolved upon recognizing that two different types of
thermodynamic operations are being discussed.”101 Normal thermodynamically
reversible heat generation process is classically limited to temperatures above
absolute zero (T > 0 K). “For heat to be generated at T = 0 K, an irreversible
thermodynamic operation needs to occur, such as by taking the systems out of
mechanical equilibrium.”102 Examples are given of theoretical systems with two
opposite charges or two dipoles in a perfectly reflecting box being forced closer
and farther apart. Adiabatic expansion and irreversible adiabatic free contraction
curves are identified on a graph of force versus distance with reversible heating
and cooling curves connecting both endpoints. Though a practical method of

46
energy or heat extraction is not addressed in the article, the basis for designing
one is given a physical foundation.
A summary of all three ZPE effects introduced above (heat, inertia, and
gravity) can be found in the most recent Puthoff et al. publication entitled,
“Engineering the Zero-Point Field and Polarizable Vacuum for Interstellar
Flight.”103 In it they state, “One version of this concept involves the projected
possibility that empty space itself (the quantum vacuum, or space-time metric)
might be manipulated so as to provide energy/thrust for future space vehicles.
Although far-reaching, such a proposal is solidly grounded in modern theory that
describes the vacuum as a polarizable medium that sustains energetic quantum
fluctuations.”104 A similar article proposes that “monopolar particles could also be
accelerated by the ZPF, but in a much more effective manner than polarizable
particles.”105 Furthermore, “…the mechanism should eventually provide a means
to transfer energy…from the vacuum electromagnetic ZPF into a suitable
experimental apparatus.”106 With such endorsements for the use of ZPE, the
value of this present study seems to be validated and may be projected to be
scientifically fruitful.
Summary
To summarize the scientific literature review, the experimental evidence
for the existence of ZPE include the following:
1) Anomalous magnetic moment of the electron107
2) Casimir effect108
47
3) Diamagnetism109
4) Einstein’s fluctuation formula110
5) Gravity111
6) Ground state of the hydrogen atom112
7) Inertia113
8) Lamb shift114
9) Liquid Helium to T = 0 K115
10) Planck’s blackbody radiation equation116
11) Quantum noise117
12) Sonoluminescence118
13) Spontaneous emission119
14) Uncertainty principle120
15) Van der Waals forces121
The apparent discrepancy in the understanding of the concepts behind ZPE
comes from the fact that ZPE evolves from classical electrodynamics theory and
from quantum mechanics. For example, Dr. Frank Mead (US Patent #5,590,031)
calls it "zero point electromagnetic radiation energy" following the tradition of
Timothy Boyer who simply added a randomizing parameter to classical ZPE
theory thus inventing “stochastic electrodynamics” (SED).122 Lamoreaux, on the
other hand, refers to it as "a flux of virtual particles", because the particles that
react and create some of this energy are popping out of the vacuum and going
48
back in.123 The New York Times simply calls it "quantum foam." But the
important part about it is from Dr. Robert Forward, "the quantum mechanical zero
point oscillations are real."124

49
CHAPTER 3
Methodology
In this chapter, the methods used in this research feasibility study will be
reviewed, including the approach, the data gathering method, the database
selected for analysis, the analysis of the data, the validity of the data, the
uniqueness (originality) and limitations of the method, along with a brief
summary.
Approach
The principal argument for the feasibility study of zero-point energy
extraction is that it provides a systematic way of evaluating the fundamental
properties of this phenomena of nature. Secondly, research into the properties of
ZPE offer an opportunity for innovative application of basic principles of energy
conversion. These basic transduction methods fall into the disciplines of
mechanical, fluidic, thermal, and electrical systems.125 It is well-known that these
engineering systems find application in all areas of energy generation in our
society. Therefore, it is reasonable that this study utilize a systems approach to
zero-point energy conversion while taking into consideration the latest quantum
electrodynamic findings regarding ZPE.
There are several important lessons that can be conveyed by a feasibility
study of ZPE extraction.
1) It permits a grounding of observations and concepts about ZPE in a
scientific setting with an emphasis toward engineering practicability.

50
2) It furnishes information from a number of sources and over a wide
range of disciplines, which is important for a maximum potential of
success.
3) It can provide the dimension of history to the study of ZPE thereby
enabling the investigator to examine continuity and any change in
patterns over time.
4) It encourages and facilitates, in practice, experimental assessment,
theoretical innovation and even fruitful generalizations.
5) It can offer the best possible avenues, which are available for further
research and development, for the highest probability of success.
A feasibility study enables an investigation to take place into every detail of the
phenomena being researched. The feasibility study is an effective vehicle for
providing an overview of the breadth and depth of the subject at hand, while
providing the reader an opportunity to probe for internal consistency.
What is a Feasibility Study?
A feasibility study is a complete examination of the practicability of a
specific invention, project, phenomena, or process. It strives to provide the
requisite details necessary to support its conclusion concerning the possibility or
impossibility of accomplishing the goal of the research study. As such, it takes an
unbiased viewpoint toward the subject matter and reflects a balanced
presentation of the facts that are currently available in the scientific literature.
51
Feasibility studies are the hallmark of engineering progress, often saving
investors millions of dollars, while providing a superior substitute for risk
assessment. Therefore, such studies are required before any consideration is
made of the investment potential of an invention, project, process, or phenomena
by venture capitalists. Feasibility studies thus provide all of the possible
engineering details that can be presented beforehand so that the construction
stage can proceed smoothly and with a prerequisite degree of certitude as to the
outcome.
Feasibility studies can also provide a wealth of information just with the
literature survey that is an integral part of the research. Along with the survey, an
expert engineering and physics assessment is usually provided regarding the
findings reported in the literature and how they directly relate to the capability of
the process, phenomena, project, or invention to be put into effect.
As such, a feasibility study offers the best possible original research of the
potential for successful utilization, with a thick descriptive style so necessary for
an accurate and honest judgment.126
“A good feasibility study will contain clear supporting evidence for its
recommendations. It’s best to supply a mix of numerical data with qualitative,
experience-based documentation (where appropriate). The report should also
indicate a broad outline of how to undertake any recommended development
work. This will usually involve preparing an initial, high-level project plan that
estimates the required project scope and resources and identifies major
milestones. An outline plan makes everyone focus more clearly on the important
52
implementation issues and generate some momentum for any subsequent work.
This is especially true if feasibility teams suspect that the development itself will
become their baby. A sound, thorough feasibility study will also ease any
subsequent development tasks that gain approval. The feasibility study will have
identified major areas of risk and outlined approaches to dealing with these risks.
Recognising the nature of feasibility projects encourages the successful
implementation of the best ideas in an organisation and provides project
managers with some novel challenges.”127
Data Gathering Method
The method used in this feasibility study is the same that is used in pure
as well as applied research. Through a review of the scientific literature, certain
approaches to the conversion of zero-point energy into useful work demonstrate
more promise and engineering feasibility than others. Combining the evaluation
with the known theories and experimental discoveries of zero-point energy and
the author’s professional engineering knowledge of electromechanical
fabrication, a detailed recommendation and assessment for the most promising
and suitable development is then made. This procedure follows the standard
method used in most feasibility studies.128,129,130
Database Selected for Analysis
The database for this study consists of mostly peer-reviewed physics
journals, engineering journals, science magazines, patent literature, textbooks,
which are authored by physicists and engineers.

53
Analysis of Data
The analysis of the data is found in Chapter 4, where the findings are
explored. The most promising possibilities, from an engineering standpoint, are
the zero-point energy conversion concepts that are past the research stage or
the proof-of-principle stage and into the developmental arena. Using the scientific
method, a thorough examination of the data is presented, with physics and
engineering criteria, to determine the feasibility of zero-point energy extraction.
Validity of Data
The data used in this study can be presumed to be valid beyond a
reasonable doubt. Ninety years ago, when zero-point energy was first
discovered, the validity of the data may have been questioned. However, after so
much experimental agreement with theory has followed in the physics literature,
it can be said that the data has stood the test of time. Furthermore, in the past
decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of journal publications
on the subject of zero-point energy, demonstrating the timeliness and essential
value of this study. Excluding any anomalous findings that have not been
replicated or verified by other scientists, it can be presumed that the data
presented in this feasibility study represents the highest quality that the scientific
community can offer.
Uniqueness and Limitations of the Method
The method applied in this study, though it appears to be universal in its
approach, is being applied for the first time to determine the utility of zero-point
54
energy extraction. Only through experimental verification can the method be
validated. However, many intermediate steps required for utilization have already
been validated by experiment, as mentioned in the above sections.
As with any study of this nature, certain limitations are inherent in the
method. The feasibility study draws from a large database and involves a great
number of variables, which is, in itself, a limitation. The nature of ZPE is also a
limitation because it is so unusual and foreign to most scientists, while many
standard testing methods used for other fields and forces fail to reveal its
presence.
These variables and limitations have been minimized to every extent
possible.
Summary
The method used in this feasibility study is the application of the basic
principles of energy conversion in the mechanical, fluidic, thermal, and
electromagnetic systems to zero-point energy research. It is a systems approach
that has a fundamental basis in the scientific method. By reviewing journal
articles and textbooks in the physics and engineering field of zero-point energy,
certain data has been accumulated. The analysis of the data is conducted in a
critical manner with an approximate rating system in order to evaluate the
practical applications of both theory and experiment, and the likelihood of
success for energy conversion. It is believed that this is the first time such an
approach has been used and applied to the field of zero-point energy conversion.
As such, new and exciting conclusions are bound to emerge.

55
CHAPTER 4
Analysis
Introduction to Vacuum Engineering
The emerging discipline of vacuum engineering encompasses the present
investigation into energy conversion modalities that offer optimum feasibility. It is
believed by only a minority of physicists that the vacuum can be engineered to
properly facilitate the transduction of energy to useful work. In this chapter, the
most promising inventions and processes are examined and analyzed according
to the methodology outlined in Chapter 3.
The scope of this feasibility study is detailed in Chapter 1 and will include
zero-point energy conversion methodologies in the areas of electromagnetism,
fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, mechanical physics, and some quantum
theories.
Vacuum engineering considerations often exhibit a particular bias toward
wave or particle. It is difficult or perhaps impossible to design a zero-point energy
converter that will utilize both wave and particle aspects of the quantum vacuum.
Therefore, experimental ZPE conversions will center upon one or the other
approach, except where the size of the transducer varies.
Electromagnetic Energy Conversion
Treating the quantum vacuum initially as an all-pervading electromagnetic
wave with a high bandwidth is a classical physics approach. Among various
examples, the most intriguing is a U.S. patent (#5,590,031) proposing

56
microscopic antennae for collecting and amplifying zero-point electromagnetic
energy. Introduced in Figure 9, it is a US Air Force invention by Mead et al. that
offers sufficient scientific rigor and intrigue to warrant further analysis. The
patent’s spherical resonators are small scatterers of the zero-point vacuum flux
and capitalize on the electromagnetic wave nature of the ZPF. Utilizing this
design to start the inquiry at least into the microscopic and nanotechnology
realm, it is helpful to review the key design parameters in the Mead patent,
• the energy density increases with frequency (col. 7, line 63),
• the spheres are preferably microscopic in size (col. 8, line 3),
• a volume of close proximity spheres enhances output (col. 8, line 20),
• resonant “RHO values” which correspond to propagation values are
sought for which coefficients an or bn is infinity (col. 6, line 40),
• spherical structures are of different size so that the secondary fields
will be a lower frequency than the incident radiation (col. 3, line 7),
• the converter circuitry may also include a transformer for voltage
optimization and possibly a rectifier to convert the energy into a direct
current (col. 3, line 30),
• the system also includes an antenna which receives the beat
frequency (col. 7, line 35).
It is noted in the patent that “zero point radiation is homogeneous and isotropic
as well as ubiquitous. In addition, since zero point radiation is also invariant with
respect to Lorentz transformation, the zero point radiation spectrum has the
57
characteristic that the intensity of the radiation at any frequency is proportional to
the cube of that frequency” (col. 1, line 30). This sets the stage for an optimum
design of the highest frequency collector possible that the inventors believe will
work anywhere in the universe.
Another area of interest upon review is the opinion of the inventors that,
“At resonance, electromagnetically induced material deformations of the
receiving structures produce secondary fields of electromagnetic energy
therefrom which may have evanescent energy densities several times that of the
incident radiation” (col. 2, line 65). However, this does not seem to be a
physically justifiable statement, nor is it defended anywhere else in the patent.
Furthermore, the discussion diverges and instead proceeds toward the formation
of “beat frequencies” which are produced through interference resulting in the
sum and difference of two similar frequencies. It is noted that the subtraction of
the frequencies from two receivers of slightly different size is of primary
importance to the invention claimed (col. 3, line 7).
The engineering considerations in the patent include the statement that
“packing a volume with such spheres in close proximity could enhance the output
of energy” (col. 8, line 20). The enhancement referred to here is understood to
mean the multiplied effect from having several interference sources for the beat
frequency production and amplification. Upon researching this aspect of the
invention, it is found however, that scattering by a collection of scatterers can
actually reduce the output of energy, especially if the spheres are randomly
distributed. In that case, an incoherent superposition of individual contributions

58
will have destructive instead of constructive interference. A large regular array of
scatterers, even if transparent, tends to absorb rather than scatter, such as a
simple cubic array of scattering centers in a rock salt or quartz crystal.131
This crucial feature of the patent involving the receiver’s output involves a
method for analyzing electromagnetic or Mie scattering from dielectric spheres132
(col. 4, line 60). The patent relies upon a report detailing the calculations by Cox
(which has been obtained from the inventor) of two infinite series equations for
the electric and magnetic components of the spherical reflection of incident
electromagnetic waves.133 The report, summarized in the patent, utilizes
spherical Bessel functions to solve two pairs of inhomogeneous equations for the
components of
radiation scattering
from a dielectric
sphere.
For a particular
radius of the spheres,
resonance will occur
at a corresponding
frequency. In the
patent, with the
sphere diameter set

Figure 10 - Electromagnetic Energy Conversion Chart
equal to 2 microns
(2 x 10-6 m) one solution is found as an example (col. 7, line 10). The resonant
59
frequency is calculated to be about 9 x 1015 radians per second (1.5 x 1014 Hz),
which is the corresponding frequency calculated from the wavelength ( c = f λ )
that can be assumed to classically resonate with a sphere of that size, as also
found in the light spectrum chart (Figure 10). This serves as one check for the
feasibility of the patent’s prediction, since it is within a power of ten of this answer
for a microsphere. The spacing between spheres, seen in Figure 14, may
resonate at a higher harmonic.
The Cox report, supplied to this author by Dr. Mead, ends with an offer of
general guidance, which is not found in the patent, regarding research in this
area: “Much work still remains in finding more resonances and in studying other
areas of the theory. A source of EM radiation having a broad enough range of
frequencies to achieve resonances between two chosen spheres needs to be
selected. Then, one should analyze the beat frequency produced by the
interaction of the two resonant waves, as well as the effect of separation distance
of the two spheres on the beat frequency. Finally, a method of rectifying this beat
frequency should be established using currently available equipment, if possible.
It is also important to know how much energy is available at the resonant points.
As a practical matter, manufacturing processes must be investigated that would
allow structures to be fabricated with close enough tolerances to be of use.”134
It is not difficult to examine each of the above-mentioned
recommendations offered by the report, in order to assess the feasibility of this
ZPE invention. First of all, the analysis used by the inventors in the patent and
the report depends upon one rather involved and somewhat obscure approach to
60
scattering from an older textbook. “The main area of concern addressed in this
report is the interaction of electromagnetic radiation with a dielectric sphere; i.e.,
Figure 11 – Incident Wave and

Sphere
the diffracting of a plane wave by a sphere, more commonly known as Mie
scattering.135 It is assumed that the sphere is made of a homogeneous material
and that the medium surrounding the sphere is a vacuum. The incident radiation
is assumed to be a plane wave propagating in the z-direction. Electrical
vibrations of the incident wave are assumed to occur in the x-direction, with
magnetic vibrations in the y-direction (see Figure 11). As explained in Stratton,136
“a forced oscillation of free and bound charges, synchronous with the applied
field, arises when a periodic wave falls incident upon a body, regardless of the
61
sphere’s material. This creates
a secondary field in and around
the body. The vector sum of

Figure 12 – RHO graph
these primary and secondary
fields gives the value of the
overall field. In theory, a
transient term must be added
to account for the failure of the
boundary conditions to hold
during the onset of forced
oscillations. However, in
practice it is acceptable to
consider only the steady-state,
synchronous term because the transient oscillations are quickly damped by
absorption and radiation losses.”137
While this introductory viewpoint is sophisticated, it is also rudimentary,
classical physics. The calculations used by Stratton and Cox become
cumbersome however, aimed toward the supposedly obscure resonance
between two spheres, though only one sphere is analyzed. The culmination of
the work solves for “RHO” (ρ) which is defined as the propagation constant
multiplied by the radius of the dielectric sphere and alternately defined as the
radius times the frequency of interest divided by the speed of light c.138 The
report and patent furthermore emphasize “resonant peaks,” seen in Figure 12,
62
which are claimed to be worthy of special design considerations. However, it is
noted that these peaks of “FRHO” are less than a power of ten from baseline,
which, considering standard engineering practice, will not warrant special design
attention. Considering feasibility analysis, if each sphere successfully amplified
free energy from the vacuum, the improvement in output from resonance beat
frequency design can only be a secondary consideration for quality management
to reduce waste and improve efficiency after prototype manufacture, not a
primary focus patent and laboratory reports.139
Secondly, neither the patent nor the report mentions the power density of
the scattered energy even once. It is assumed that RHO is related to such a
power consideration, which is of primary interest for an energy invention, but
surprisingly, the concept of energy density is not discussed in either publication.
These two issues create the distinct impression that this invention is presented in
such a way that distracts attention from the essential issue of quantitative energy
extraction.
With that preliminary assessment, the following physics analysis
separates this theoretical ZPE invention into four spheres of interest:
• microsphere: micron-sized (10-6 m) electrolithography,
• nanosphere: nanometer-sized (10-9 m) molecular nanotechnology,
• picosphere: picometer-sized (10-12 m) atomic technology,
• femtosphere: femtometer-sized (10-15 m) nuclear technology.

63
However, only the first two or three are amenable to electromagnetic analysis,
with corresponding wavelengths of interest. The fourth category requires
quantum analysis. The relative comparison of λ > R, λ = R, or λ < R may only
differ if a resonance occurs near R = λ. The diameter (= 2R) of the sphere is
most often considered to resonate with the fundamental wavelength of interest
but a factor of two may not be significant in every case. In quantum mechanics
however, de Broglie’s standing matter waves correspond to the Bohr quantization
condition for angular momentum, and are equal to an integral multiple of the
circumference (= 2πR) of an electron orbit of an atom.140
Scattering and absorption of electromagnetic radiation by a conducting or
dielectric sphere varies considerably in classical physics.141 Therefore, two
additional distinctions, dielectric or conductor, should also be considered for
microspheres and nanospheres. A general benefit of the ubiquitous zero-point
electromagnetic radiation in regards to scattering is that with all of the spheres,
no shadow or transition regions need to be considered. Based on this nature of
the ZPF, all parts of the surface of the sphere considered are in the illumined
region, which simplifies the analysis.
Regarding the patent’s reference to an increase of energy with frequency
(col. 7, line 62), in reality, the spectral energy density of the ZPF depends on the
third power of frequency:142

hω3
ρo(ω ) = = 3 x 10-40f3 eV/m3 (16)
2π2 c3
64
which is integrated further on to yield Equation (21) for a band of frequencies. It
is noted that Equation (16) is directly related to the third order dependence of
radiation reaction, according to the fluctuation-dissipation theorem.143
It is agreed that the general design criteria of the patent is feasible: “the
spheres must be small in direct proportion to the wavelength of the high
frequencies of the incident electromagnetic radiation at which resonance is
desirably obtained” (col. 7, line 66).
Before proceeding with individual categories of spherical sizes and
wavelengths, it is useful to briefly review the “beating phenomena” as it is known
in vibrational physics, whether in mechanical or electromagnetic systems.
Starting with two harmonic motions of the same amplitude but of slightly different
Figure 13 – beating
phenomena
frequencies imposed upon a vibrating body, the amplitudes of the two vibrations
can be expressed as x1 = A cos ωt and x2 = A cos (ω + Δω)t . Adding these
together and using a trigonometry identity, it is found that the composite
amplitude x = x1 + x2 is mathematically expressed as:144
x = {2A cos (Δω/2)t} cos (ω + Δω/2)t . (17)

65
It is noted that Δω is normally a constant in most systems while ω may vary. Two
observations for application to the ZPE patent being examined are the following:
• the amplitude of the composite vibration is doubled (2A)
• the beat frequency of the vibration is fb = Δω/2π Hz .
The period (wavelength) of the beating phenomena is T = 1/ fb (see Figure 13).
Also common in electronic and optical systems, where it is called “heterodyning,”
the beating phenomena permits reception at lower frequencies where a local
oscillator is used to interfere with the signal.
Microsphere Energy Collectors
The micron-sized sphere (microsphere) is already mentioned in the patent
and in the Cox report. Looking at some of the risks involved, it is assumed to
have a radius R = 10-6 m but the second adjacent sphere will unpredictably vary
by at least 5%, due to manufacturing tolerances. A primary example in the
patent, general engineering considerations would question the advantage of
designing for a single beat
frequency in this case, which
tends to limit the bandwidth
and energy output. Using
Figure 10 as mentioned
previously, we find that a
Figure 14 – semiconductor spheres wavelength of a micrometer
(micron) resonates with a frequency of 1014 Hz, which is in the optical region. In
66
this region, it would be prudent to utilize photovoltaic (PV) technology for the
converter 222 in Figure 14, which is already developed for the conversion of
optical radiation to electrical energy, which for silicon photovoltaic cells, peaks
around 0.8 micron in optical wavelength.145 With that in mind, Figure 10 implies
that the sphere might be a tenth of a micron in size instead, with a wavelength in
the UV region. Then, at the most, a 10% variation in size will create a maximum
beat frequency of about 1 x 1014 Hz. However, the feasibility of inducing a
prominent beat frequency with broadband ZPE electromagnetic wave scattering
by uncoupled dielectric spheres has to be questioned in this case. Because the
beating phenomena, which only doubles the amplitude, will not be significant in
this regime, individual spheres constructed adjacent to a micron-sized PV
converter, may be preferable, as seen in Figure 14 from the patent.
Scattering contributions by these microspheres can be analyzed from
classical electrodynamic equations that apply. The range λ > R is scattering of
electromagnetic waves by systems whose individual dimensions are small
compared with a wavelength, which “is a common and important occurrence.”146
Without polarization of the incident wave, since ZPE radiation is ubiquitous, it will
not contribute to dipole or multipole formation on the sphere. Assumptions
include a permeability μ = 1 and a uniform dielectric constant Є which varies with
frequency. Energy output is calculated by the total scattering cross section σ.147
With units of area, σ is “an area normal to the incident beam which intercepts an
amount of incident power equal to the scattered power.”148
The total scattering cross section of a dielectric sphere for λ > R is,
67
│Є – 1│2
4 6
σ = ⅓ 8π b R (18)
│Є + 2│2
where wave number b = ω / c = 2π /λ. The dielectric constant Є is actually the
“relative dielectric constant” which is a ratio of substance permittivity to the
permittivity of free
Figure 15 – Dielectric constant
over range of 1 to 100 in variation
with frequency. space Єo. In order to
appreciate the range of
values that Equation
(18) may assume, it is
noted that “At optical
frequencies, only the
electrons can respond
significantly. The
dielectric constants are in the range Є = 1.7 – 10, with Є = 2 – 3 for most solids.
Water has Є = 1.77 – 1.80 over the visible range, essentially independent of
temperature from 0 to 100C.“149 With this information in mind, a graph of the
behavior with frequency is also shown in Figure 15. A declining Є with frequency
can only make Equation (18) even smaller as Є tends toward the limit of 1
(where the permittivity equals Єo ).
As an example of the total cross section for scattering by a relatively good
dielectric, Є = 3 can be chosen. Then, with f = 1014 Hz and R = 0.1 x 10-6 m (thus
keeping λ > R), Equation (18) is found to yield σ = 2.6 x 10-17 m2. Dividing σ by
the actual cross sectional area of a microsphere ( πR2 ) for comparison,

68
scattering by a dielectric sphere of optical frequency electromagnetic radiation
yields a loss of about 8 x 10-6 in power.
In comparison, for λ > R, small conducting spheres have a total scattering
cross section that is significantly larger, where
σ = ⅓ 10π b4 R6 . (19)
There is an advantage of using conducting spheres in place of the
dielectric spheres which is more significant than designing for the doubling effect
from possible beat frequencies. The cross section σ for a one-tenth micron-sized
conducting sphere (R = 0.1 x 10-6 m) with visible light incident (f = 1014 Hz) yields
about 2 x 10-16 m2 for λ > R.150 Dividing this as before by the actual cross
sectional area yields only 6 x 10-5 loss of power or ten times better than the
dielectric scattering cross section.
While both of these total cross section calculations still may seem very
low, there seems to be an explanation for it. Since they were still within a power
of ten from λ = R, Figure 16 shows there is an interference scattering effect for
plane waves, within a
few wavelengths of this
region. Utilizing the
spherical Bessel
Figure 16 – Total scattering cross
section Q for a plane wave function expansion for a
scattering from a sphere R = a.
plane wave, similar to
the inventor Mead, the

69
solution with amplitudes and phases is found for the boundary condition that the
wave function is zero at R = a but the radial velocity of the wave is zero at R = 0.
As seen in Figure 16 (the textbook uses Q for total cross section), the surprise is
that in the region of λ = 2πR and smaller (<1 on the abscissa), the total cross
section becomes very small, tending to zero. The graph, however, reflects the
boundary conditions used, such as the radial velocity vr of the ratio S (of
scattered intensity to incident intensity) = 0, the total cross section calculation
with the proper Bessel function tends toward the limit of 2πR2 for λ <<R, which is
twice the actual cross sectional area. However, for very long wavelengths
Figure 17 – Scattered intensity for a plane wave scattering from a sphere R = a.
compared to the radius (λ >>R) the total cross section for plane wave scattering
by a sphere tends toward 4πR2 which is four times the actual cross sectional
area.151
70
Also confirmed from Figure 17, based on the same text with a Bessel
function treatment of a plane wave incident (from the left) on a rigid sphere, the
scattered intensity grows larger with smaller wavelength, instead of exhibiting a
trend toward resonance when λ ≈ R, tending to be “spherically symmetrical” in
the limit where bR Æ 0, S Æ 1, and σ Æ 4πR2. These figures seem to contradict
the inventor’s assertion of a ZPE electromagnetic resonance with a microsphere
and any number of microspheres in close proximity. Furthermore, the penetration
of electromagnetic waves throughout dielectric spheres is another complication
which is treated in detail in the above-mentioned theoretical physics text,
including a complex index of refraction when required, to account for
transmission, reflection, and absorption.152 These two issues diminish the
feasibility of the inventor’s microsphere design significantly.
In the region of λ <R, classical ray theory applies since the wavelength is
short compared to the radius of curvature. Fresnel equations can also be utilized,
treating the surface as locally flat.153 This argument also leads to the standard
description in physics of specular reflection.
To show the value of Bessel function analysis of plane wave scattering
and the strong directional dependence, a graph of the differential cross section is
plotted in Figure 18. Considering the previously mentioned advantage of using
conducting spheres of the micron size, the analysis is also more straightforward.
Under these circumstances, the tangential magnetic fields and normal electric
fields of the electromagnetic wave will be approximately equal to the incident

71
wave.154 The differential backward scattering of the incident radiation, for λ < R
and θ < 10/bR is found to be,
dσ
│J1(bR sinθ)│2
2 2
dΩ = R (bR) │ bR sinθ │ (20)
where J1 is a Bessel function of the first kind of order one. The forward differential
scattering for θ >> 1/bR (higher θ angles) is simply R2/4. A plot of Equation (20),
for the smaller angles, is the dashed line in Figure 18, with the exact solution as
Figure 18 – Unpolarized scattering from a

conducting sphere as a function of
scattering angle θ in the short-wavelength
range of λ < R. For convenience, bR = 10
for this plot.
Ordinate axis units: 4 dσ

R2 dΩ
72
the solid line. Destructive interference is noted where it dips below unity.155 The
peak in the graph of Figure 18 indicates a strong reflection back-scattering for a
conductive sphere. This is a common phenomenon since silver, a very good
conductor, is used often for coating glass to create mirrors. The conductive
surface allows the electric field vector of the electromagnetic wave to oscillate
freely upon contact, with very little resistance, thus creating the reflective wave.
Such electromagnetic radiation scattering is distinguished from Thomson
scattering, Rayleigh scattering, Coulomb scattering, Compton and Rutherford
scattering, which also use cross section formulae as well. Each of these, more
common with particle scattering, will be discussed in the following sections.
It should be emphasized that the same two σ limits discussed above, 2πR2
and 4πR2, for small wavelengths (λ <<R) and large wavelengths (λ >>R)
respectively, are also derived in quantum mechanics using the method of partial
waves for scattering of wave packets by a perfectly rigid sphere and thus will also
be applied in the further sections to follow.156
For feasibility consideration of energy extraction, to collect and transduce
the total scattered ZPE radiation from the vacuum flux, it would be necessary to
place one sphere at the focus of an evacuated, reflecting 3-D ellipsoid cavity with
the PV converter at the other, for example, instead of the spherical cavity the
inventors refer to. However, in the interest of maximizing energy output per
volume, it may be more convenient to engineer sheets of single spheres placed
in alternate planes between planar PV converters, which may unfortunately limit
the available ZPF frequencies.

73
An important calculation for each sphere of interest is to find whether
significant scattered zero-point energy is available at these wavelengths.
Therefore, the spectral density Equation (16) is integrated as,157
. (21)
For the wavelength range of 0.4 to 0.7 microns (micrometers) in the visible light
band, using Equation (8), the radial frequencies can be generated for the
integrated energy density equation. Substituting these for ω2 and ω1 we find an
energy density of only 22 J/m3 or 22 microjoules/cc which equals approximately
0.24 eV/μm3 (electron volts per cubic micron).
To create a simple standard calculation for the frequency band of each
sphere of interest, ω2 is chosen to correspond to the radius R and ω1 is chosen
to be 1/10 of that frequency. For a microsphere, with λ = R = 10-6 m, the spectral
energy density from Equation (21) is ρ(ω) = 0.62 J/m3 or 3.9 eV/μm3 for the
decade range: Δf = 3 x 1013 to 3 x 1014 Hz. From Figure 10, this energy density
is also comparable to the photon energy (2 eV) in the visible band.
Nanosphere Energy Scatterers
In the region of λ > R for the scattering by these nano-sized spheres
(nanosphere) the classical electrodynamic equations still apply. However, with a
radius R of the sphere considered to be 10-9 m, the effect on the ZPF spectral
energy density is quite dramatic. In Figure 22, it is noted that 1 nm is in the keV
region. A resonant correspondence with the sphere diameter of 2 x 10-9 m equals

74
a full wavelength antenna, the resonant frequency will be in the range of 1 x 1017
Hz. The spectral energy density of ZPE at this frequency is substantially more
promising. Using Equation (21), we find that the ZPE spectral energy density is
6.2 x 1011 J/m3, which is a billion times more energy per cubic meter than was
available from the ZPF for the micro-sized spheres. Converting to electronvolts
per cubic nanometer, it is interesting that the ZPF offers about 390 eV/nm3 which
is three orders of magnitude more energy than available to the micron-sized
sphere. The advantage as well is that a billion of these spheres will fit into a cubic
micrometer, if a collection was found to be coherently constructive with regards
to scattering. Vacuum polarization is probably more pronounced at the
nanometer dimensions, yielding more ZPE virtual particles which would be
expected contribute more significantly to scattering off of nanospheres.
Evaluating Equation (19) at this resonant frequency and radius, it is found
that for a conducting nanosphere, the scattering cross section σ = 1 x 10–15 m2
for the region λ > R. Comparing with cross-sectional area πR2 for the
nanospheres, it is found to be 318 times its cross-sectional area πR2. (The ratio
of σ to spherical surface area is also constant σ /4π R2 = 83). This demonstrates
that the scattering cross section σ is geometrically correlated to the object’s
actual cross-sectional area.
For the consideration of λ ≈ 2R, resonance is still not expected to affect
the amplitude of scattered radiation appreciably.

75
For the consideration of λ < R the scattering profile seen in Figure 18
would still apply because quantum mechanical effects become important only
when hf ≈ mc2. This may be anticipated for the femtosphere.158
The present state of the art for engineering capabilities in the microsphere
and nanosphere regions is illustrated in Figure 19. Called “nanoboxes,” they are
electrically conductive single crystals of silver, produced at the University of
Washington, with slightly truncated edges and
corners. “Each box was bounded by two sets of
facets (eight triangular facets and six square
ones), and any one of these facets could lie
against a solid substrate. The inset shows the

Figure 19 – nanoboxes
SEM image of an individual box sitting on a silicon
substrate against one of its triangular facets, illustrating the high symmetry of this
polyhedral hollow nanoparticle.”159 Octahedra and tetrahedra, such as the inset
have also been produced, which approach the patent-proposed ideal of a
nanosphere. The white scale bar at the bottom of Figure 19 is 100 nm in length
for comparison. For 17-min and 14-min growth times, the nanocubes had a mean
edge length of 115 ± 9 and 95 ± 7 nm, respectively. For the sake of the feasibility
discussion, regarding the microsphere’s difficulty of predictable beat frequencies,
it is noted that the tolerances quoted here are between 7% and 8%. Thus, the
benefit of a single beat frequency production of two adjacent silver
nanopolyhedrons is judged to be not feasible at either microsphere or
nanosphere sizes because of the large manufacturing errors. Nanocubes with

76
sides as small as 50 nm have also been obtained, though some of them were not
able to evolve into complete truncated cubes.
Regarding the scale of 1 nanometer in diameter, such as the nanosphere
Figure 20 – molecular picture

that is proposed, the error control may
not require a higher tolerance range than
quoted above. As seen in Figure 20, if
individual molecular crystals were used
for 1 nm range, they do not vary widely in
size.160 A sphere of carbon-60, for
example, would be a real possibility,
though it is not highly conductive. If metal
nanopolygons are used, it is noted that
“nonspherical gold and silver nanoparticles absorb and scatter light of different
wavelengths, depending on nanoparticle size and shape.”161
Interestingly, gold and silver nanoparticles have been used as sensors,
since they have surface-enhanced Raman scattering and other optical effects
peculiar to the ~10- to 100-nm range.162 Instead, using heavy metal atoms, such
as Polonium with a diameter of 0.336 nm should be considered in this section
because of superior spherical shape and reproducibility. Polonium may also be
an interesting candidate because it is the only element known to crystallize in a
primitive cubic unit cell under room temperature conditions.163 Therefore, the
interatomic spacing is also very well known. ZPE virtual particles, or equivalent
ZPE electromagnetic radiation, would not be expected to play a large part in

77
scattering off polonium atoms however. Instead, they already are known to
contribute to the Lamb shift of the 2p electron levels, with about 1.06 GHz worth
of energy. Furthermore, virtual particle scattering “contributes the same energy to
every state,” consisting of e2A2/2mc2 in the nonrelativistic theory with the
Hamiltonian, where A is the vector potential.164 Beat frequencies would be
unlikely and very difficult to engineer with polonium atoms since the atoms would
normally share the same energy, being at the same temperature, etc.
Picosphere Energy Resonators
In the picosphere range, it is more likely that some of the key elements of
this patent may be more effectively applied. One of the reasons for this is that up
until this point, there has not been a

Figure 21 – Ionization transducers
necessity for lower frequency
scattering. To review some of the
transduction methods available, Figure
21 shows some of the standard
devices for transducing ionization into
electricity. Note that ionizing radiation
can also consist of electromagnetic X-
rays or gamma rays since there is
sufficient energy at these frequencies to cause ionization. The method of ionizing
transduction relies upon the production of ion pairs in a gas or solid by the
incidence of radiation. The applied electric field in Figure 21 is an excitation
voltage (Exc.) used to separate the ionized positive and negative charges to
78
produce an electromotive force.165 For the picosphere range, it is also expected
that small individual atoms can be arranged to meet the specifications for the
patent more effectively since nature has much better error tolerances than
engineers can manufacture artificially.
Figure 22 – Electromagnetic spectrum
The high frequency electromagnetic spectrum is reproduced in Figure 22,
which picks up where Figure 10 left off, with wavelength decreasing from left to
right.166 The picosphere with a radius of 10-12 m (1 pm) and a wavelength equal
to its diameter, corresponds to a frequency of 1.5 x 1020 Hz using Equation (8).
Using Einstein’s equation E = hf, the photon energy at that frequency can be
found to be about 650 keV which is useful to compare with the spectral energy
density. Using Equation (21), we calculate a spectral energy density of 6.2 x 1023
J/m3 or 390 keV/pm3.
In the range of λ > R the scattering cross section σ = 1 x 10–21 m2 is in the
same proportion of 318 times sphere cross sectional area.

79
At the resonant wavelength of λ ≈ 2R, the amplitude of scattering can be
expected to be higher. It is also anticipated that here is where the concept of beat
frequency may be applied more conveniently, with greater precision than in either
larger category. However, since all atomic radii vary between 50 pm (e.g.,
Helium) and 660 pm (e.g., Cesium), the picosphere with a proposed radius of 1
pm has to be declared to be impractical and therefore, not feasible.
In the range of λ < R the scattering seen in Figures 16 and 17 would still
apply. The diffraction pattern is also very

Figure 23 – X-ray diffraction
predictable. The intensity distribution of X-ray
diffraction could be correlated to the theoretical
scattering off a sphere from Equation (21). An
example is seen in Figure 23 where the
wavelength of the X-rays is 71 pm and the
target is an aluminum atom, which has an
atomic radius of 182 pm.167
If a smaller target on the order of a picosphere
were used, it is expected that the scattering
pattern would be the same for λ < R.
In this region, the need for a heterodyned frequency might emerge if, for
example, the ionization transducers of Figure 21 were not configured for high
efficiency capturing of the ZPE scattered radiation. However, the production of a
beat frequency that also resonates with the geometry of an array of atoms may
be problematic, for two reasons. The array would preferably need to be a 2-D
80
sheet only one atom thick, such as thin metal foil used for diffraction studies, to
prevent destructive interference of the ZPF scattering. Secondly, the real barrier
to creating a useful ZPE beat frequency atomic array is producing picospheres
that vary reliably in one part in one thousand with a maximum error tolerance of
one part in ten thousand. An avenue of speculative physics would require the
engineer to estimate the diameter of a suitable metal atom in the ground state
and pursue a manufacturing procedure to excite alternate adjacent atoms to a
very long metastable state, which is known to expand its size, much like Ryberg
atoms.168 Hypothetically, this ideal situation would achieve a small difference in
diameter of adjacent atoms sufficient to produce beat frequencies of resonant
scattered ZPE.
Utilizing the Fermi-Thomas model of the atom, most atomic radii can be
approximated by
a ≈ 1.4 ao / Z⅓ (22)
where Z = atomic number and ao = h2 / me2, the hydrogenic Bohr radius.169
Taking an excellent example of two atoms with similar size, platinum (Pt) and
gold (Au) would be good candidates since they are next to each other on the
periodic table and relatively inert, Noble metals. It is presumed that the diameter
may resonate with a full wavelength, with 183 pm and 179 pm as the radii for Pt
and Au respectively.170 In that case, 8.20 x 1017 Hz is the corresponding Pt
frequency and 8.37 x 1017 Hz is the corresponding Au frequency, both in the soft
X-ray band. Subtracting the two frequencies, the beat frequency would
theoretically be a difference of 1.83 x 1016 Hz, moving it down into the UV band. If
81
the conversion of UV incident electromagnetic energy is more efficient than
transducing soft X-rays, then this method would offer a chance to collect ZPE, so
long as the arrangement of multiple pairs of Pt and Au atoms could constructively
interfere at their beat frequency. However, the wavelength of 1.83 x 1016 Hz is
about 16 nm, which forces the placement of individual atomic pairs to be fairly
distant from each other, compared to their size. With only a 2% difference in
diameter, the beat frequency difference yields a power of ten difference for lower
frequency detection, as the Mead-Cox resonant microsphere analysis of Figure
11. The improvement in amplitude from resonance would reasonably be only a
power of two, unless a resonant cavity was used as well.
Another example, representing the smallest atomic pair that is available
for this experiment, is hydrogen (H) and deuterium (D), an isotope of hydrogen
with one proton and one neutron in the nucleus. The Bohr radius ao for hydrogen
is 53 pm and the atomic radius of deuterium is about the same. In fact, the Hα
emission lines (Balmer series) for deuterium and hydrogen are 656.10 nm and
656.28 nm respectively, a difference of only 0.03%.171 Such a similar size will
force the beating frequency to be more than a power of ten difference, which
apparently is viewed as an advantage by the patent holders. For such gaseous
atoms, the phenomenon of “upscattering” might be achieved with this gas at a
finite temperature T with a Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distribution if the incident
ZPE virtual particles fell into a regime of low energy up to about 10 kT.172 This
implies that it is possible for the incident particle to gain energy in a scattering
collision. In the situation where the hydrogen or deuterium nuclei might be at rest,
82
the scattering probability P(EI Æ Ef ) inversely depends upon the incident particle
energy Ei. However, for elastic scattering in a hydrogen (proton) gas, the
scattering probability depends on the final particle energy Ef and is not zero even
for Ef > Ei. In Figure 24, a graph is shown of the scattering probability for
scattering of a proton gas with various incident particle energies. With resonance
considerations seen in Figure 25 added to the design as well, such a regime
might be a test, with a minimum of risk, for the Mead spherical collector concept
Figure 24 – Upscattering energy gain
in an atomic, picosphere region. However, with or without a successfully
amplified beat frequency, the upscattering of virtual particles from a proton gas
may still have inherent flaws for two reasons: 1) most such proton gas
experiments have been conducted only with low energy incident neutrons; 2) “the
dissipative effect of radiation reaction precludes spontaneous absorption of
energy from the vacuum field” which normally applies only to an atom in the
ground state.173 Yet, the gain of one to two times the incident EI = kBT may be
valuable to the energy equation as the gas transfers energy to the incident
83
particles, even if the probability drops to 50%, since theoretically an abundant
number of virtual particles are available. At room temperature (T – 300K) for
example, 1 kBT = 0.026 eV which is about 1013 Hz or an infrared terahertz
frequency.
In Figure 25, an example of a capture resonance is shown at temperature
T1, where the average cross section dramatically increases for a certain resonant
Figure 25 – Broadening of
the resonance peak with
increasing temperature
incident energy Eo. Another aspect of temperature increase is also graphically
demonstrated. This is called “Doppler broadening” caused by the Doppler shift in
frequency as a thermally excited atom moves away from or toward the incident
particle with greater temperature-dependent speed.174 Therefore, an increase in
temperature causes the increased cross section of a resonant peak to be lost.
Lower temperatures are important for preserving the advantage of resonance.

84
Thus examining the options for the resonant sphere, the two atomic pairs
of deuterium and hydrogen are the best beating examples in the picosphere
region, still demonstrating major unknowns in the “beat frequency” design
concept of the Mead patent. At the present state of nanotechnology development
however, the picospheres cannot be manufactured.
Quantum Femtosphere Amplifiers
With the examination of the femtosphere (R = 10-15 m = 1fm) there are a
number of phenomena that synchronize so well with this dimension that the
patent being examined seems to be more compatible with the nuclear particle
than any other size sphere. The first obvious advantage is the spectral energy
density of Equation (21) which is found to be 6.2 x 1035 J/m3 or 390 MeV/fm3.
This is also interesting in that the quantum mechanical realm applies where hf is
about the same as mc2. Testing for this condition, both energies are calculated
with a wavelength of 2 x 10-15 m and a corresponding frequency (see Figure 22)
of 1.5 x 1023 Hz. The Einstein formula for photon energy of the femtosphere is
E = hf = 9.9 x 10-11 J = 619 MeV . (23)
To determine the mass of the femtosphere, it is known that the radius of
either the proton or neutron is about 8 x 10-16 m.175,176 This is remarkably close
(within 20%) to the conceptual femtosphere radius R of 1 fm. Therefore, it is
reasonable to use the average mass of either nuclear particle (1.7 x 10-27 kg) in
the Einstein equation for mass-energy, to find the energy equivalent of the
femtosphere’s mass:
85
E = mc2 = 1.5 x 10-10 J = 938 MeV . (24)
Comparing Equations (23) and (24), they are the same order of magnitude, so it
is determined that quantum mechanical rules apply in this region. The classical
equations for energy and scattering cross section are still applicable. However,
they may be regarded as classical approximations, in view of the
correspondence principle, to quantum mechanical phenomena. “The important
quantum effects are (1) discreteness of the possible energy transfers, and (2)
limitations due to the wave nature of the particles and the uncertainty
principle.”177
In this femtosphere range, Rutherford scattering is applicable. The total
nuclear Rutherford scattering cross section is,
(2 z Z e2 )2
σ = π R2 ( h v )2 (25)
where z is the number of charges (particles) in the incident at a velocity v and Z
is the number of charges (particles) in the target. For example, at high velocities,
even for incident virtual photon radiation, the total cross section can be far
smaller than the classical value of πR2, which is its geometrical area.178 The
parenthetical terms in Equation (25) can result in a reduction of 10-24 times the
geometrical area π R2 of the target for an incident photon at the speed of light.
For this size of target, due to vacuum polarization, it is important to
mention that more incident virtual particles from the vacuum, as discussed in
Chapter 1 (with an artist rendering in Figure 3), will also be present for a charged
femtosphere. Therefore, the de Broglie wavelength of the incident particle will

86
also be important, treating the ZPF virtual particles on the same level as
electromagnetic waves:
λ = h/p = h/mv . (26)
The de Broglie requirement of quantum mechanics, postulated in 1924,179
thus affects the possibilities for energy generation for the Mead patented design.
“For a nucleus of finite size…the de Broglie wavelength of the incident particle
does enter…The situation is quite analogous to the diffraction of waves by a
spherical object.”180
Vacuum polarization will also enhance the natural electromagnetic
radiation from the vacuum for the femtosphere. Since double slit experiments
with particles like electrons and neutrons demonstrate the wave phenomenon of
diffraction, femtosphere particles can also be regarded as “wave packets.”181
This type of scattering utilizes the continuously distributed energy eigenvalues of
quantum mechanics which consider the boundary conditions at great distances
from the collision. The scattering is treated here only as elastic scattering, so
there is no absorption by the target. This is different from photoelectric scattering
or Rayleigh scattering, which are inelastic.
For the region of λ > R this can be represented by the low energy limit
where 2πR << λ (the circumference is much less than the wavelength). For the
femtosphere, the total cross section is approximately σ ≈ 10-30 m2 in this low
frequency, long wavelength region.

87
For the region of λ ≈ 2R or 2πR, there is a uniquely quantum mechanical
phenomenon of resonant scattering called “resonance fluorescence” that applies
“to the absorption of radiation by an atom, molecule, or nucleus in a transition
from its ground state to an excited state with the subsequent re-emission of the
radiation in other directions in the process of de-excitation.”182 The reaction of the
target when the frequency of the incident equals the binding energy of the target,
the scattering becomes very great, exhibiting a formal resonance peak seen in
Figure 26.
Note that a single femtosphere, such as a free neutron or proton would not
possess the requisite binding energy for this type of oscillator resonance. In
addition, this process reveals an inelastic form of scattering but the dramatically
Figure 26 – Total cross

section resonance
fluorescence for scattering
radiation by an oscillator
increased cross section apparent in the resonant peak of Figure 26 more than
makes up for any energy lost in absorption and re-emission. Resonance
fluorescence brings a number of phenomena into play that are seen in Figure 26,
88
such as Thomson scattering, which is scattering of radiation by a free charge. It
can be X-rays by electrons or gamma rays by a proton for example.183 Thomson
scattering occurs along a baseline of higher frequencies in Figure 26 above ωo,
where the cross section is

8 π e4
σT = . (27)
3 m2c4
The Thomson cross section of Equation (27), evaluated for a target electron,
yields 6.6 x 10-25 cm2 for σT where e2/mc2 = 2.8 fm, the classical electron radius.
By comparison, the Rayleigh scattering (which causes the atmosphere to
take on a blue color) cross section has a dependence on the fourth power of the
incident frequency. Thus, the highest visible frequency (blue color) has a much
larger scattering cross section and consequently, a stronger interaction with air
molecules, including a wide scattering angle. Both phenomena illustrate the
dominance of cross section scattering terms with cubic and quartic exponents.
Deuteron Femtosphere
One example of an intriguing femtosphere oscillator is the deuteron (a
proton bound to a neutron in close contact), which also demonstrates resonant
fluorescence. It would satisfy the requirement of “binding energy” for the target
and is also treated as an oscillator. However, it should be mentioned that it is
unlikely that the deuteron would exhibit beat phenomena, since the wave
functions overlap making the deuteron behave as one nucleus (ionized
deuterium), with a single resonant frequency and a radius of about 2 fm.184

89
Recalling that the beat frequency design of the Mead patent is simply a
means to downshift the radiated frequency, it is also possible to use the standard
electrical engineering approach instead. Frequency converters, for example,
utilize a “local oscillator” which mixes with the incoming signal to produce a
subtracted intermediate frequency one or two orders of magnitude lower, for the
same purpose. Once the resonant frequency of the deuteron is determined to be
beyond the useful energy transduction range, an engineering recommendation
therefore, would be to find a lower local oscillator in the same range, so that a
substantially reduced intermediate frequency can be produced.
The deuteron has one bound state ( l = 0 ) of a proton and neutron with
binding energy of Eb = 2.23 MeV. The more preferred state ( 75% ) is where the
spin ½ of the proton and neutron are parallel (triplet state). The cross section for
the deuteron is
2 π h2 /m
σ = . (28)
E - Eb
Equation (28) is about 70 x 10-24 cm2 for the singlet (antiparallel) state and about
20 x 10-24 cm2 for the triplet state, which computes to 550 times and 157 times
the geometrical cross sectional area, respectively.
With resonance fluorescence, the condition is in a sense an almost bound
state that isn’t below zero energy to be a true bound state (see the dashed line
levels in Figure 27). If the potential V(r) is an attractive well, then the effective
potential is,
Veff = V(r) + h2 l (l+1) / 2mr2 (29)

90
where the integer angular momentum quantum number, l > 1. “Resonances are
the ‘bound states’ of the well at
the positive energy, indicated by
the dotted lines...What happens
in scattering at a resonant
energy is that the incident
Figure 27 – Effective potential creating an almost particle has a large probability of

bound state for a resonance condition of an attractive
potential
becoming temporarily trapped in
such a quasi-bound state of the well; this possibility increases the scattering
cross section.”185 In Figure 27, the depth of the potential well for the deuteron
must be Vo = 36 MeV for the deuteron.186
With that introduction to resonance with the deuteron, it should be
mentioned that it is also an advantageous oscillator since the binding energy of
Eb = 2.23 MeV corresponds to an X-ray frequency of fb = 5.4 x 1020 Hz, instead of
the gamma ray frequency of 1023 Hz that should resonate with the diameter of a
femtosphere. Thus, the deuteron binding energy satisfies the need for a lowering
of the resonant frequency for transduction purposes, voiced in the Mead patent.
The cross section is complicated by the existence of a singlet and triplet state
depending on the proton and neutron spin direction. “There are no bound excited
states of the deuteron. Neutron-proton scattering experiments indicate that the
force between n and p in the singlet state (antiparallel spins) is just sufficiently
less strong than in the triplet state to make the deuteron unstable if the spins are
antiparallel…there is a small, measurable quadrupole moment.”187

91
For the region of even smaller sizes, beyond the femtosphere resonance,
where λ < R, the cross section can be represented by the high energy limit where
R >> λ. Here the scattering by a perfectly rigid femtosphere can be
approximated, as mentioned with the microsphere, with a total cross section of
σ ≈ 2πR2 (29)
which is twice the actual geometrical cross section area.188 The reason for the
apparently anomalous result of Equation (29) is that the asymptotic form of the
wave function is composed of the incident and the scattered wave, which also
experiences interference between the two partial waves. “However, so long as
2πR/λ is finite, diffraction around the sphere in the forward direction actually
takes place, and the total measured cross section…is approximately 2πR2.“189
Electron Femtosphere
The electron is the best femtosphere for many reasons. Its classical radius
ro is calculated to be 2.8 x 10–15 m or 2.8 fm and is suitable for a Mead patent
test. As seen in Figure 3, the electron, like the proton, offers a steep electrical
gradient at its boundary that creates a decay or polarization of the vacuum
locally. It is expected that electron charge clusters like Cooper pairs or bigger
boson charge bundles can offer a substantially enhanced vacuum activity in their
vicinity. The patents of Ken Shoulders (US #5,018,180) and Hal Puthoff (US
#5,208,844) on charge cluster devices discuss the potentials of such an
approach but lack sufficient engineering feasibility to control their volatility.
Therefore, an ion trap or “force field” confinement process is required.

92
QED vacuum effects such as the coupling of the atomic electron to the
vacuum electromagnetic field show that the electron is more intimately connected
to the vacuum flux than most other particles. “The zero-point oscillations of the
field contribute to the electron a certain amount of energy…Efl ~ e2h/4mca2,” with
an upper bound of hfmax = 15 MeV for a free electron.190 The coupling term for the
atomic electron in the Hamiltonian is (e2/2mc2 )A2 where A is the vector potential
and the parenthetical modifier is familiar from Equation (27) as half of the
classical electron radius. “Since this term does not involve atomic operators, it
contributes the same energy to every state” in the atom.191 Besides the ground
state contribution, called the Lamb shift, it appears that every other electron level
is also shifted upwards from vacuum flux energy or virtual particles. For this
reason alone, it should be emphasized that extraction of energy from the vacuum
is already occurring in every atom throughout the universe, since every atomic
electron and every free electron is positively energized. However within the
atomic system, “the effects of the vacuum field and radiation reaction cancel, so
that the ‘spontaneous absorption’ rate is”192
A12 = RVF - RRR = ½ A21 - ½ A21 = 0 (30)
where A12 is the Einstein A coefficient for the electron transition from the ground
state to the first atomic energy level. The spontaneous emission rate sums the
rate of energy absorption from the vacuum field RVF and the radiation reaction
rate RRR to equal the Einstein A coefficient.
The energetic scattering of the vacuum flux on a free electron, clearly
seen in Figure 3, may perhaps be optimally amplified in the gas state, such as
93
within the confines of an ion trap. This author collaborated in the construction of
such a trap, which proved that electron and ion densities can be increased with
Figure 28 – Nonresonant ion trap with voltage applied to grid, driver plate, and extraction
plate. Thoriated filaments supply electrons.
such a trap, as the electrons are retained in one place for measurements and
energy extraction.193 Such an apparatus may also work well for charge clusters,
after applying inductive braking to their kinetic energy. For an applied voltage of
300V and vacuum pressures of at
least a microTorr, the concentration
of ions ranged between 108 and 1010
ions per cc. As seen in Figure 29, the
voltage profile or potential distribution
inside the grid with the presence of
negative space charge from the
Thoriated filaments exhibits a large

Figure 29 – Potential distribution in ion trap
concentration of electrons. Assuming
that charge clusters cannot be trapped by any other means without destroying
94
them, the nonresonant ion trap should provide a reliable method for study and
possible energy extraction if an additional collection and amplification method for
the femtosphere is optimized and implemented.
Weisskopf notes that if the electron is assumed to be a sphere of radius a,
then only waves with a wavelength λ /2π > a will act upon the electron, while the
wavelengths λ /2π >> a will not be that significant. The upper bound of hfmax
assumes an electron radius of a = c/fmax while the number of vibration modes of
the ZPF gives rise to a value of a ≈ ro( hc/e2)½ so that “the fluctuation energy
seemingly pushes the electron radius to even greater values…”194
Casimir Force Electricity Generator
A fascinating example of utilizing mechanical forces from the Casimir
effect and a change of the surface dielectric properties, to intimately control the
abundance of virtual particles, is an optically-controlled vacuum energy
transducer developed by a Jet Propulsion Lab scientist.195 A moving cantilever or
membrane is proposed to cyclically change the active volume of the chamber as
it generates electricity with a thermodynamic engine cycle. The invention
proposes to use the Casimir force to power the microcantilever beam produced
with standard micromachining technology. The silicon structure may also include
a microbridge or micromembrane instead, all of which have a natural oscillation
frequency on the order of a free-carrier lifetime in the same material. The
discussion will refer the (micro)cantilever design but it is understood that a
microbridge or flexible membrane could also be substituted. The invention is
based on the cyclic manipulation of the dimensions of Casimir cavity created

95
between the cantilever and the substrate as seen in Figure 30. The
semiconducting membrane (SCM) is the cantilever which could be on the order
of 50-100 microns in size with a few micron thickness in order to obtain a
resonant frequency in the range of 10 kHz, for example.
Two monochromatic lasers (RS) are turned on thereby increasing the
Casimir force by optically changing the dielectric properties of the cantilever. This
frequency dependence of a dielectric constant, can be seen in Figure 15. It can
vary with frequency by a few orders of magnitude inversely proportional to the
frequency. The standard
analysis of cavity modes
usually identifies the
resonant modes of the
cavity, dependent on the
boundary conditions.196,197
However, Pinto’s pro-
active approach is to excite
a particular frequency
mode in the cavity. In

Figure 30 – Optically controlled vacuum energy transducer
doing so, an applied
electrostatic charge (Vb) increases as the cantilever is pulled toward the adjacent
substrate (SCP) by the Casimir force. Bending the charged cantilever on a
nanoscale, the Casimir attractive force is theoretically balanced with opposing
electrostatic forces, in the same way as Forward’s “parking ramp” of Figure 8. As

96
the potential difference to the cantilever assembly is applied with reference to a
conducting surface (CP2) nearby, the distance to this surface is also kept much
larger than the distance between the cantilever and the substrate (SCP). Upon
microlaser illumination, which changes the dielectric properties of the surface and
increases the Casimir force, there is also predicted an increase in electrostatic
energy due to an increase in capacitance and voltage potential. Therefore a finite
electrical current can be extracted and the circuit battery is charged by an energy
amount equal to the net work done by the Casimir force. Pinto estimates the
Casimir force field energy transfer to be approximately 100 to 1000 erg/cm2.198
Converting this to similar units used previously, this Casimir engine should
produce in the range of 60 to 600 TeV/cm2 (teraelectron volts per square
centimeter) which is also equal to 0.01 to 0.1 mJ/cm2 for every cycle in Figure 31.
Analysis of the Casimir engine cycle demonstrates its departure from
Figure 31 – Engine cycle of vacuum energy transducer where FCas = Casimir force
97
hydroelectric, gaseous, or gravitational systems. For example, the Casimir
pressure always acts opposite to the gas pressure of classical thermodynamics
and the energy transfer which causes dielectric surface changes “does not flow
to the virtual photon gas.”199 Altering physical parameters of the device therefore,
can change the total work done by the Casimir force, in contrast to gravitational
or hydroelectric systems. Unique to the quantum world, the type of surface and
its variation with optical irradiation is a key to the transducer operation. Normally,
changing the reflectivity of a surface will affect the radiation pressure on the
surface but not the energy density of the real photons. However, in the Casimir
force case, Pinto explains, “…the normalized energy density of the radiation field
of virtual photons is drastically affected by the dielectric properties of all media
involved via the source-free Maxwell equations.”200
Specifically, Pinto discovered that the absolute value of the vacuum
energy can change “just by causing energy to flow from a location to another
inside the volume V.”201 This finding predicts a major breakthrough in utilization
of a quantum principle to create a transducer of vacuum energy. Some concerns
are usually raised, as mentioned previously, with whether the vacuum energy is
conserved. In quantum systems, if the parameters (boundary conditions) are held
constant, the Casimir force is strictly conservative in the classical sense,
according to Pinto. “When they are changed, however, it is possible to identify
closed paths along which the total work done by this force does not vanish.”202
To conclude the energy production analysis, it is noted by Pinto that
10,000 cycles per second are taken as a performance limit. Taking the lower
98
estimate of 100 erg/cm2 per cycle, power or “wattage” is calculated to be about 1
kW/m2 which is on par with photovoltaic energy production. However, on the
scale of interest, where s in Figure 31 is always less than 1 μm, the single
cantilever transducer is expected to produce about 0.5 nW and establish a
millivolt across a kilohm load, which is still fairly robust for such a tiny machine.203
The basis of the dielectric formula starts with Pinto’s analysis that the
Drude model of electrical conductivity is dependent on the mean electron energy
<E> (less than hf) and estimated to be in the range of submillimeter wavelengths.
The Drude model, though classical in nature, is often used for comparison
purposes in Casimir calculations.204 The detailed analysis by Pinto shows that
carrier concentrations and resistivity contribute to the estimate of the total
dielectric permittivity function value, which is frequency dependent. The
frequency dependence is of increasing concern for investigations into the Casimir
effects on dielectrics.205
Analyzing the invention for engineering considerations, it is clear that
some of the nanotechnology necessary for fabrication of the invention have only
become available very recently. The one-atom microlaser, invented in 1994,
should be a key component for this invention since about ten photons are emitted
per atom.206 However, it has been found that new phenomena, (1) the virtual-
photon tunnel effect and (2) the virtual-photon quantum noise, both have an
adverse effect on the preparation of a pure photon-number state inside a cavity,
which may impede the performance of the microlaser if placed inside a cavity.207
99
Pinto concurs that such a low emission rate is necessary since the lasing must
take place “as a succession of very small changes” 208
Another suggested improvement to the original invention could involve a
femtosecond or attosecond pulse from a disk-shaped semiconductor microlaser
(such as those developed by Bell Laboratories). The microlaser could be used in
Figure 32 – Microlaser on a pedestal (computer simulation)
close proximity to the cantilever assembly. Such microlaser structures, called
“microdisk lasers” measuring 2 microns across and 100 nm thick, have been
shown to produce coherent light radially (see Figure 32). A proper choice of laser
frequency would be to tune it to the impurity ionization energy of the

100
semiconductor cantilever. In this example, the size would be approximately
correct for the micron-sized Casimir cavity.
Pinto chooses to neglect any temperature effects on the dielectric
permittivity.209 However, since then, the effect of finite temperature has been
found to be intimately related to the cavity edge choices that can cause the
Casimir energy to be positive or negative.210 Therefore, the contribution of
temperature variance and optimization of the operating temperature seems to
have become a parameter that should not be ignored. Also supporting this view
is the evidence that the dielectric permittivity has been found to depend on the
derivative of the dielectric permittivity with respect to temperature.211
Cavity QED Controls Vacuum Fluctuations
It is known from the basic physics of “cavity QED” that just the presence of
the walls of a cavity will cause any atoms within it to react differently. For
example, “the spontaneous emission rate at wavelength should be completely
suppressed if the transition dipole moment is parallel to the mirror plates” where
the walls of the cavity are reflecting conductors.212 In other words, “a confined
antenna cannot broadcast at long wavelengths. An excited atom in a small cavity
is precisely such an antenna, albeit a microscopic one. If the cavity is small
enough, the atom will be unable to radiate because the wavelength of the
oscillating field it would ‘like’ to produce cannot fit within the boundaries. As long
as the atom cannot emit a photon, it must remain in the same energy level; the
excited state acquires an infinite lifetime...[because] there are no vacuum
fluctuations to stimulate its emission by oscillating in phase with it.”213 Such

101
effects are noticed for cavities on the order of hundreds of microns and smaller,
precisely the range of Pinto’s cavity. Therefore, it can be expected that carefully
choosing the fundamental resonant frequency of the cavity will provoke the
emission of photons so that the dielectric effect on the walls may be enhanced
with less input of energy.
Furthermore, the most important Casimir force research relating to Pinto’s
invention may be the analysis of a vibrating cavity. If the membrane oscillation
frequency is chosen, for example, to be close to a multiple frequency (harmonic)
of the fundamental unperturbed field mode of the cavity, resonant photon
generation will also provoked. Such resonant photon generation in a vibrating
cavity like Pinto’s has been studied in the literature.214, 215
Another aspect of the Pinto experiment apparently not discussed in his
article is the relative concentration of gas molecules in the vacuum energy
transducer of Figure 30. Though a complete evacuation of air would be
preferable, especially when compression of the membrane could be impeded by
increasing gas pressures, it is naturally expected that too many gas molecules
will still remain airborne even with a high vacuum, such as 10-10 to 10-12 Torr.
Therefore, using another characteristic of cavity QED may be recommended.
First of all, the selection of the gas is important, so that the atomic transition
frequency matches the cavity resonant frequency very closely. Once this is
achieved, it would be recommended, from an engineering point of view, to
optimize the design of the size of the cavity transducer so that the atomic
transition has a slightly higher frequency than the resonant frequency of the
102
cavity. This could easily occur with the resonant wavelength slightly longer than
the resonant transition wavelength of the gas in question. In that way, the gas
molecules will be repulsed from entering the cavity, thus creating a lower gas
pressure inside. Logically, this would be accomplished with the cavity transducer
in the maximum SA position in Figure 30. It would thereby add to the
compression force of the movable membrane. As the membrane reaches its
lowest position in the engine cycle with minimum SA position, cavity QED dictates
that since the atomic transition frequency will then be lower than the resonant
frequency of the cavity, the force will be attractive, pulling gas molecules toward
the cavity and increasing the pressure. This condition may be accomplished as
well, since the shorter wavelength of the smaller cavity size will now be less than
the longer wavelength of the atomic transition wavelength of the gas. Such a
condition, with extra gas molecules in the cavity, will assist in pushing the
membrane upwards again.216 Such detailed planning with gases and cavity
dimensions should create a situation where the ZPF is supplying a larger
percentage of the energy output, with a minimum of nanolaser input energy. If so,
the Pinto vacuum energy generator would offer an unparalleled miniature
electricity source that could fill a wide range of nanotechnology needs and
microelectronic needs.
Spatial Squeezing of the Vacuum
The analysis of Pinto’s invention is analogous to spatial squeezing of the
initial states to decrease the energy density on one side of a surface, below its
vacuum value, in order to increase the Casimir force. For an oscillating boundary
103
like Pinto’s, this can also create a correlated excitation of frequency modes into
squeezed states and
“sub-Casimir regions”
where the vacuum

Fig. 33 Squeezed n = 0 cavity state
develops structure.
“Pressing zero-point
energy out of a spatial
region can be used to
temporarily increase the
Casimir force.”217 This spatial squeezing technique is gaining increasing
acceptance in the physics literature as a method for bending quantum rules while
gaining a short-term benefit, such as modulating the quantum fluctuations of
atomic displacements below the zero-point quantum noise level of coherent
phonon (vibrational) states, based on phonon-phonon interactions.218
The squeezing technique involves minimizing the expectation value of the
energy in a prescribed region, such as a cavity. “In general, a squeezed state is
obtained from an eigenstate of the annihilation operator…by applying to it the
unitary squeezing (or dilation) operator.”219 Ideally, “it seems promising to
generate squeezed modes inside a cavity by an instant change of length of the
cavity.”220 The implied infinite speed or frequency for a movable membrane
would not be achievable however. If it were approachable, the squeezing would
cause a modification of the Casimir force so that it could become a time
dependent oscillation from a maximum to minimum force. Pursuing resonance

104
measurements may turn out to be the most realistic experimental approach in
order to exploit the periodic variation in the Casimir force by squeezing.
In Figure 33, the effect of squeezing can be seen in the fundamental
cavity mode n = 0 where the emission of photons is almost double that allowed
by the Planck radiation law Equation (9), where there are quantized field modes.
Hu found that the other field modes go to a mixed quantum state due to the
intermode interaction caused by the classical Doppler effect from the moving
mirrors. The theory also predicts that the significant features of the nonstationary
Casimir effect are not sensitive to temperature.221
Focusing Vacuum Fluctuations

Fig. 34 Vacuum fluctuations focus
Another development that may directly
affect transduction possibilities of ZPE is the
theoretical prediction of focusing vacuum
fluctuations. Utilizing a parabolic mirror designed
to be about 1 micron in size (labeled ‘a’ in Figure
33), with a plasma frequency in the range of 0.1
micron for most metals, Ford predicts that it may
be possible to deflect atoms with room
temperatures of 300K, levitate them in a
gravitational field, and trap them within a few
microns of the focus F.222 A positive energy
density results in an attractive force. Depending upon the parameters, it may
alternatively result in a repulsive Van der Waals force at the focus with a region
105
of negative energy density. This type of trapping would require no externally
applied electromagnetic fields or photons. The enhanced vacuum fluctuations
responsible for these effects are found to arise from an interference term
between different reflected rays. The interesting conundrum is the suggestion
that parabolic mirrors can focus something even in the absence of incoming light,
but vacuum fluctuations are often treated as evanescent electromagnetic fields.
The manifestation of the focusing phenomenon is the growth in the energy
density and the mean squared electric field near the focus.223
Focusing vacuum fluctuations in many ways resembles “amplified
spontaneous emission” (ASE) which occurs in a gain medium, where the buildup
of intensity depends upon the quantum noise associated with the vacuum field.224
Stress Enhances Casimir Deflection
Figure 35 NEMS cantilever bridge deflection
An interesting Casimir force effect, seen more and more frequently in
nano-electromechanical system (NEMS), is illustrated in Figure 35. Shown is a
membrane or cantilever of thickness h that covers a well of width l and height a,
which is deflected in the y direction, by an amount of distance W(x) depending

106
upon the position with respect to x.225 The equation describing the deflection of
any point on the membrane is:
D ∂4W(x)/ ∂x4 = F . (31)
D = Eh3/(12-12p2) where E is the elastic modulus, h is the thickness (see Figure
35) of the membrane, and p is the Poisson ratio. The Poisson ratio is the ratio of
the transverse contracting strain to the elongation strain.226 The Casimir force F
in Equation (31), due to the proximity to the bottom plate, is an inhomogeneous
force in this situation, varying from point to point along x as227
F = – π2 h c
(32)
4
210 (a – W(x))
where h, W(x) and a are defined above.
Equations (31) and (32) are then equated to produce a quartic equation
dependent on W(x) where the residual applied stress/strain σ can be added as a
modifier. Solving for W(x) under conditions of strain (stretching) yields a tendency
toward a stationary wave pattern characteristic of buckling, without any
appreciable change in the center deflection. Solving for W(x) under conditions of
stress (compression) reveals that “compressive residual stress enhances the
deflection of the bridge and reduces its [buckling] behaviour.”228 The amount of
enhancement at the center is W(0) = 0.0074a or almost 1%. However, since the
Casimir force in Equation (32) increases by the fourth power of the distance (a –
W(x)), it is also regarded as a positive feedback system, with a tendency of
increasing any deflection in a direction toward structural failure.

107
Casimir Force Geometry Design
Since the Casimir force is such an integral part of the experimental energy
manifestations of the ZPF as well as the Chapter 4 analysis, it is worthwhile to
review some of its important characteristics. First of all, the attractive Casimir
force between two uniform, flat metal plates which are perfectly conducting (and
therefore, a reflective surface) is229
F = – π2 hc / 240 d4 (33)
where d is the spacing between the plates. Milonni points out that besides the
usual vacuum fluctuations approach, one can also treat the virtual photons of the
vacuum as “carriers of linear momentum.” This perspective yields a
mathematical proof that the Casimir force can also be classically analyzed as a
physical difference of radiation pressure on the two sides of each plate.230
In comparison, the Coulomb force for charged plates, such as with
Forward’s charge foliated conductors of Figure 8, is found to be
FCoul = V2 / 8πd2 . (34)
Thus, with a potential difference of only V = 17 mV at d = 1 μm, the Casimir force
Figure 36
Constant + / 0 / –
Casimir energy
curves for various
rectangular metal
microboxes
108
equals the Coulomb force.231 This is also the operating principle behind Pinto’s
cavity transducer of Figure 30, as the Casimir force is varied cyclically.
In Figure 36, a comprehensive approach by Maclay is made for an
arbitrarily-sized box made of perfectly conducting surfaces. As the dimensions of
the box deviate from a cubic design (1 x 1 x 1) the Casimir forces change as well.
Figure 37
Dotted P1 is the
pressure on the
1 x C face; P3
is the pressure
on 1 x 1 face;
E / V is the
energy density;
E is Casimir
energy for the
metal box
A maximum positive energy density (dark area near the origin) signifies a positive
Casimir force or outward pressure. Effectively, positive energy density produces
a repulsive Casimir force. The dimensions of 1 x 1 x 1.7 signify the transition
zone known as “zero energy density.” Any further increase in size results in a
negative or attractive Casimir force. It is readily apparent from these calculations
that a similar system, with a movable membrane like Pinto’s Figure 30, offers a
109
restoring force for either deviation from zero, as if the cavity held a compressible
fluid.232
In Figure 37, the Casimir forces for a perfectly conducting 1 x 1 x C
rectangular box, expanding from C = 1 to an elongated size, can be traced quite
closely. Again, as in Figure 36, it can be seen that as C = 1.7 the Casimir
pressure P1 crosses the zero energy line. To help distinguish the Casimir energy
density E / V and Casimir energy E lines from the rest, it is noted that these two
lines cross zero at the same point C = 3.5, while the Casimir pressure P3 line
stays constant past C = 1. The E / V, E, and P3 lines are all negative when C < 1
showing the dominance of d4 in the denominator of Equation (33), when two
surfaces approach 1 micron or less.
The discovery by Maclay of a particular box dimension (1 x 1 x 1.7), that
sits in the middle of attractive and repulsive Casimir forces, presents a possible
scenario for vacuum energy extraction. “This interesting motion suggests that we
may be organizing the random fluctuation of the EM field in such a way that
changes in pressure directly result, which could lead to work being done. One
interesting question is can we design a cavity that will just oscillate by itself in a
vacuum. One approach to this would require a set of cavity dimensions such that
the force on a particular side is zero, but if the side is moved inward, a restoring
force would be created that would tend to push it outward, and vice versa. Hence
a condition for oscillation would be obtained. Ideally, one would try to choose a
mechanical resonance condition that would match the vacuum force resonance
frequency. More complex patterns of oscillation might be possible. The cavity

110
resonator might be used to convert vacuum fluctuation energy into kinetic energy
or thermal energy. More calculations of forces within cavities are needed to
determine if this is possible, what would be a suitable geometry and how the
energy balance would be obtained.”233 Maclay concedes however, that upon
analyzing Forward’s charged parking ramp of Figure 8, with like charges
supplying the restorative force to the Casimir attractive force, that no net work
would be done for any given oscillation cycle.
When dielectrics are considered, the analysis becomes more involved.
“Calculations of Casimir forces for situations more complicated than two parallel
plates are notoriously difficult, and one has little intuition even as to whether the
force should be attractive or repulsive for any given geometry.”234 With a
dielectric set of parallel plates, the characteristics of dispersive (phase velocity is
a function of frequency) or non-dispersive (all frequencies equally transmitted or
reflected) dielectrics enters into the equation. For example, a classic example is
two dispersive dielectric parallel plates that have a Casimir energy which
depends only on the distance between the plates and the dispersion of the
dielectrics.235
Various geometries of rectangular cavities can also be studied using the
principle of virtual work where E = - ∫ F dx. With the Casimir vacuum energy E
for a dielectric ball of radius a, for example, the Casimir force per unit area is,
1 ∂E
F = – (35)
4 π a2 ∂ a
For a dilute, dispersive dielectric ball for example, the Casimir surface force is
found to be attractive with inward pressure.236 A system of two dielectric spheres

111
with general permittivities and some chosen values of the refractive index n has
also been evaluated for Casimir forces.237
One application for this type of Casimir force calculation lies with biological
cells which are spheres with a high dielectric constant. Figure 38 shows a B-
lymphocyte which is 1 micron across which therefore must
experience and compensate for the inward Casimir pressure.
“Biological structures may also interact with the vacuum field. It
Figure 38 seems possible that cells, and components of cells, for

B-lymphocyte
example, the endoplasmic reticulum may interact with the
vacuum field in specific ways. A cell membrane, with a controllable ionic
permeability, might change shape in such a way that vacuum energy is
transferred. Microtubules, in cell cytoskeletons, may have certain specific
properties with regard to the vacuum field. Diatoms, with their ornate geometrical
structures, must create interesting vacuum field densities; one wonders if there is
a function for such fields.”238 Many of these structures that are less than one
micron in size have much higher Casimir pressures to contend with, such as
ribosomes which are about 0.02 micron across.239
Other geometrical objects have also been analyzed for the resultant
Casimir forces such as hemispheres, pistons, and flat, circular disks.240 Instead
of solid objects, configurations such as spherically symmetric cavities have also
been presented in the literature.241 Rectangular cavities, for example, have also
been found to have a temperature dependence and edge design variations which
can lead to the Casimir energy being positive or negative.242

112
Another interesting area of possible energy extraction from the Casimir
effect is in astronomical bodies such as stars. The Casimir effect has been
proposed as a source of cosmic energy. In such cosmological objects as white
dwarfs, neutron stars, and quasars, the volume effect of the Casimir force is
theoretically sufficient to explain the huge output of quasars for example. A
calculation of the shift in energy density of the ZPF due to the presence of an
ideal conductor in a volume V of space relative to the case with an absence of
the volume is the mean value of the stress-energy tensor of QED inside volume
V. A conductive material will be conductive for frequencies below the plasma
frequency ω < ωp and transparent for frequencies above the plasma frequency ω
> ωp. The plasma frequency, for nonpropagating oscillations depending only on
the total number of electrons per unit volume is, in Gaussian units, 243
ω p2 = 4π ne2 / m . (36)
The dielectric constant for high frequencies is also dependent on the plasma
frequency (compare with Figure 15),
ε (ω ) = 1 – ωp2 / ω2 . (37)
(In dielectric media, Equation (37) applies for ω2 >> ωp2.) The shift in the vacuum
energy density due to the presence of a volume of ideal conducting material is,
expressed in terms of the plasma frequency,
Δ Evac = – ωp4 h c / 4π2 . (38)
With a dramatic increase in the electron density n due to gravitational
compression in collapsing stars, an energy creation is predicted that compares

113
with 1038 J expected for a nova or 1042 J for a supernova if the radius of the star
is compressed to approximately R ≈ 107 m.244
Vibrating Cavity Photon Emission
Various cavities have been analyzed so far for the net Casimir effect.
However, the case of photon creation from the vacuum due to a non-stationary
Casimir effect in a cavity with vibrating wall(s) is unique and has interesting
ramifications. Comparing with Pinto’s cavity of Figure 30, the cavity chosen by
Dodonov to create resonance photon generation also has one moving wall while
the rest of the rectangular cavity is stationary. The fundamental electromagnetic
mode is ω1 = π c / Lo where Lo is the mean distance between the walls of the
cavity. The maximum value of the energy is found to be three times the minimum
value, depending on the phase. The total energy also oscillates in time and the
photon generation rate tends toward a constant value as long as any detuning is
less than one.
While changes in the dielectric constant of cavity walls affect the Casimir
vacuum force of Pinto’s vibrating cavity, there are also effects from a change in
the refractive index of a medium. Hizhnyakov presents evidence for the emission
of photons from such a distortion of the spectrum of zero point quantum
fluctuations. If the medium experiences a time-dependent refractive index, it has
been demonstrated that part of the energy will be emitted as real photons. An
example is a dielectric medium excited by a rectangular light pulse for about a
femtosecond (10-15 seconds). The spectral density of the photon energy is shown
to depend only upon the rate of change of the refractive index over time, which is
114
unusual. While Hawking and Unruh radiation effects are mixed thermal states,
this refractive index derivative effect is said by Hizhnyakov to be a pure state
equally related to the ZPF as a non-linear quantum optical effect. In terms of
energy flow, a picojoule (10-9 J) laser pulse lasting for a femtosecond produces
about ten megawatts (10 MW/cm2) of power input and the input pulse has about
10-5 cm2 cross sectional area which gives about a 100 W power input. The
output intensity, estimated to be about a picowatt, is calculated to be the sum of
two pulses created from the leading and trailing edges of the input refractive
index change.245
The Unruh radiation referred to above is actually called the Unruh-Davies
effect which refers to a phenomenon related to uniform acceleration. In a scalar
field such as the ZPE vacuum, “the effect of acceleration is to ‘promote’ zero-
point quantum field fluctuations to the level of thermal fluctuations.”246 Milonni
points out that it took a half a century after the birth of quantum theory for the
thermal effect of uniform acceleration to be discovered. The effective
temperature that would be measured by an accelerated detector in a vacuum is
ha (38)
TU =
2π kc
which leads to the interpretation that thermal radiation is very similar to vacuum
fluctuation radiation. In Equation (38), k is the wave number (ω/c) and a is the
acceleration. Both vacuum probability distribution functions and thermal
distributions exhibit a Gaussian probability distribution since the vacuum
distribution is the T Æ 0 limit of the thermal distribution.247

115
Looking at Hawking radiation, which is emitted from a black hole, it is
based on the premise that pair production from the vacuum can occur anywhere,
even at the event horizon of a black hole. The treatment is related to a
mathematical manipulation called Wick rotation, where the metric is rotated into
the complex plane with time t Æ - i t, so that the temperature is inversely equal to
the period. Solving for the region just outside the event horizon r > 2GM, where G
is the gravitational constant, the Hawking temperature is found to be
h c3
TH = (39)
8π GM
where M is the mass of the black hole.248 Since Planck’s constant is included in
Equation (39), Zee notes that Hawking radiation is indeed a quantum effect. The
similarities between Equations (38) and (39) are referred to by Hizhnyakov.
Fluid Dynamics of the Quantum Vacuum
In the analysis of Figure 37, it was mentioned that the Casimir force within
cavities of Pinto and Maclay, possessing one movable wall, behave like a
compressible fluid since a restoring force is present for any deviation from the
zero-force position. It turns out that more exact analogies to fluids are possible
for the quantum vacuum. A hydrodynamic model of a fluid with irregular
fluctuations has been proposed by Bohm and Vigier for the vacuum, which also
satisfies Einstein’s desire for a causal interpretation of quantum mechanics.249
Their work also includes a proof that the wave function probability density P =
116
|ψ|2 used in quantum theory approaches the standard formula for fluid density
with random fluctuations. There is also a suggestion of further work regarding
how a fluid vortex provides a very natural model of the non-relativistic wave
equation of a particle with spin.
A computational fluid dynamics approach to the ZPF, with the ambitious
aim of reducing flight resistance at superluminal speeds has been proposed by
Figure 39
Flight
resistance
vs. speed
utilize the
same
equation in
air or in
space
Froning and Roach.250 The negative energy density region seen in Figure 37
between Casimir plates is also implicated in spacetime warping concepts and a
theoretical increase in the speed of light. Resistance to flight in air and space
have interesting parallels in this theory. In Figure 39, the aerodynamic viscous
drag resistance to increased speed is compared to the electromagnetic zero-
point vacuum resistance to increased speed, which is perceived as inertia.
Drawing upon the separate works by Puthoff and Haisch (cited in Chapter 2), this
117
Figure 40
Acoustic
and
electro-
magnetic
wave
speed
approach takes their ZPE-related gravity and inertia theory to the engineering
level of experimental simulation. In Figure 40, the analogy is drawn between the
well-known equation for the speed of light c = ( μoεo )-½ and the aerodynamic
gas equation for the speed of sound c = (gRγT)-½ with compressible fluid
graphics for each. The aerodynamic resistance of viscous drag exerted on the
substructure of a vehicle is compared to the Lorentz force exerted on the
substructure of the vehicle by the ZPF, which is also proposed to be a Casimir-
like force exerted on the exterior by unbalanced ZPE radiation pressures. The
conclusion drawn from this first-order analysis is that μo and εo can be perturbed
by propagation speed and possibly vehicle inertia, accompanied by a distortion of
the zero-point vacuum.
A fundamental part of the Fronig and Roach approach to the fluid dynamic
simulation of superluminal speeds is the proposal that μo and εo can be reduced
significantly by nonabelian electromagnetic fields of SU(2) symmetry. It is
proposed that EM fields of nonabelian form have the same symmetry that
118
underlies gravity and inertia. Their approach is particularly to use alternating
current toroids with resonant frequencies. That nonabelian gauge symmetry
offers a higher order of symmetry has been seen elsewhere in the literature. Zee,
for example, notes that the square of the vector potential A2 would normally be
equal to zero in the abelian gauge, which all standard (“trivial”) electromagnetic
theory texts use. Instead, he notes that a field strength such as F = dA + A2 can
be formulated easily in the nonabelian gauge and shown to be nonzero and
gauge covariant (though not invariant). Furthermore, the nonabelian analog of
the Maxwell Langrangian, called the Yang-Mills Langrangian, includes cubic and
quartic terms that describe self-interaction of nonabelian bosons (photons), as
well as a nonabelian Berry’s
phase that is intimately related to
the Aharonov-Bohm phase. (The
Aharonov-Bohm phase depends
exclusively on the vector
potential.) Even the strong
nuclear interaction is accurately
described by a nonabelian gauge
theory. “Pure Maxwell theory is
free and so essentially trivial. It
contains a noninteracting photon.

Figure 41 Topology of vacuum field disturbance
In contrast, pure Yang-Mills
theory contains self-interaction and is highly nontrivial…Fields listen to the Yang-

119
Mills gauge bosons according to the representation R that they belong to, and
those that belong to the trivial identity representation do not hear the call of the
gauge boson.”251
According to Froning and Roach, the representation R can be changed by
surrounding a saucer-shaped spaceship with a toroidal EM field that distorts and
perturbs the vacuum sufficiently to affect its permeability and permittivity. The
vacuum field perturbations are simulated by fluid field perturbations that resulted
in the same percentage change in disturbance propagation speed within the
region of perturbation. The computational effort was simplified by solving only the
Euler equations of fluid dynamics for wave drag. The resulting μo and εo
perturbation solutions are shown in Figure 41.
In his discussion of the 1910 Einstein-Hopf model, Milonni describes their
derivation of a retarding force or drag on a moving dipole as a result of its
interaction with the vacuum zero-point field, which acts to decrease its kinetic
energy. Assuming v << c, the retarding force due to motion through the ZPF
thermal field is described with a fluid dynamics equation, F = – R v, where v is
the velocity of the dipole and R is a formula depending upon dipole mass and
ZPF spectral energy density. Milonni also notes that due to recoil associated with
photon emission and absorption, which are both in the same direction, the ZPF
also acts to increase the kinetic energy of a dipole. Equilibrium is established
when the increase in kinetic energy due to recoil balances the decrease in kinetic
energy due to the drag.252

120
It has been proposed by Rueda and Haisch, with a contract from NASA,
that the ZPF can lose its Einstein-Hopf drag as the absolute temperature
approaches zero, which would leave only the accelerating recoil force left.
Furthermore, they propose that the ZPF can provide a directional acceleration to
monopolar particles more effectively that to polarizable particles. They also
suggest that “if valid, the mechanism should eventually provide a means to
transfer energy, back and forth, but most importantly forth, from the vacuum
electromagnetic ZPF into a suitable experimental apparatus.”253
Quantum Coherence Accesses Single Heat Bath
One of the main criticisms of energy extraction from the ZPF is that it
represents a single low-temperature bath and the second law of thermodynamics
prohibits such an energy conversion. It is well-known that Carnot showed that
every heat engine has the same maximum efficiency, determined only by the
high-temperature energy source and the low-temperature entropy sink.
Specifically, it follows that no work can be extracted from a single heat bath when
the high and low temperature baths are the same.
However, a new kind of quantum heat engine (QHE) powered by a special
“quantum heat bath” has been proposed by Scully et al. which allows the
extraction of work from a single thermal reservoir. In this heat engine, radiation
pressure drives the piston and is also called a “Photo-Carnot engine.” Thus, the
radiation is the working fluid, which is heated by a beam of hot atoms. The atoms
in the quantum heat bath are given a small bit of quantum coherence (phase
adjustment) which becomes vanishingly small in the high-temperature limit that is

121
essentially thermal. However, the phase associated with the atomic coherence,
provides a new control parameter that can be varied to increase the temperature
of the radiation field and to extract work from a single heat bath. The second law
of thermodynamics is not violated, according to Scully et al., because the
quantum Carnot engine takes more energy, with microwave input, to create the
quantum coherence than is generated.254
Figure 42 Photo-Carnot heat cycle diagram. Qin is provided by hot atoms from bath.
The Photo-Carnot engine, shown in Figure 42, creates radiation pressure
from a thermally excited single-mode field that can drive a piston. Atoms flow
through the engine from the Th heat bath and keep the field at a constant
temperature for the isothermal 1Æ 2 portion of the Carnot cycle (Figure 43).
Upon exiting the engine, the bath atoms are cooler than when they entered and
are reheated by interactions with the blackbody at Th and "stored" in preparation
for the next cycle.
The stimulus for the work came from two innovations in quantum optics:
the micromaser and microlaser (Figure 32) and lasing without inversion (LWI). In
micromasers and microlasers, the radiation cavity lifetime is so long that a

122
modest beam of excited atoms can sustain laser oscillation. In LWI, the atoms
have a nearly degenerate pair of levels making up the ground state. When the
lower level pair is coherently prepared, a small excited state population can yield
lasing (without inversion). In the QHE, the "engine" is a microlaser cavity in which
one mirror is a piston driven by the radiation pressure given by
PV = nhπc/L (40)
where P is the radiation pressure, V is the cavity volume, n is the average
number of
thermal photons
in the right mode
(about 103), and
L is the length of
the cavity.255 In
Figure 43, an
engine cycle
Figure 43 Temperature – entropy diagram for Photo-Carnot engine
diagram is shown
which is a temperature versus entropy graph for the Photo-Carnot engine, where
|ρbc| ≈ 3 x 10-6 is an off-diagonal density matrix element in the extension of the
quantum theory of a laser without inversion. Figure 43 contains a closed cycle of
two isothermal and two adiabatic processes (compare with Pinto’s Figure 31). Qin
is the energy absorbed during the isothermal expansion and Qout is the energy
given to the heat sink during the isothermal compression. However, instead of
123
two states which would render this a classical engine, the QHE has three states,
which can result in quantum coherence. “If there is a non-vanishing phase
difference between the two lowest atomic states, then the atoms are said to have
quantum coherence. This can be induced by a microwave field with a frequency
that corresponds to the transition between the two lowest atomic states.
Quantum coherence changes the way the atoms interact with the cavity radiation
by changing the relative strengths of emission and absorption.256 In Figure 42,
as the atoms leave the blackbody at temperature Th they pass through a
microwave cavity that causes them to become coherent with phase Φ before
they enter the optical cavity. The temperature that characterizes the radiation is
TΦ which is
TΦ = Th (1 – n ε cos Φ) (41)
where ε is the magnitude of quantum coherence, ε = 3|ρbc|. The second term in
Equation (41) is also used in the QHE efficiency equation,
ηΦ = η – ( Tc/Th ) n ε cos Φ (42)
“Thus, depending on the value of Φ, the efficiency of the quantum Carnot engine
can exceed that of the classical engine – even when Tc = Th . It can therefore
extract work from a single heat bath.”257
Inexplicably, Scully et al. fail to cite a previous work by Allahverdyan and
Nieuwenhuizen that utilizes more rigorous physics for same purpose of extraction
of work from a single thermal bath in the quantum regime with quantum
coherence. The authors, perhaps, have more controversial statements in the

124
article regarding free energy extraction. Using the quantum Langevin equation for
quantum Brownian motion, they note that it has a Gibbs distribution only in the
limit of weak damping, thus preventing the applicability of equilibrium
thermodynamics. The reason is related to quantum entanglement and the
necessary mixed state. “Our main results are rather dramatic, apparently
contradicting the second law: We show that the Clausius inequality dQ < TdS can
be violated, and that it is even possible to extract work from the bath by cyclic
variations of a parameter (“perpetuum mobile”). The physical cause for this
appalling behavior will be traced back to quantum coherence in the presence of
the near-equilibrium bath.”258 It is also emphasized that the quantum coherence
is reflected in the quantum noise correlation time which exceeds the damping
time 1/ Γ.
Regarding the ZPF, it is interesting that the quantum Langevin equation is
a consequence of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem of Equation (11). The
authors note that part of the equation includes the fluctuating quantum noise,
which has a maximum correlation time and therefore has a long memory
(quantum coherence) at low temperature. The Brownian particle of interest also
has semi-classical behavior due to its interaction with the bath, where “there is a
transfer of heat, even for T = 0.”259
The possibility of extracting energy from the bath is due to the
nonequilibrium state, which is ensured by the switching energy ½ γ Γ<x2>o that is
also a purely classical effect. The switching energy depends upon γ which is the
damping constant and Γ which is the cutoff frequency. Both harmonic and
125
anharmonic oscillation potentials are considered. The Brownian quantum particle
strongly interacts with the quantum thermal bath, described by the Fokker-Planck
equations.
“Two formulations of the second law, namely, the Clausius inequality and
the impossibility to extract work during cyclical variations, can be apparently
violated at low temperatures. One could thus speak of a ‘perpetuum mobile of the
second kind.’ We should mention, however, that the number of cycles can be
large, but not arbitrarily large. As a result, the total amount of extractable work is
modest. In any case, the system energy can never be less than its ground state
energy…We call them apparent violations, since, the standard requirements for a
thermal bath not being fulfilled, thermodynamics just does not apply. Let us
stress that also in the classical regime the harmonic oscillator bath is not in full
equilibrium, but there noise and damping have the same time scale 1/ Γ, allowing
the Gibbs distribution to save the day and thermodynamics to apply. Our results
make it clear that the characterization of the heat bath should be given with care.
If it thermalizes on the observation time, standard thermodynamics always
applies. Otherwise, thermodynamics need not have a say…The finding that work
can be extracted from quantum baths may have a wide scope of applications
such as cooling."260
In a physics commentary, Linke defends the second law by insisting that
the work done by the Scully et al. piston (in Figure 42) is less than the work
required to establish quantum coherence. Linke clarifies the Photo-Carnot
process by stating, “When the phase difference is adjusted to the value π,

126
destructive interference reduces the likelihood of photon absorption, whereas
emission from the upper level is not affected. This deviation from detailed
balance between photon absorption and emission increases the photon
temperature. The resulting temperature difference between photon gas and heat
bath allows the photon Carnot engine to produce work in the absence of a hot
bath.”261
Thermodynamic Brownian Motors
There is still another aspect of the ZPF that presents the possibility of
energy extraction, which are nonequilibrium fluctuations — a different
representation of the single heat bath. Biasing the Brownian motion of a particle
in an anisotropic medium without thermal gradients, the force of gravity, or a
macroscopic electric field is a way that usable work is theoretically generated
from nonequilibrium fluctuations, such as those generated externally or by a
chemical reaction far from equilibrium. Fluctuation-driven transport is one
mechanism by which chemical energy can directly drive the motion of particles
and macromolecules and may find application in a wide variety of fields, including
the design of molecular motors called “Brownian motors” and pumps.262
Brownian motion, the random collisions with solvent molecules by a
particle in a liquid, has been studied historically by Einstein as well as by
Langevin. Langevin’s equation, as noted in the previous section, suggested that
the forces on the particle due to the solvent can be split into two components: (1)
a fluctuating force that changes direction and magnitude frequently compared to
any other time scale of the system and averages to zero over time, and (2) a
127
viscous drag force that always slows the motions induced by the fluctuation term.
Related to the fluctuation-dissipation theorem of Equation (11), the amplitude of
the fluctuating force is governed by the viscosity of the solution and by
temperature, so the fluctuation is often termed thermal noise. Even in an
anisotropic medium, the fluctuations are symmetric as required by the second
law of thermodynamics, as are the dissipative drag force. Therefore, when all
components of fluctuation-driven system are treated consistently, net motion is
not achieved if it is an isothermal system, despite the anisotropy of a ratchet's
teeth. However, a thermal gradient in synergy with Brownian motion can cause
directed motion of a ratchet and can be used to do work but these are hard to
maintain in microscopic and molecular systems. Recent work has focused,
instead, on the possibility of an energy source other than a thermal gradient to
power a microscopic motor.263
Astumian proposes a fluctuating electrical potential that causes the uphill
transport of a particle. A fluctuating potential energy profile is provided with an
anisotropic sawtooth function Usaw and periodically spaced wells with no net
macroscopic force. When the potential is off, the energy profile is flat with a
uniform force everywhere. When the potential is turned on again, the particle is
trapped in one of the wells. The result is resolved into two components: the
downhill drift and the diffusive spreading of the probability distribution. For
intermediate times, it is more likely for a particle to be trapped in one of the uphill
wells if the potential were turned back on, than between the first and second well.
Thus, turning the potential on and off cyclically can cause motion to the right and
128
uphill against gravity despite the net force to the left. The theory has been
successfully tested with colloidal particles with anisotropic electrodes turned on
and off, as well as with an optical
trap modulated to create a
sawtooth potential.
Figure 44 shows the basic
mechanism by which a
fluctuating or oscillating force can
cause directed motion along a
ratchet potential Usaw and also
some statistics of an example.
The presence of thermal noise
allows a subthreshold fluctuating
force to cause flow. The force is
modulated between + Fmax
where the average velocity <v> is
calculated as a function of Fmax
where the dashed lines (B)
indicate the threshold forces.
Another example is shown (C)

Figure 44 Examples of fluctuation-driven transport
where average velocity is plotted
as a function of the thermal noise strength kBT, where kB is Boltzmann’s constant
and T is the absolute temperature and Fmax = 0.4 pN. The (C) graph shows that,
129
up to a point, increasing the noise can actually increase the flow induced by a
fluctuating force. However, the (B) graph shows that for forces near the optimum
(about 1.5 pN in this example), the velocity decreases with increasing noise.264
A more general approach is suggested for analyzing fluctuation-driven
transport using the diffusion equation with a probability density given by the
Boltzmann distribution P(x) ≈ exp(-U/ kBT).
Since modulating the potential certainly requires work, Astumian believes
there is no question of these devices being perpetual motion machines. The
surprising aspect is that flow is induced without a macroscopic force. All of the
forces involved are local and act on a length scale of the order of a single period
of the potential. Yet the motion persists indefinitely, for many periods. However,
the direction of the flow depends upon how the modulation is applied. Such
devices are indicated to be consistent with the behavior of molecules.
In a dramatic confirmation of the Astumian theory, two subsequent
experiments were performed by Linke et al. which applied an electron ratchet in a
tunneling regime with a “rocking-induced current (tunneling through and
excitation over the ratchet’s energy barrier) flow in opposite directions. Thus the
net current direction depends on the electron energy distribution at a given
temperature.”265 The practical aspect of this experimental approach is that a
square wave source-drain voltage is applied with the time-averaged electric field
being zero, similar to AC electricity, and yet the output net current is DC, similar
to a rectifier.
130
Figure 45 Net current for quantum ratchet. Solid lines, T= 0.4K. Dotted lines, T= 4K. Inset
SEM shows four repeating ratchet cells. Temperature-dependent current reversal at a, b, c.
Figure 45A shows in the inset the asymmetrical darker regions which are
etched trenches that laterally confine a two-dimensional sheet of electrons
located parallel to the surface of a GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructure. Figure 45B
inset compares the barrier height Vo with the electron energy |eU| < 1 meV. The
trench's periodic variation in width induces a corresponding variation in electron
confinement energy that creates asymmetric energy barriers at each constriction.
When the square wave source-drain bias voltage is applied, the resulting current I
is plotted for two devices R10 and R1. Because of the geometric asymmetry, the
electric field along the channel produced by the voltage deforms the barriers in a
way that depends on the polarity of the voltage, trapping the electrons in one of
the side gates along the x direction. The quantum ratchet is thus established by
confining electrons to an asymmetric conducting channel of a width comparable
to the electron wavelength. The experiment demonstrates importance of resonant

131
design and fulfills the theoretical prediction that a fluctuating voltage is sufficient
to cause a unidirectional current.
The detailed theoretical model of the tunneling ratchet is shown in Figure
46. The difference ∆t between the transmission functions for the barrier potential
Vo in Figure 45B inset is graphed (solid curve) for a rocking voltage Uo = 0.5 mV.
The bottom of
Figure 46
shows visually
the approximate
equality of the
barrier height Vo
and the Fermi
energy μF of 12
meV. The “thin”
curves are
Figure 46 Theoretical model of the quantum electron ratchet

identified by
temperature and
are graphed against the energy range ∆f of the right hand ordinate axis. The
Figure 46 top inset shows the dramatic difference between the solid curve
quantum mechanical behavior (qm) and the classical (cl) transmission function
versus electron energy ε for Uo = 0. The classical step function occurs at ε = Vo
which is the Fermi energy μF. Note the Figure 46 lower inset which summarizes
the net current I in picoamperes versus temperature, for rocking voltages Uo =

132
0.7 mV (dashed curve), 0.5 mV (solid curve), and 0.3 mV (dotted curve). All
temperatures in this experiment were within a few degrees of absolute zero.
Transient Fluctuation Theorem
Another development in the thermodynamics of microscopic systems has
recently redefined the concept of work. In a system connected to a single heat
bath, uncertainties on the order of kBT will arise from the Boltzmann distribution
of energies in the initial and final states, as well as from energy exchange with
the heat bath as the system goes from initial to final energy states. Because of
the thermal fluctuations or energy uncertainties, it has now been proven by
theory and experiment, that the work cannot be uniquely specified, even if the
path is known. When the system is microscopic, the fluctuations are significant
and a transient fluctuation theorem has evolved to account for the behavior which
takes the form,
P(W) / P(-W) = eW (43)
where W is the work divided by kBT and P(W) is the probability of performing
positive work over an interval
of time, while P(-W) is the
probability of performing
negative work over the same
period of time .266 It needs to
be clarified that in these
microscopic systems, work is

Figure 47 Positive (solid), negative (dots) work over time
133
measured as it is delivered to a vessel but half the time the system goes in
reverse, apparently violating the law of entropy. In Figure 47, a Poisson
distribution is shown of an optical trap interacting with an experimental vessel
having micron-sized beads. Though the trap exerted a restoring force, as for the
spring in Figure 2, the experimentally-determined values measured for the bead
position in the integrated fluctuation theorem showed a nonzero probability for
negative work, for up to two seconds.
“Imagine, as is often the case, that after a certain time, the bead has a
higher energy than it had initially. Then, if the work done by the trap on the vessel
(bead plus bath) is negative, energy has been delivered to both the bead and the
optical trap interacting with the vessel. That energy came from the water bath—
just the sort of energy transfer prohibited by the second law in the
thermodynamic limit of infinitely large systems: Heat has been converted to work
with 100% efficiency.”267
The generalized transient fluctuation theorem has various forms
depending upon the application. For example, the probability ratio in Equation
(43) can instead relate to entropy production w for forward and reverse time,
where microscopic reversibility is an essential requirement. The theorem finds its
greatest utility in the application to single heat baths and systems driven by a
stochastic (random), microscopically-reversible (time-symmetric), periodic
process. Then, the only Gaussian distribution that satisfies the fluctuation
theorem has a variance that is twice the mean 2<w> = <(w-<w>)2>, which is a
version of the standard fluctuation-dissipation relation of Equation (11).268 It is

134
noted that entropy production, which is irreversible dissipation, is directly related
to the fluctuations.
An example of a systematic application of the fluctuation theorem,
reminiscent of the quantum ratchet concept seen previously, is a Metropolis
Monte Carlo simulation
by Crooks, illustrated in
Figure 48. A single
particle occupies a finite
number of positions in a
one-dimensional box
with periodic boundaries
and coupled to a heat

Figure 48 Nonequilibrium Metropolis Monte Carlo simulation
bath of T = 5. The energy
surface E(x) is outlined by a series of dashed (–) lines. The equilibrium
distribution to be expected from such a potential well is shown as a symmetric hill
with open circles Ο since the particle is free to move with equal probability to the
right, left, or to stay put. However, every eight time intervals, the energy surface
moves to the right by one position.
In this way, the system is driven away from equilibrium and settles into a
time-symmetric, nonequilibrium steady state distribution shown by black dots ●,
skewed to the left. The master equation for this system can be solved exactly to
compare with the theory.269

135
Power Conversion of Thermal Fluctuations
While many recent scientific advances in the treatment of nonequilibrium
energy fluctuations have been reviewed so far, there are also developments in
the area of nonlinear equilibrium thermal fluctuations. Based on the Nyquist
theorem (another name for the fluctuation-dissipation theorem) and van
Kampen’s work on nonlinear thermal fluctuations in diodes, Yater’s pioneering
work involves the use of microscopic diodes in a simple circuit, whose “results
gave higher conversion efficiencies than the Carnot cycle for certain limiting
cases as these model sizes decreased."270 While the use of two heat baths
suggests a thermionic energy
source, his detailed analysis
makes it clear that the energy
fluctuation conversion is
added to a heat pump

Figure 49 Energy fluctuation conversion circuit
thermal conversion cycle, for
example, yielding a factor of 10 improvement.271
Yater offers a simplified master equation for the output rectified current
from an independent particle model,
I (N) ≈ exp [ (β – α)(N – ½ ) – (βm + αn)] – 1 (44)
where β = q2 / kBTcC, N = the number of excess electrons in the total circuit
capacitance C, and α = q2 / kBTrC. The designation of n and m are related: n =
CcV/q and m = CrV/q where C = Cc + Cr.272 The forward and reverse diode
136
currents in Figure 49 also combine in textbook fashion to produce the total
current of Equation (44):
I (N) ≈ I1a I2b – I2a I1b (45)
A Schottky barrier diode, for example, at the liquid Helium temperature of
Tc = 1K can be used for the cold bath Tr in Figure 49. For such a diode the
nonlinearity factor is β = 1.16 x 104 e/C where C is the capacitance of the diode
(C ~ 10-16F) and e is the charge on the electron. A Schottky diode is also known
to be formed between a semiconductor and a metal, with nonlinear rectifying
characteristics and fast switching speeds.273
Yater notes that “for the long range design goals, sub-micron circuit sizes
are required if all the high power goals of megawatts per square meter are to be
achieved…The results of an analysis of the independent particle model for both
classical and quantum effect, show that the reversible thermoelectric converter
with power conversion of energy fluctuations has the potential of achieving the
maximum efficiency of the Carnot cycle. The potential applications of this device
can be seen to be universal.”274 His patent #4,004,210 clarifies that the electric
energy fluctuations are transmitted from the higher temperature diode to the
lower temperature diode while the heat transfer is in reverse, which is unusual.
Upon reviewing the literature, Yater summarizes his findings: “The relation
of the second law of thermodynamics to the power conversion of fluctuation
energy has been of recurring interest and study. The results of these studies
have ranged from the conclusion that conversion of fluctuation energy is

137
prohibited by the second law to the conclusion that the conversion of fluctuation
energy is not limited by the second law of thermodynamics.”275
Rectifying Thermal Noise
Particles that move aperiodically due to thermal or external noise, in the
presence of asymmetric periodic potentials, have also been called “stochastic
ratchets.” These systems have the intriguing ability to rectify symmetric
correlated noise and thus have the ability to produce a net electrical current. As a
consequence of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem, the ratchet does not drift (as
in the Metropolis Monte Carlo simulation of Figure 48) if it is in interaction only
with a thermal bath. An external forcing must be used to produce the drift,
according to the researchers, Ibarra-Bracamontes et al.276
By describing the ratchet system in the Brownian particle regime with the
Langevin equation (like Allahverdyan and Nieuwenhuizen), thermal noise is
considered to have finite correlation times. This treatment yields a prediction of
current production due to a time-dependent external force. In this case, the
external force is either sinusoidal or stochastic. The generalized Langevin
equation is an embellishment of Newton’s equation, F = ma, describing a particle
of mass m moving in an asymmetric periodic potential V(x) that forms the ratchet,
m d2x/dt2 = – ∫ d(t’) Γ(t – t’) dx(t’)/dt’ – dV(x)/dx + f(t) + Fext(t) . (46)
Γ(t) is the dissipation kernel, which in this case has memory and correlated with
friction. The term, f(t), is the stochastic fluctuating thermal force exerted by the
138
bath which has a usual stochastic property of being Gaussian with zero mean. By
a numerical solution, Equation (49) does not show a net current in the absence of
external forces (if Fext(t) = 0). However, adding a time-symmetric external force in
general is a necessary and sufficient condition for the Langevin equation to yield
a current flow in one direction.
Rather than argue in favor of nonequilibrium fluctuations being present
with a symmetric correlated force, the emphasis is made in this case in favor of
an external origin for the force. In accordance with the second law of
thermodynamics, the assertion is also made here that "one cannot extract a
current from a thermal bath, whether white or colored.”277 Colored noise is where
some frequencies
dominate the
noise spectrum
and is also
referred to as
“pink” noise. The
average position
of the electron
Figure 50 Net current as particle position x versus time t for five
different ratcheting external force Fo values.
<x> is shown in
Figure 50 for five different external force amplitudes versus time. The solution
demonstrates the Metropolis Monte Carlo simulation, with a different ratchet
design than Figure 48. However, it is not clear that Ibarra-Bracamontes et al.
have succeeded in proving their controversial claim that “any external forcing
139
may be used to produce the drift” but the rectification of thermal noise due to an
asymmetric external potential has been demonstrated.
An experimental demonstration of rectifying random thermal fluctuations
involves ferrofluids, which are colloidal suspensions of nanoparticle
ferromagnetic grains (~10 nm). In this case, the external potential is an
anharmonic oscillating magnetic field { f(t)=cos(ωt)+Asin(2ωt+β) } created by
Hemholtz coils Hy at a distance from the ferrofluid. It is regarded as a rotating
magnetic field since there is a static magnetic field Hx at right angles to the
oscillating field which sums to create rotation and angular momentum (Figure
51). The angular momentum of electromagnetic fields is a principle of classical
physics. Without thermal fluctuations, relaxation dynamics tend to cause the
particles to align with the field in the x-y plane and no average rotation nor torque
is created. In the presence of thermal fluctuations however, stochastic transitions
occur due to the magnetic field asymmetry, yielding slightly different probabilities
for the magnetic orientational motion of the ferromagnetic grains, as discovered
by Engel et al.278
As with the Photo-Carnot engine, the Fokker-Planck equation is also used
in this case for a quantitative solution of the induced torque effect in the ferrofluid.
Solving the equation by expansion in spherical harmonics, the transitions
between deterministic solutions become possible. “The spatial asymmetry and
temporal anharmonicity of the potential results in slightly different rates for noise-
induced increments and decrements of [phase] φ, respectively. As a result, a
noise-driven rotation of the particles arises.”279 There is viscous coupling

140
between the ferromagnetic grains and the carrier liquid so that the individual
torques add to create a
macroscopic torque per fluid
volume, N = μo M x H.
However, Engel et al. admit
that the time-averaged Nz is
much smaller than the typical
values of the time-
independent Nz calculated
from the Fokker-Planck

Figure 51 Ferrofluid rotation (A) induced at a distance
from a static Hx field added to an oscillating Hy field (B)
equation by adopting the
effective field method.280
With an exploration of nonlinear perturbation techniques, Engel et al.
admit that only a particularly chosen Langevin function yields the correct time-
averaged z-component of the torque Nz, with static and dynamic magnetic field
terms included. The expression for Nz shows that both the static magnetic field
and the anharmonic part of the oscillatory component are essential for the
directed rotation to occur.
Interestingly, the Brownian relaxation time is another parameter which had
to be heuristically determined to achieve agreement between theory and
experiment. It corresponded to a particle size of approximately 35 nm which is
about three times the average particle size. Engel et al. conclude that the
141
Brownian relaxation time must therefore correspond to the largest grains in the
population rather than the average.
Engel et al. succeeded in rectifying rotational Brownian motion angular
momentum. It is an experimental realization of “the combined action of many
individual nanoscale ratchets to yield a macroscopic thermal noise transport
effect.”281
In regards to rectifying thermal electrical noise, it is worth mentioning the
U.S. Patent #3,890,161 by Charles M. Brown that utilizes an array of nanometer-
sized metal-metal diodes, capable of rectifying frequencies up to a terahertz (1012
Hz). Brown notes that thermal agitation electrical noise (Johnson noise) behaves
like an external signal and can be sorted or preferentially conducted in one
direction by a diode. The Johnson noise in the diode is also generated at the
junction itself and therefore, requires no minimum signal to initiate the conduction
in one direction. The thermal noise voltage is normally given by V2 = 4kBTRB
where R is the device resistance and B is the bandwidth in Hertz.282 Brown’s
diodes also require no external power to operate, in contrast to the Yater diode
invention. Brown also indicates that heat is absorbed in the system, so that a
cooling effect is noticed, because heat (thermal noise) energy energizes the
carriers in the first place and some of it is converted into DC electricity. In
contrast, the well-known Peltier effect is the closest electrothermal phenomenon
similar to this but requires a significant current flow into a junction of dissimilar
metals in order to create a cooling effect (or heating). Brown suggests that a
million nickel-copper diodes formed in micropore membranes, with sufficient

142
numbers in series and parallel, can generate 10 microwatts. The large scale yield
is estimated to be several watts per square meter.
Quantum Brownian Nonthermal Recifiers
While many researchers believe that the asymmetrical ratchet of one form
or another is essential in the conversion of stochastic fluctuations, there are
others who also find that stochastic resonance (SR) in threshold systems is a
sufficient substitute. “The ‘cooperation’ between the signal and noise introduces
coherence into the system…This coherence is conveniently quantified as the
power spectral density…of the system response…The earliest definition of SR
was the maximum of the output signal strength as a function of noise…”283 An
introduction to SR is shown in
Figure 52 Bistable Figure 52 with a potential

dichotomic potential
with periodic forcing barrier Uo separating two
wells at +c. If the energy is
subthreshold, the system will
be monotonic but adding an
amount of noise on the order
of Uo allows the dichotomic
system to oscillate. With a
supra-threshold periodic
forcing, the two wells may have different net occupation levels (as arrows
indicate), with the output signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) following the input SNR
closely.
143
Anomalous transport properties, using SR, which do not exploit the ratchet
mechanism have been investigated in driven periodic tight-binding (TB) lattices
near zero DC bias with the combined effects of DC and AC fields, or DC field and
external noise. In particular, Goychuk et al. have found that periodic TB lattices
can be driven by unbiased nonthermal noise generated from the vacuum ZPF,
generating an electrical current as a result of a “ratchetlike mechanism,” as long
as there is quantum dissipation in the system.284
Theoretically introducing quantum dissipation with an ensemble multi-state
model of harmonic oscillators coupled to the driven system, along with an
unbaised, time-dependent random force (characterized by an external, time-
dependent random electric field, η(t) = eaEη(t)/h), yields the noise-averaged
stationary quantum DC electrical current Jst = e(lim tÆ∞)d<q(t)>/dt and quantum
diffusion coefficient D. The nonthermal fluctuations are given discrete, quantum
values with probabilities as QED dictates. It is assumed that neither the
temperature nor the nonthermal fluctuations can cause any essential occupation
of higher energy levels for the dissipation model.
Goychuk et al. succeed in demonstrating that without dissipation, for any
field, the stationary DC current is always zero. An initially localized particle, as in
a crystal, does not produce a current in the absence of dissipation. However,
considering the effect of adding unbiased fluctuations η(t) on Bloch oscillations,
Goychuk develops a master equation which includes a real-time quantum Monte
Carlo calculation yielding a good approximation for a TB particle at environmental
temperatures and/or strong dissipation when transport includes sequential

144
tunneling. Bloch functions describe an electron in a periodic lattice with a
sinusoidal wave function conditioned by a lattice periodicity function.285 Driven
tunneling dynamics in Bloch oscillation system is the subject of another paper
Goychuk has coauthored with efficient determination of the optimal control of
quantum coherence.286
In Figure 53, the production of rectified electrical current Jst is shown with
an ohmic friction factor α = 1 graphed against changes in fluctuation noise
strength σ for a dichotomic (two-choiced) random process with zero mean and
asymmetry parameter of ξ = ½. While the solid line is adiabatic, the dashed lines
depict non-adiabatic autocorrelation times of 0.1ωc and ωc respectively from top
Figure 53 Stationary current versus noise strength for a random process.

Solid line is adiabatic approximation. Inset is current reversal with friction.
down, where ωc is the cutoff frequency. The inset graph is an interesting current
reversal that occurs under a case of strong friction α = 5 which is related to SR.
145
“Because the current appears as the nonlinear response to the aperiodic external
signal, the existence of this maximum [in Figure 53] can be interpreted as a
signature of aperiodic quantum stochastic resonance.”287
Figure 54 Aperiodic quantum stochastic resonance shown (dashed line

with noise σ = 7ωc ) with an insert of current reversal under strong friction.
The stationary current is also found to depend on temperature, which is
the signature of aperiodic quantum stochastic resonance (AQSR). In Figure 54,
the rectified current is shown versus temperature for a fluctuation noise strength
σ =0.5ωc (solid line) and σ = 7ωc (dashed line) while friction α = 1 and asymmetry
ξ = 1.
In the presence of unbiased, asymmetric forcing, a noise-directed current
always occurs in a dissipative TB lattice, because of the ratchet-like effect of the
asymmetric forcing, like the stochastic ratchets that rectify thermal noise. With
146
stochastic resonance, nonthermal fluctuations are effectively rectified, creating a
measurable current. Goychuk believes that the effect should be already
observable in superlattices and/or optical lattices.288
For reference, it is worth mentioning that with crystal lattices, thermal
fluctuations appear at environmental temperatures, with ½ mωo2<u2> = 3(½kBT)
energy level where m and ωo are the mass and frequency of the harmonic
oscillations and u is the displacement from a fixed lattice site. The nonthermal
oscillations associated with ZPE are mωo2<u2> = 3(½hωo) in terms of energy,
adding to the lattice thermal fluctuations.289
Vacuum Field Amplification
With the introduction to AQSR along with the rectification of nonthermal
noise, it makes sense to investigate the amplification of quantum noise. Milonni
points out that “the vacuum field may be amplified…if the spontaneously emitted
radiation inside the cavity is amplified by the gain medium, then so to must the
vacuum field entering the cavity. Another way to say this is that ‘quantum noise’
may be amplified.”290 Since the SR TB lattice current output depends on the
noise level, as in the Goychuk simulation, the optimum level of energy extraction
depends on parameter control, as in quantum optics, which utilizes quantum
noise amplification. This is similar to ASE which also uses a gain medium.
The actual content of quantum noise and vacuum polarization may still
remain a mystery after all of the Chapter 4 analysis. Milonni notes that even
though heavier virtual particle pairs like muons, pions, etc. may take part in
147
virtual polarization, the majority of the manifested particles will always be
electron-positron pairs because of the 1/m2 mass dependence of the
nonexchange term between the two current densities for the electron and the
negative-energy states of the ZPF.291 Jackson notes that the Weisacker-Williams
“method of virtual quanta” treats every scattering impact or close encounter
between charged particles as a Fourier collection of virtual particles which are
equal to the electric field pulse radiated to the target. This method, in
consonance with QED, gives the frequency spectrum, cutoff, and number of
virtual particles per unit energy interval.292

148
CHAPTER 5
Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations
Summary
This study was predicated on the existing volume of data already in the
scientific literature regarding the nonthermal vacuum fluctuations that comprise
ZPE. The assessment of the feasibility of zero-point energy extraction by humans
from the quantum vacuum for the performance of useful work in the electrical,
fluidic, thermodynamic, and mechanical conversion modalities is determined in
this chapter.
Analyzing the specific experiments, theories, simulations, measurements
and predictions in this study offers a wealth of details concerning the energetic
operation of ZPE throughout the universe. As a result, it can possibly be argued
from an historical perspective that, because nature already extracts ZPE for the
performance of useful work, humans eventually will be able to so as well.
Acknowledging the need for robust, concentrated energy sources in the world,
any study of the concept of energy extraction and production should address the
corresponding utility and energy quality. Therefore, this summary addresses the
electrical power output and the practicality of the conversion mode and method.
This study finds that at the present time, the categories of the present
major inventive ZPE conversion modes includes 1) electromagnetic conversion,

149
2) Casimir cavity mechanical engine, 3) fluid dynamics techniques, and 4)
quantum thermodynamic rectifiers. Under these major headings are individual
methods such as 1a) focusing vacuum fluctuations, 2a) cavity QED, 2b) spatial
squeezing, 2c) Casimir cavity geometry design, 2d) Casimir stress enhancement,
and 2e) vibrating cavity photon emission, 3a) inertial effects, 3b) hydrodynamic
model, 3c) Casimir cavity, 4a) quantum coherence, 4b) Brownian motors, 4c)
transient fluctuations, 4d) thermal fluctuation rectifiers, and 4e) nonthermal
Brownian rectifiers, as shown in Table 1 with relevant author names.
Table 1 - ZPE Conversion Modes & Methods
Electromagnetic Mechanical Fluid Dynamic Thermodynamic

Dual sphere - Casimir engine - Inertia Effects - Quantum coherence -
Mead Pinto Froning Allahverdyan, Scully
Focusing ZPE - Cavity QED - Hydrodynamic Brownian motors -
Ford Haroche model – Bohm Astumian
Spatial squeezing- Casimir cavity - Transient fluctuation
Hu Maclay theorem - Crooks
Casimir cavity Thermal fluctuation
optimized design - rectifiers – Brown,
Maclay Ibarra-Bracamontes,
Engel
Vibrating cavity Quantum Brownian
photon emission - nonthermal rectifiers -
Hizhnyakov Goychuk
Electromagnetic Conversion
In the electromagnetic energy conversion process, the proposed Mead
configuration of two spheres in close proximity was analyzed for four different
size categories, each of which are a thousand times smaller than the previous
one. The microsphere category seemed to match the Mead design closely but
150
was found to be lacking in sufficient scattering intensity, even when substituting
conducting spheres which have the highest scattering cross section. The
decrease of dielectric constant with frequency also was a problem for most
materials. The ZPF energy density and resonant photon energy for the
microsphere were only moderate and are summarized in Table 2, along with the
other three spheres.
The nanosphere, as shown in Figures 16 and 17, demonstrates the
present state of the art in nanotechnology assembly. The spectral energy density
of Equation (16) for the nanosphere increases by a billion times over the
microsphere even though the sphere size is reduced by a billion times. Upon
integrating over a decade of frequencies with Equation (21) (see Table 2), a
thousand times increase in ZPE density is calculated with each successively
smaller sphere. However, no significant vacuum polarization is available for
nano-sized particles, which is an energetic, physical manifestation of ZPE.
The picosphere is interesting in that Mead’s beat frequency concept can
theoretically be realized with pairs of atoms very close in atomic weight such as
platinum and gold or hydrogen and deuterium. However, the engineering
challenges of such an assembly would be prohibitive, even if one could foresee a
significant overunity energy production per pair. Furthermore, even with the
advanced techniques such as Ford’s focusing of vacuum fluctuations, textbook
upscattering or resonant fluorescence, etc., paired atoms of choice still have a
technological barrier, lacking compatibility with any existing amplification or
conversion transducer, such as those seen in Figure 21.

151
With the femtosphere, QED principles inherent to ZPE, start to emerge. In
one sense, the femtosphere has become almost too small to manage individual
particles, if they are in contact. In another sense, the size presents other
opportunities such as with the ion trap, where electron femtospheres can be
collected, for example. However, even as the advantage of working with
electrons as ZPE receivers becomes more apparent, it is obvious much more
research is needed.
Overall, the Mead patented method for utilizing ZPE collectors and
resonators certainly presents a design or a collector that amplifies scattering,
though Mead only analyzes a single sphere. The ZPF energy density of Equation
(21) is the most relevant, showing the quartic increase of energy with frequency
even though there is a cubic decrease of volume with each successive sphere. In
the final assessment, given the extent of the experimentation that is required for
success with this concept for extraction of useful energy, all four spheres of
interest still do not receive a feasibility rating of overall confidence that would
qualify it for endorsement from scientists, engineers, or investors. Using the
realistic power production level or anticipated work output as a measure of
energy quality, this invention receives a poor energy quality rating.
Table 2 presents more energy data for each sphere, with photon energy
for the corresponding wavelength and the Einstein energy content added for
comparison. The main observation with this tabular summary is that the ZPE
energy for a given spherical volume finally equals (same order of magnitude) the
Einstein energy content of matter as well as the photon energy of the

152
corresponding wavelength. While the scattering cross section may seem to offer
some advantages at larger sphere diameters, the equal weighting of light, matter,
and vacuum for a femtosphere has to be extraordinarily inviting for the vacuum
engineer and an area worthy of further research.
Table 2 - Energy and Cross Section of the Spheres
Microsphere Nanosphere Picosphere Femtosphere

Photon energy
1 eV 1keV 1 MeV 1 GeV
E = mc2
Si: 1044 eV Ag: 1017 eV Pt: 1011 eV p: 940 MeV
ZPE energy
390 meV/μm3 390 eV/nm3 390 keV/pm3 390 MeV/fm3
Physical cross
sectional area 3 x 10-12 m2 3 x 10-18 m2 3 x 10-24 m2 3 x 10-30 m2
Scattering
cross section 10-8 m2 10-15 m2 10-21 m2 10-30 m2
Mechanical Casimir Force Conversion
The Casimir force presents a fascinating exhibition of the power of the
ZPF offering about one atmosphere of pressure when plates are less than one
micron apart. As is the case with magnetism today, it has not been immediately
obvious, until recently, how a directed Casimir force might be cyclically controlled
to do work. The optically-controlled vacuum energy transducer however,
proposed by Pinto, presents a powerful theoretical case for rapidly changing the
Casimir force by a quantum surface effect, excited by photons, to complete an
engine cycle and transfer a few electrons. The exciting part of Pinto’s invention is
the QED rigor that he brings to the analysis, offering a convincing argument for
free energy production. The nano-fabrication task that is presented, however, is

153
overwhelming. Besides mounting nanolasers inside the Casimir cavity, the
process suggests that a 10 Khz repetition rate is possible with a moving
cantilever, without addressing the expected lifespan. The energy production rate
is predicted to be robust (0.5 nW per cell or 1 kW/m2), which could motivate a
dedicated research and development project in the future. However, the Casimir
engine project of Pinto’s appears to be a long-term, multi-million dollar
investment at best.
Utilizing some of the latest cavity QED techniques, such as mirrors,
resonant frequencies of the cavity vs. the gas molecules, quantum coherence,
vibrating cavity photon emission, rapid change of refractive index, spatial
squeezing, cantilever deflection enhancement by stress, and optimized Casimir
cavity geometry design, the Pinto invention may be improved substantially. The
process of laser irradiation of the cavity for example, needs to be replaced with
one of the above-mentioned quantum techniques for achieving the same variable
Casimir force effect, with less hardware involved. At the present stage of
theoretical development, the Pinto device receives only a moderate rating of
feasibility. It’s energy quality rating, however, is very high.
Fluid Dynamics
In the fluid dynamics analysis of the vacuum presented by Froning, it was
convincingly argued that the permittivity and permeability of the vacuum can be
reduced effectively by nonabelian electromagnetic fields, specifically by utilizing
alternating current toroids at resonant frequencies.

154
While this research does not directly produce electricity, the energy
extraction indirectly achieved by the use of the Froning prototype is in the form of
energy conservation. By reducing the drag and inertia normally experienced by a
spaceship in space, it will save a significant amount of energy, which is
equivalent to generating it. The referenced information from Rueda and Haisch
as well as from Maclay supports the validity of Froning’s fluid dynamic approach.
At its present stage of development, the feasibility rating is low, with an energy
quality rating of high.
Thermodynamic Conversion
The Photo-Carnot engine is an interesting theoretcial device that relies
upon quantum coherence to yield a cyclical radiation pressure for the piston-
driven engine. The phase induced with the quantum coherence, provides a new
control parameter that can be varied to increase the temperature of the radiation
field and to extract work from a single heat bath. The claim is made that the
second law of thermodynamics is not violated, according to Scully et al., because
the quantum Carnot engine takes more energy, with microwave input, to create
the quantum coherence than is generated. However, it is possible that as
efficiency improvements are made, the output will exceed the input as is the
trend with the other thermodynamic engines analyzed in this study. After all,
depending on the value of the phase Φ, the efficiency of the quantum Carnot
engine can already exceed that of the classical engine – even when Tc = Th. The
capability of extracting heat from a single reservoir should be regarded as a
requirement for a ZPE thermodynamic transducer. With the added endorsement

155
of Allahverdyan and Nieuwenhuizen, the Photo-Carnot engine is rasied to a
‘perpetuum mobile of the second kind.’ The number of cycles cannot be
arbitrarily large apparently, and the total amount of extractable work is modest.
However, the standard requirements for a thermal bath are not fulfilled, according
to Allahverdyan and Nieuwenhuizen, so thermodynamics just does not apply. For
these reasons, the Photo-Carnot invention has great potential for becoming a
ZPE energy producer and receives a high feasibility rating, with moderate energy
quality rating.
The Brownian motors proposed by Astumian (Figures 44) utilize
Langevin’s equation, also mentioned in connection with the quantum coherence
of Scully et al. Astumian emphasizes the fluctuating energy source (thermal
noise) and the dissipation (viscous drag) that is essential to the fluctuation-
dissipation theorem, fundamentally important to the ZPF. With Astumian’s
Brownian motors, the oscillating potential also needs an asymmetrical ratchet to
ensure one-way transport. The ratchet concept, while very feasible and proven
by two experiments, offers only a limited production of current with underunity
efficiency. Astumian notes that with the viscous drag of the solvent, all of the
energy gained by the ratchet steps is dissipated with an overall thermodynamic
efficiency of less than 5%.293
The tunneling electron ratchet experiment performed by Linke et al., seen
in Figures 45-46, is an encouraging demonstration of the Brownian motor. Linke
generates a maximum of 0.2 nA with about a millivolt of source-drain rocking
voltage, at the picowatt or picojoule level, which is encouraging. However, with

156
only between 1% and 5% rectification of the total current, the efficiency is also
quite as low as Astumian.
With the analysis of the transient fluctuation theorem, it becomes apparent
that with microscopic systems, the performance of negative work has a high
probability, apparently violating the law of entropy. The Metropolis Monte Carlo
simulation of Crooks in Figure 48 is similar to the quantum ratchet concept
however, and doesn’t offer an advantage over the other techniques.
The Yater method for power conversion of energy fluctuations is in the
same category as rectifying thermal noise. While the Yater invention has an
impressive assembly of patents and journal articles, the process requires two
heat sources separated by a large spread in temperature. This makes the overall
analysis of the device difficult to analyze except by conventional means with
underunity energy output projections. His claims for a 10 times improvement over
heat pumps is intriguing and the detailed plans in his patent encourage further
research, with a reasonable feasibility projected and high energy quality.
The work by Ibarra-Bracamontes et al. is another confirmation of rectifying
thermal fluctuation noise. It is interesting for theoretical analysis but the type of
signals that are possible for external forcing is not made clear. Rectifying random
thermal fluctuations with ferrofluids adds a new twist that is unique, especially
when rotational energy is not available directly from the ZPF. Engel et al. offer a
fascinating experiment for consideration, consistent with the rectification of
thermal fluctuations for linear motion. However, the driving potential is a complex
oscillating magnetic field with a field intensity as high as the static field which is
157
also required (several kA/m). Both are generated by a commercial
electromagnet. The work output that should be calculated in time-averaged
torque multiplied by rotational distance will predictably be only a few percent of
the input, at best. It is a good demonstration but does not seem to represent a
practical concept for motoring or rotational work. Therefore, it receives a high
feasibility rating but low energy quality.
The Brown patent rectifying thermal electrical noise with nano-sized metal-
metal diodes is probably the most exciting invention analyzed in Chapter 4.
Though the inventor does not acknowledge a ZPE contribution to Johnson noise,
it is reasonable to project that the Brown diode arrays will rectify nonthermal
fluctuations as well as thermal noise. With no external input needed for
conduction, nor a minimum voltage to overcome the usual diode barrier, the
potential for free energy production seems quite high. The attractiveness and
projected consumer interest for such a solid state, zero-maintenance device is
also very high. Not only is the fabrication understandable and straightforward but
the description of a cooling effect (negative kinetic energy) from the conversion of
thermal noise (positive kinetic energy) is also scientifically and
thermodynamically acceptable. The energy density of several watts per square
meter is reasonable and robust. However, this quantity should be calculated in
watts per cubic meter, since the filled Millipore sheets can easily be stacked
vertically as well. Another important calculated parameter for space power is the
amount of watts per kilogram, which is probably moderate to high in this case. It
is possible with modern nanotechnology that this invention could compete with
158
the battery market. Not only is the feasibility given the highest rating for this
invention, but the energy quality rating is also given the highest rating as well.
Stochastic resonance is an emerging energy field that now is being used
to substitute for ratcheting in the Brownian rectifiers. The work by Goychuk
demonstrates the aperiodic quantum stochastic resonance (AQSR) that is
essential for these rectifiers to work in a solid state environment of a tight-binding
crystal lattice. With near zero DC bias, the invention is very attractive for many
reasons. The “ratchetlike mechanism” of Goychuk is a valuable substitute for the
Astumian style of Brownian motor requiring physically fabricated ratchets. It does
not require a static bias, which is a distinct improvement over previously
analyzed Brownian motor requirements. The stationary current is also found to
be nonzero for unbiased noise, demonstrating a DC rectification, as long as there
is some degree of asymmetry in the noise. As a result, the invention combines
the noise and the asymmetric driving force into one signal, which is also an
advantage over lesser ZPE models. The AQSR design has the ability to rectify
asymmetric, unbiased, nonthermal noise, including quantum fluctuations as well,
producing a measurable electrical current in a solid state crystal lattice. The only
remaining variables are the amount of quantum dissipation required for the
effect, the optimum operating temperature, the anticipated energy efficiency and
the projected difficulty inherent in creating asymmetry with nonthermal noise that
naturally tends to be symmetric in time and space. These variables may be of a
sufficiently minor concern for the Goychuk invention to actually offer a gateway to
the future of ZPE electricity generation. Many parts of the invention fit the ideal
159
“impedance” matching of energy source behavior with energy transducer
behavior. For example, quantum fluctuations are shown by Goychuk to simply
require quantum dissipation and a slight asymmetry, which is less energy
intensive overall than creating a quantum coherence. This invention is given the
highest rating for feasibility and the highest rating for energy quality.
Conclusions
The risk analysis that is often integrated into a feasibility study that is
dedicated to a single development plan is really a process to assign a degree of
likelihood to stages of a project.294 The feasibility rating standard adopted in
Chapter 5 is equivalent to such an analysis.
The results of this study finds varying feasibility ratings and energy quality
ratings for the four modes of energy conversion from the ZPF. For the
Electromagnetic modality, in the present stage of development, the overall
method is rated unfeasible with poor energy quality, given the limitations of
today’s technology capabilities. The Mechanical modality fares better with a
moderate feasibility rating, at the overall present stage of development, with a
very high energy quality rating. The Fluid Dynamic modality drops back with a
low feasibility rating but high energy quality rating. The Thermodynamic modality
shines with the highest feasibility rating and the highest energy quality rating.
The overall conclusions drawn from this study support the introductory
physical description of the quantum vacuum. Furthermore, the hypothesis of a
ZPF vibrating with measurable mechanical pressure, electromagnetic activity,
and nonthermal energy is also supported by the scientific evidence uncovered by

160
this study. The fluid dynamics information about ZPE was a reassuring fulfillment
of the fourfold modality expectation. There is also a consistency with previous
research going back to the early days of QED, which adds a reliability and
confidence level to the normally unsettling nature of ZPE. Further research is
needed however, as outlined briefly in the next section, to fully exploit the
discoveries of energy extraction from the quantum vacuum.
The implications of this study to the emerging field of discipline called
vacuum engineering are enormous and far-reaching: An up-to-date assessment
of the state of the art has been accomplished by this comprehensive study.
Based on this engineering physics achievement, with the feasibility and energy
quality ratings therein, it can be reasonably expected that at least one business
plan will be generated for a ZPE invention, perhaps for the first time in history.
Such a development offers the business world an opportunity to benefit from the
most plentiful energy source that also now has been found to have a certain level
of practicality and moderate risk assessment, compatible with competing
enterprises. As a result of this study, an opportunity has emerged for the public to
benefit from some of the ZPE unusual ubiquitous qualities, such as making many
completed ZPE transducers completely portable and possibly installing lifetime
ZPE transducers in every appliance. The implications of this study are that future
generations may finally relinquish fossil fuels in favor of ZPE.
Recommendations
Based on the quality of research uncovered and the level of agreement
between theory and experiment demonstrated, specifically by the thermodynamic

161
mode of ZPE conversion, it is recommended that further attention and funding be
primarily dedicated to the exploitation of zero-point energy extraction, beginning
with the microscopic realm. While the other three modalities offer interesting and
promising developments, the feasibility rating and energy quality rating is the
highest with the thermodynamic mode. In particular, it is recommended that 1)
metal-metal nanodiodes should be researched, with attention to the Johnson
noise voltage and purported lack of diode barrier, along with the possible mass
production of high density substrates; 2) more ratchet and ratchetlike
asymmetries should be researched, by government, industry and academia, so
that a TB lattice or diode assembly may one day offer a truly solid state
transducer for ZPE; 3) research should continue into quantum coherence,
refractive index change, and stochastic resonance with a goal of reducing the
present relatively large energy investment, so that more robust avenues of
product development in ZPE thermodynamics may be achieved. Brownian
motors, thermal fluctuation rectifiers, and quantum Brownian nonthermal
rectifiers utilizing AQSR have already achieved a level of theoretical and
experimental confidence where further physics research and engineering studies
can offer fruitful rewards in the production of rectified DC electricity. This mode of
ZPE conversion research and development needs to be continued with earnest
in order to expand mankind’s woefully limited portfolio of energy choices.
A broad outline of how to undertake the recommended development work
would include specific tasks and milestones associated with a) the confirmation
of ZPE quantum effects described in this study on a larger scale; b) replication of

162
results but also optimization of results; and c) engineering tasks of conductor and
semiconductor design, nanowires and ohmic contacts. All of these, along with
other tasks not mentioned, need to be included. The project would also include
estimates of output current and energy production with any given geometry.
Parallel development paths in research and development will always accelerate
the completion of the optimum design. A market study should also accompany
the work, so a clear focus on the existing niche to be filled is maintained. A
national or international project proposal that estimates the required project
scope, resources, break-even point and identifies major milestones, has to be
formulated, if major progress in ZPE usage is to be achieved. Simply
commissioning another study to follow up this study will lead only to
institutionalizing the effort without accomplishment of set goals.
This feasibility study of ZPE extraction for useful work has presented a
balanced and detailed assessment with scientific integrity, engineering utility and
the likelihood of success for further development. It can be concluded that zero-
point energy is deserving of more attention by engineers and entrepreneurs as a
serious and practical energy source for the near future. The proposed project
plan for ZPE development, yet to be written, has been reduced to a business
endeavor and an exercise in return on investment.

163
FIGURE CREDITS
1. NASA website: www.grc.nasa.gov
2. Zinkernagel, Henrik. “High Energy Particles and Reality.” Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Copenhagen, 1999, p. 25
3. Petersen, I. “Peeking inside an electron’s screen.” Science News. Vol. 151, Feb. 8, 1997, p. 89
4. Deffeyes, Kenneth. Hubbert’s Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage. Princeton University
Press, Princeton, 2001, p. 5
5. Isaev, P. S. Quantum Electrodynamics at High Energies. American Institute of Physics, NY,
1989, p.33
6. Yam, Philip. “Exploiting Zero-Point Energy.” Scientific American. December, 1997, p. 84
7. Browne, Malcolm. “Physicists confirm power of nothing, measuring force of quantum ‘foam.’”
The New York Times. January 21, 1997, p. C2
8. Forward, Robert. “Extracting electrical energy from the vacuum by cohesion of charged foliated
conductors.” Phys. Rev. B. 30, 4, 1984, p.1700
9. Mead, Frank. “System for Converting Electromagnetic Radiation Energy to Electrical Energy”
U.S. Patent #5,590,031, Dec. 31, 1996, Figure 1
10. Fink, Donald. Electrical Engineers’ Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1975, p.10-39
11. Mead, Frank., Figure 5
12. Cox, Larry T. “Calculation of Resonant Values of Electromagnetic Energy Incident Upon
Dielectric Spheres” Phillips Laboratory, Air Force Material Command, PL-TR-93-3002,
February, 1994, p. 17
164
13. Seto, William W. Schaum’s Outline Series: Theory and Problems of Mechanical Vibrations.
Schaum Pub. Co., New York, 1964, p.22
14. Mead, Frank., Figure 6
15. Fink, Donald., p. 6-36
16. Morse, Philip M. and Herman Feshbach. Methods of Theoretical Physics, Part II, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1953, p.1485
17. Ibid., p. 1485
18. Jackson, J.D. Classical Electrodynamics. J. Wiley, New York, Second Edition, 1975, p. 452
19. Sun, Yugang, et al. “Shape-Controlled Synthesis of Gold and Silver Nanoparticles” Science,
Vol. 298, No. 5601, p. 2176
20. Snow, T. P. and J. M. Shull. Physics, West Pub. Co., St. Paul, 1986, p. 744
21. Fink, p. 10-42
22. “Electromagnetic Spectrum” TRW, Inc., Electronics Systems Group, Redondo Beach, CA,
October, 1986
23. Tipler, Paul A. Foundations of Modern Physics. Worth Publishers, NY, 1969, p. 195
24. Duderstadt, James and L.. Hamilton, Nuclear Reactor Analysis, J. Wiley & Sons, New York,
1976, p. 54
25. Ibid., p. 49
26. Jackson, p. 803
27. Baym, Gordon. Lectures on Quantum Mechanics. Benjamin/Cummings, Reading, 1978, p. 211
165
28. Brink, G. O., “Nonresonant Ion Trap” Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 46, No. 6, June,
1975, p. 739
29. Ibid., p. 740
30. Pinto, F. “Engine cycle of an optically controlled vacuum energy transducer” Phys, Rev. B,
Vol. 60, No. 21, 1999, p. 14745
31. Ibid., p. 14746
32. Gourley, P. “Nanolasers” Scientific American, March, 1998, p. 57
33. Dodonov, V.V. “Squeezing and photon distribution in a vibrating cavity” ” J. Phys. A: Math
Gen. V. 32, 1999, p. 6720
34. Ford, L.H. et al. “Focusing Vacuum Fluctuations” Casimir Forces Workshop: Recent
Developments in Experiment and Theory, Harvard University, November 14-16, 2002, p. 19
35. Zheng, M-S., et al. “Influence of combination of Casimir force and residual stress on the
behaviour of micro- and nano-electromechanical systems” Chinese Physics Letters, V. 19, No.
6, 2002, p. 832
36. Maclay, J. “Unusual properties of conductive rectangular cavities in the zero point
electromagnetic field: resolving Forward’s Casimir energy extraction cycle paradox”
Proceedings of Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF),
Albuquerque, NM, January, 1999, Figure 1, p. 3
37. Ibid., Figure 2, p. 4
38. Sagan, Carl. Cosmos, Random House, New York, 1980, p. 37

166
39. Froning, H.D. and R.L. Roach “Preliminary simulations of vehicle interactions with the quantum
vacuum by fluid dynamic approximations” Proceedings of 38th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint
Propulsion Conference, July, 2002, AIAA-2002-3925, p. 52236
40. Ibid., p. 52237
41. Ibid., p. 52239
42. Scully, M.O. et al. “Extracting work from a single heat bath via vanishing quantum coherence”
Science, Vol. 299, Issue 5608, 2003, Figure 1, p. 862
44. Astumian, R. D. “Thermodynamics and Kinetics of a Brownian Motor” Science, Vol. 276, Issue
5314, Figure 3, p. 919
45. Linke, H. et al. “Experimental Tunneling Ratchets” Science, Vol. 286, Issue 5448, 1999, Figure
1, p. 2314
46. Ibid., Figure 3, p. 2317
47. Blau, S. “The Unusual Thermodynamics of Microscopic Systems” Physics Today, September,
2002, Figure 1, p. 19
48. Crooks, G.E. “Entropy production fluctuation theorem and the nonequilibrium work relation for
free energy differences” Physical Review E, Vol. 60, No. 3, September, 1999, p. 2724
49. Yater, J.C. “Relation of the second law of thermodynamics to the power conversion of energy
fluctuations” Physical Review A, Vol. 20, No. 4, October, 1979, Figure 1, p. 1614
50. Ibarra-Bracamontes, et al. “Stochastic ratchets with colored thermal noise” Physical Review E,
Vol. 56, No. 4, October, 1997, Figure 2A, p. 4050

167
51. Engel, A., et al. “Ferrofluids as Thermal Ratchets” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 91, No. 6,
2003, Figure 2, p. 060602-3
52. Bulsara, A.R. et al. “Tuning in to Noise” Physics Today, March, 1996, p. 39
53. Goychuk, I. et al. “Nonadiabatic quantum Brownian rectifiers” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 81,
No. 3, 1998, Figure 1, p. 651

168
REFERENCES
1
Barlett, D. and James Steele. “Special Report: The New Energy Crisis.” Time, July 21, 2003,
p.36
2
Boyer, Timothy. "The Classical Vacuum." Scientific American, August, 1985, p. 70
3
Valone, Thomas. Harnessing the Wheelwork of Nature: Tesla’s Science of
Energy. Adventures Unlimited Press, Kempton, 2002, p. 9
4
Obousy, Richard K. “Concepts in Advanced Field Propulsion.” University of
Leicester, Birmingham, Department of Physics, Lecture 5, Sec. 5.8, 1999, p.14
5
Baym, Gordon. Lectures on Quantum Mechanics. Benjamin/Cummings,
Reading, 1978, p.99
6
Ibid., p. 126
7
Boyer, 1985, p. 77
8
Isaev, P. S. Quantum Electrodynamics at High Energies. American Institute of
Physics, NY, 1989, p.86
9
Milonni, Peter. The Quantum Vacuum. Academic Press, San Diego, 1994, p. 156
10
Rueda, A. and Bernard Haisch. “Electromagnetic Zero Point Field as Active Energy
Source in the Intergalactic Medium.” 35th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference.
June 20, 1999, AIAA paper #99-2145, p. 4
11
Puthoff, Harold. “Gravity as a zero-point-fluctuation force.” Physical Review A.
Vol. 39, No. 5, March 1989, p. 2336
12
Isaev, p. 98
13
Lapedes, Daniel. Dictionary of Physics and Mathematics. McGraw-Hill, NY, 1978,
p. 745
14
Puthoff, 1989, p. 2339
15
Ibid., p. 2333
16
Forward, Robert. “An Introductory Tutuorial on the Quantum Mechanical Zero Temperature
Electromagnetic Fluctuations of the Vacuum.” Mass Modification Experiment Definition Study.
Phillips Laboratory Report #PL-TR 96-3004, 1996, p. 3
17
Milonni, p. 5
18
Ibid., p. 9
169
19
Planck, M. “Uber die Begrundung des Gesetzes der scwarzen Strahlung.”
Ann. d. Phys. 37, 1912, p. 642
20
Milonni, p. 10
21
Baym, p. 126
22
Granger, S., and G.W. Ford. “Electron Spin Motion in a Magnetic Mirror Trap,”
Phys. Rev. Lett., 5, 1972, p. 1479
23
Milonni, p. 416
24
Ibid., p.49
25
Fulcher, L., and J. Rafelski, A. Klein. “The Decay of the Vacuum.” Scientific American, Dec.
1979, p. 153
26
Petersen, I. “Peeking inside an electron’s screen.” Science News. Vol. 151, Feb. 8,
1997, p. 89
27
Lamoreaux, S. K. “Demonstration of the Casimir force in the 0.6 to 6 µm range.” Phys.
Rev. Lett. 78, 5, 1997, p. 1
28
Zinkernagel, Henrik. “High Energy Particles and Reality.” Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Copenhagen, 1999, p. 125
29
Dirac, P. A. M. “The Quantum Theory of the Emission and Absorption of
Radiation.” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 114, 1927, p.243
30
Callen, H. B. and T. A. Welton. “Irreversibility and Generalized Noise.” Phys. Rev.
83, 1951, p. 34
31
Milonni, p. 54
32
Nyquist, H. “Thermal Agitation of Electric Charge in Conductors.” Phys. Rev. 32, 1928,
p. 110
33
Johnson, J. B. “Thermal Agitation of Electricity in Conductors.” Phys. Rev. 32,
1928, p. 97
34
Callen et al., p. 34
35
Ibid., p. 34
36
Feynman, Richard. The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Volume II. Addison-Wesley, Reading,
1965, p. 28-8
37
38
Ibid., p. 38
170
39
Yam, Philip. “Exploiting Zero-Point Energy.” Scientific American. December,
1997, p. 82
40
Forward, Robert. “Extracting electrical energy from the vacuum by cohesion of
charged foliated conductors.” Phys. Rev. B. 30, 4, 1984, p.1700
41
Obousy, Richard K., Appendix
42
Barrow, John. The Book of Nothing. Pantheon Books, New York, 2000, p. 210
43
Mann, Charles. “Getting Over Oil.” Technology Review. Jan-Feb., 2002, p. 33
44
Deffeyes, Kenneth. Hubbert’s Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage.
Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2001, p. 1
45
Brown, Lester, and Christopher Flavin, Hilary French. The State of the World,
Worldwatch Institute, Washington, 1999, p.26
46
Roosevelt, Margot. “Not in My Back Bay.” Time. September 30, 2002, p. 62
47
Greer, Steven. “Disclosure: Implications for the Environment, World Peace,
World Poverty and the Human Future.” Disclosure Project Briefing Document, The Disclosure
Project, April, 2001, p. 2
48
Haisch, Bernard, and Alfonso Rueda, Harold Puthoff. “Inertia as a zero-point-
field Lorentz force.” Physical Review A. Vol. 49, No. 2, Feb., 1994, p. 678
49
Clarke, Arthur C. 3001, The Final Odyssey. Ballantine Books, NY, 1997, p. 245
50
Joos, Georg. Theoretical Physics. Dover, NY, 1986, p. 743
51
Planck, M., p. 642
52
Milonni, p. 10
53
Einstein, A. “Zur gegenwartigen Stand des Strahlungsproblems.” Phys. Zs. 10,
1909, p. 185
54
Ibid., p. 19
55
Einstein, A. and O. Stern. “Einige Argumente fur die Annahme einer molekularen
Agitation beim absoluten Nullpunkt.” Ann. d. Phys. 40, 1913, p. 551
56
Einstein, A. “Zur Quantentheorie der Strahlung.” Phys. Zs. 18, 1917, p. 121
57
Dirac, P. A. M. “The Quantum Theory of the Emission and Absorption of
Radiation.” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 114, 1927, p. 243
58
Dirac, P. A. M. “The Quantum Theory of the Electron.” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond.
A117, 1928, p. 610
59
Debye, P. “Interferenz von Rontgenstrahlen und Warmebewegung.” Ann. d.
171
Phys. 43, 1914, p. 49

60
Wu, T. Y. The Physical and Philosophical Nature of the Foundation of Modern
Physics. Linking Pub. Co., Taiwan, 1975, p. 33
61
Pauling, L. and E. B. Wilson, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics. McGraw-Hill, NY,
1935, p. 74
62
Pauli, Wolfgang. Selected Topics in Field Quantization. Dover Pub., NY, 1973, p. 3
63
Snow, T. P. and J. M. Shull. Physics, West Pub. Co., St. Paul, 1986, p. 817
64
Halliday, D., and R. Resnick, Physics Part II. John Wiley & Sons, NY, 1967, p. 1184
65
Einstein, A., 1917, p.121
66
Snow et al., p. 877
67
Isaev, p. 4
68
Ibid., p. 33
69
Casimir, H. B. G. “On the attraction between two perfectly conducting plates.”
Proc. K. Ned. Akad. Wet. 51, 1948, p. 793
70
Sparnaay, M.J. "Measurements of Attractive Forces between Flat Plates,"
Physica (Utrecht). V. 24, 1958, p. 751
71
Lamoreaux, S. K. “Demonstration of the Casimir force in the 0.6 to 6 µm range.”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 5, 1997, p. 1
72
Browne, Malcolm. “Physicists confirm power of nothing, measuring force of
quantum ‘foam.’” The New York Times. January 21, 1997, p. C1
73
Milonni, p. 275
74
Puthoff, Harold. “Ground State of Hydrogen as a Zero-Point Fluctuation-
Determined State.” Phys. Rev. D 35, 1987, p. 3266
75
Milonni, p. 81
76
Isaev, p. 15
77
Hawton, Margaret. “One-photon operators and the role of vacuum fluctuations in the
Casimir force.” Phys. Rev. A. 50, 2, 1994, p. 1057
78
Ibid., p. 1057
79
Milonni, p. 80
80
Forward, 1984, p. 1700
81
Iacopini, E. “Casimir effect at macroscopic distances.” Phys. Rev. A. 48, 1,
172
1993, p. 129
82
Haroche, S. and J. Raimond. “Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics.” Scientific American. April,
1993, p. 56
83
Weigert, Stefan. “Spatial squeezing of the vacuum and the Casimir effect.”
Phys. Lett. A. 214, 1996, p. 215
84
Lambrecht, Astrid, and Marc-Thierry Jaekel, Serge Reynaud. “The Casimir force for passive
mirrors.” Phys. Lett. A. 225, 1997, p. 193
85
Cougo-Pinto, M. V. “Bosonic Casimir effect in external magnetic field.” J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.
V. 32, 1999, p. 4457
86
Pinto, F. “Engine cycle of an optically controlled vacuum energy transducer.” Phys. Rev. B. V.
60, No. 21, 1999, p. 14740
87
Ibid., p. 14740
88
Liu, Z. and L. Zeng, P. Liu. “Virtual-photon tunnel effect and quantum noise in a one-atom
micromaser.” Phys. Lett. A. V. 217, 1996, p. 219
89
Valone, Thomas. “Inside Zero Point Energy.” Journal of New Energy. Vol. 5, No. 4, Spring,
2001, p. 141
90
Yater, Joseph. “Power conversion of energy fluctuations.” Phys. Rev. A. Vol. 10, No. 4, 1974,
p. 1361
91
Yater, Joseph. “Relation of the second law of thermodynamics to the power conversion of
energy fluctuations.” Phys. Rev. A. Vol. 20, No. 4, 1979, p. 1614
92
Yater, Joseph. “Rebuttal to ‘Comments on “Power conversion of energy fluctuations.”’” Phys.
Rev. A. Vol. 20, No. 2, 1979, p. 623
93
Astumian, R. D. “Thermodynamics and Kinetics of a Brownian Motor.” Science, 276, 1997, p.
5314
94
Barber, Bradley P., and Robert Hiller, Ritva Lofstedt, Seth Putterman, Keith Weninger,
“Defining the Unknowns of Sonoluminescence.” Physics Reports. 281 (2), March, 1997, p. 69
95
Eberlein, Claudia. “Sonoluminescence as Quantum Vacuum Radiation.” Phys. Rev. Lett. V. 76,
No. 20, 1996, p. 3842
96
Liberati, S., and M. Visser, F. Belgiorno, D. Sciama. “Sonoluminescence as a QED vacuum
effect: probing Schwinger’s proposal.” J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 33, 2000, p. 2251
97
Puthoff, 1989, p. 2336
98
Haisch, et al., 1994, p. 678
99
Ibid., p. 690
173
100
Feigel, A. “Quantum vacuum contribution to the momentum of dielectric media.” Physical
Review Letters, Vol. 92, p. 020404, 2004
101
Cole, Daniel, and Harold Puthoff. “Extracting energy and heat from the vacuum.” Physical
Review E. Vol. 48, No. 2, August, 1993, p. 1562
102
Ibid., p. 1563
103
Puthoff, Harold, and S. R. Little, M. Ibison. “Engineering the zero-point field and polarizable
vacuum for interstellar flight.” Journal of the British Interplanetary Society. Vol. 55, 2002, p.137
104
Ibid., p. 137
105
Rueda et al., 1999, p. 1
106
Ibid., p. 4
107
Milonni, 1994, p. 111
108
Casimir, 1948, p. 793
109
Boyer, 1980, p. 66
110
Milonni, 1994, p. 19
111
Puthoff, 1989, p. 233
112
Puthoff, 1987, p. 3266
113
Haisch et al., 1994, p. 678
114
Lamb, 1947, p. 241
115
Baym, 1978, p. 99
116
Planck, p. 642
117
118
Eberlein, p. 842
119
Milonni, 1994, p. 111
120
Baym, p. 126
121
Milonni, 1994, p. 99
122
Boyer, p. 790
123
Lamoreaux, p.2
124
Forward, 1984, p. 1701
174
125
Dierauf and Court. Unified Concepts in Applied Physics. Prentice-Hall, 1979, p. 82
126
Stevens, R. E., and P. K. Sherwood. How to Prepare a Feasibility Study. Prentice-Hall, 1982
127
“A feasibility study: Can you manage it?” November 01, 2002 ZDNet Australia. URL:
http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/hr/story/0,2000024989,20269565,00.htm
128
Ozaki, S., and R. Palmer, M. Zisman, and J. Gallardo. “Feasibility Study-II of a Muon-Based
Neutrino Source” 2001, http://www.cap.bnl.gov.mumu/studyii/FS2-report.html
129
“The Feasibility Study / Proposed Plan” December 2000 U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. http://www.epa.gov/hudson/feasibility.htm
130
“The Feasibility Study” November 2002 Nonviolent Peaceforce.
http://www.nonviolentpeaceforce.org/research/summary.htm
131
Jackson, J.D. Classical Electrodynamics. J. Wiley, New York, Second Edition, 1975, p. 418
132
Mie, G., Annals of Physics. Vol. 25, No. 377, 1908
133
Cox, Larry T. “Calculation of Resonant Values of Electromagnetic Energy Incident Upon
Dielectric Spheres” Phillips Laboratory, Air Force Material Command, PL-TR-93-3002, February,
1994, p. 7
134
Ibid., p. 16
135
Jackson, p. 775
136
Stratton, J., Electromagnetic Theory. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1941
137
Cox, p, 2
138
Ibid., p. 8 & 15
139
Gryna, Frank M. Quality Planning & Analysis. McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York, 2001, p. 54
140
Halliday et al., p. 1204
141
Jackson, p. 411-452
142
Milonni, p. 15
143
Ibid., p. 54
144
Seto, William W. Schaum’s Outline Series of Mechanical Vibrations. Schaum Pub. Co., New
York, 1964, p.22
145
Fink, Donald G. Electronics Engineers’ Handbook. McGraw-Hill Book Co. New York, 1975,
p.10-40
146
Jackson, p. 411
147
Ibid., p. 414
175
148
Morse, Philip M. and Herman Feshbach. Methods of Theoretical Physics, Part II, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1953, p.1066
149
Jackson, p. 16
150
Jackson, p. 417
151
Morse, et al. p. 1485
152
Ibid., p. 1488
153
Jackson, p. 447
154
Ibid., p. 448
155
Ibid., p. 451
156
Schiff, Leonard. Quantum Mechanics, 3rd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968, p. 125
157
Milonni, p. 49
158
Ibid., p. 803
159
Sun, Yugang, et al. “Shape-Controlled Synthesis of Gold and Silver Nanoparticles” Science,
Vol. 298, No. 5601, December 13, 2002, p. 2176
160
Snow et al., p. 744
161
Murphy, Catherine. “Nanocubes and Nanoboxes” Science, Vol. 298, No. 5601, December 13,
2002, p. 2139
162
Ibid., p. 2139
163
Metz, Clyde R. Schaum’s Outline Series: Theory and Problems of Physical Chemistry, 2nd
edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1989, p. 435
164
Milonni, p. 84
165
Fink, p. 10-42
166
“Electromagnetic Spectrum” TRW, Inc., Electronics Systems Group, Redondo Beach, CA,
October, 1986
167
Tipler, Paul A. Foundations of Modern Physics. Worth Publishers, NY, 1969, p. 195
168
Dunning, F. Barry. “Ryberg Atoms, Giants of the Atomic World” Science Spectra, Issue 3,
1995, p. 34
169
Jackson, p. 644
170
“Table of Periodic Properties of the Elements” WLS-18806, Sargent-Welch VWR International,
Buffalo Grove, IL, 2002, Side 2
176
171
Gautreau, R. and W. Savin. Schaum’s Outline Series, Theory and Problems of Modern
Physics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1978, p. 107
172
Duderstadt, James and L.. Hamilton, Nuclear Reactor Analysis, J. Wiley & Sons, New York,
1976, p. 53
173
Milonni, p. 144
174
Duderstadt, p. 49
175
“Table of Periodic Properties of the Elements,” Side 2
176
Jackson, p. 682
177
Ibid., p. 627
178
Ibid., p. 647
179
Gautreau et al., p. 77
180
Jackson, p. 646
181
Feynman, Vol. I, p. 1-1
182
Jackson, p. 803
183
Ibid., p. 681
184
Schiff, p. 457
185
Baym, p. 211
186
Schiff, p. 457
187
Tipler, p. 438
188
Schiff, p. 125
189
Ibid., p. 126
190
Weisskopf, Victor “Recent developments in the theory of the electron” Reviews of Modern
Physics, Vol. 21, No. 2, April, 1949, p. 309
191
Milonni, p. 85
192
Ibid., p. 81
193
Brink, G. O., “Nonresonant Ion Trap” Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 46, No. 6, June,
1975, p. 739
194
Weisskopf, p. 310
177
195
Pinto, F. “Engine cycle of an optically controlled vacuum energy transducer” Physical Review
B, Vol. 60, No. 21, 1999, p. 14740
196
Milonni, p. 221
197
Haroche, p. 57
198
Pinto, p. 14748
199
Ibid., p. 14743
200
Ibid., p.14743
201
Ibid., p. 14742
202
Ibid., p. 14744
203
Ibid., p. 14752
204
Falomir, H., et al. Divergencies in the Casimir energy for a medium with realistic ultraviolet
behaviour” J. Phys. A Math. Gen. V. 34, August 17, 2001, p. 6291
205
Brevik, I. “Casimir Effect in Dielectrics: On the Low-Frequency Contributions” Casimir Forces
Workshop: Recent Developments in Experiment and Theory, Harvard University, November 14-
16, 2002, p.1
206
An, K., et al. “Single-atom laser” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 73, 1994, p. 3375
207
Liu, Z. et al. “Virtual-photon tunnel effect and quantum noise in a one-atom micromaser”
Physics Letters A, V. 217, 1996, p. 219
208
Pinto, p. 14750
209
Ibid., p. 14746
210
Cheng, H. “The Casimir energy for a rectangular cavity at finite temperature” J. Phys. A: Math
Gen. Vol. 35, March 8, 2002, p. 2205
211
Klimchitskaya, G. “Problems with the Thermal Casimir Force between Real Metals” Casimir
Forces Workshop: Recent Developments in Experiment and Theory, Harvard University,
November 14-16, 2002, p.1
212
Milonni, p. 187
213
Haroche, S. et al., p. 54
214
Dodonov, V.V. “Resonance photon generation in a vibrating cavity” J. Phys. A Gen. V. 31 Dec.
11, 1998, p. 9835
215
Andreata, M.A. “Energy density and packet formation in a vibrating cavity” J. Phys. A: Math.
Gen. V. 33, April 28, 2000, p. 3209
216
Horoche, S., p. 60
178
217
Weigert, p. 215
218
Hu, Z. et al. “Squeezed Phonon States: Modulating Quantum Fluctuations of Atomic
Displacements” Phys. Rev. Lett. V. 76, 1996, p. 2294
219
Wiegert, p. 217
220
Weigert, p. 219
221
Dodonov, V.V. et al. “Squeezing and photon distribution in a vibrating cavity” J. Phys. A: Math
Gen. V. 32, 1999, p. 6721
222
Ford, L.H. et al. “Focusing Vacuum Fluctuations” Casimir Forces Workshop: Recent
Developments in Experiment and Theory, Harvard University, November 14-16, 2002, p. 1
223
Ibid., p. 19
224
Milonni, p. 200
225
Zheng, M-S., et al. “Influence of combination of Casimir force and residual stress on the
behaviour of micro- and nano-electromechanical systems” Chinese Physics Letters, V. 19, No. 6,
2002, p. 832
226
Lapedes, p. 754
227
Sperry, M. et al. “The role of the Casimir effect in the static deflection and stiction of
membrane strips in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS)” Journal of Applied Physics, V. 84,
No. 5, 1998, p. 2501
228
Zheng, et al., p. 834
229
Milonni, p. 58
230
Ibid., p. 97
231
Ibid., p. 219
232
Maclay, J. “Unusual properties of conductive rectangular cavities in the zero point
electromagnetic field: resolving Forward’s Casimir energy extraction cycle paradox” Proceedings
of Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF), Albuquerque, NM, January,
1999, p. 3
233
Ibid., p. 5
234
Maclay, J., et al. “Of some theoretical significance: Implications of Casimir effects” European
Journal of Physics, Vol. 22, 2001, p. 6
235
Lifshitz, E.M. et al. Statistical Physics, Part 2, Nauka Pub., Moscow, 1978, Chapter 8
236
Marachevsky, V.N. Modern Physics Letters A, V. 16, 2001, p. 1007
179
237
Brevik, I. et al. “Casimir problem of spherical dielectrics: Numerical evaluation for general
permittivities” Phys. Rev. E, Vol. 66, 2002, p. 26119
238
Maclay, 1999, p. 6
239
Sagan, C. Cosmos, Random House, New York, 1980, p. 37
240
Eberlein, C. “Fluctuations of Casimir forces on finite objects. I. Spheres and hemipheres, II.
Flat circular disk” J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. Vol. 25, 1992, p. 3015
241
Cognola, G. et al. “Casimir energies for spherically symmetric cavities” J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.
Vol. 34, 2001, p. 7311
242
Cheng. H. “The Casimir energy for a rectangular cavity at finite temperature” J. Phys. A: Math.
Gen. Vol. 35, 2002, p.2205
243
Jackson, p. 288
244
Sokolov, I. “The Casimir effect as a possible source of cosmic energy” Physics Letters A, Vol.
223, 1996, p. 163
245
Hizhnyakov, V.V. “Quantum emission of a medium with a time-dependent refractive index”
Quantum Optics, Vol. 4, 1992, p. 277
246
Milonni, p. 64
247
Ibid., p. 68
248
Zee, A. Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell, Princeton University Press, 2003, p. 265
249
Bohm, D. and J.P. Vigier “Model of the Causal Interpretation of Quantum Theory in Terms of a
Fluid with Irregular Fluctuations” Phys. Rev. Vol. 96, No. 1, 1954, p. 208
250
Froning, H.D. and R.L. Roach “Preliminary simulations of vehicle interactions with the
quantum vacuum by fluid dynamic approximations” Proceedings of 38th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE
Joint Propulsion Conference, July, 2002, AIAA-2002-3925, p. 52236
251
Zee, p. 233
252
Milonni, p. 12
253
Rueda and Haisch, p. 4
254
Scully, M.O. et al. “Extracting work from a single heat bath via vanishing quantum coherence”
Science, Vol. 299, Issue 5608, 2003, p. 862
255
Ibid., p. 866
256
Milonni, P.W. “Photon Steam Engines” Physics World, April, 2003, p. 2
257
Ibid., p. 3
180
258
Allahverdyan, A.E. and T.M. Nieuwenhuizen “Extraction of work from a single thermal bath in
the quantum regime” Physical Review Letters, vol. 85, No. 9, August, 2000, p. 1799
259
Ibid., p. 1800
260
Ibid., p. 1802
261
Linke, H. “Coherent Power Booster” Science, Vol. 299, Issue 5608, 2003, p. 841
262
Astumian, R. D., p. 917
263
Ibid., p. 918
264
Ibid., p. 921
265
Linke, H. et al. “Experimental Tunneling Ratchets” Science, Vol. 286, Issue 5448, 1999, p.
2314
266
Blau, S. “The Unusual Thermodynamics of Microscopic Systems” Physics Today, September,
2002, p. 19
267
Ibid., p. 20
268
Crooks, G.E. “Entropy production fluctuation theorem and the nonequilibrium work relation for
free energy differences” Physical Review E, Vol. 60, No. 3, September, 1999, p. 2725
269
Ibid., p. 2724
270
Yater, J.C. “Power conversion of energy fluctuations” Physical Review A, Vol. 10, No 4,
October, 1974, p. 1361
271
Yater, J.C. “Rebuttal to ‘comments on “Power conversion of energy fluctuations”’” Physical
Review A, Vol. 20, No. 2, August, 1979, p. 623
272
Yater, J.C. “Relation of the second law of thermodynamics to the power conversion of energy
fluctuations” Physical Review A, Vol. 20, No. 4, October, 1979, p. 1614
273
Lapedes, p. 868
274
Yater, J.C. “Reversible Thermoelectric Power Conversion of Energy Fluctuations” Proceedings
of the Second International Conference on Thermoelectric Energy Conversion, Arlington, Texas,
IEEE No. 78CH1313-6, 1978, p. 107
275
Yater, J.C. (October, 1979), p. 1614
276
Ibarra-Bracamontes, et al. “Stochastic ratchets with colored thermal noise” Physical Review E,
Vol. 56, No. 4, October, 1997, p. 4048
277
Ibid., p. 4050
278
Engel, A., et al. “Ferrofluids as Thermal Ratchets” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 91, No. 6,
2003, p. 060602-1
181
279
Ibid., p. 060602-2
280
Ibid., p. 060602-2
281
Ibid., p. 060602-4
282
Millman, J. and Halkias, C. Electronic Devices and Circuits, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967, p.
474
283
Bulsara, A.R. et al. “Tuning in to Noise” Physics Today, March, 1996, p. 39
284
Goychuk, I. et al. “Nonadiabatic quantum Brownian rectifiers” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 81,
No. 3, 1998, p. 649
285
Lapedes, p. 100
286
Hartmann, L. et al. “Driven tunneling dynamics: Bloch-Redfield theory versus path-integral
approach” Physical Review E, Vol. 61, No. 5, May, 2000, p. R4687
287
Goychuk, et al., p. 651
288
Ibid., p. 652
289
Milonni, p. 30
290
Ibid., p. 198
291
Ibid., p. 417
292
Jackson, p. 724
293
Astumian, p. 923
294
Stevens et al., p. 37
Natural light monochromatic beams propagation velocity in atmospheric air
D.H. Baziev
Problem state
According to existing theoretical physics the light velocity in vacuum с0 = 2,99792458·108 m/s is
the fundamental constant being the same for all types of radiation from the radio frequency rays to
γ-rays. However there is no any substantiation of force and energy stipulating such high light
velocity, and с0 value was determined for the entire white light in empirical way.
§ 1. Up-to-date achievements of fundamental physics

According to new physics theory developed by D.H. Baziev and given in "Principals of physics
unified theory" («Основы единой теории физики» (ОЕТФ) [М., Педагогика/Pedagogika, 1994,
640 p.]) the white light propagation velocity is not the fundamental constant as the velocity of
elementary rays forming the white light is the function of wavelength ci = f(λν) which has the
following solution:
ci = μ ⋅ν i = μ / λi – for vacuum, (1)
сi = μ / λi ⋅ ni – for atmospheric air, (2)
where μ = 119,916 984 m2/s = const – Milliken's constant representing the sectorial velocity of
photon in electric field of the ray's axial charge; ni – air refractive index for investigated
monochromatic beam having the λi wavelength.
Note that the air refractive index for the rays with different wavelength values within the range from
λ = 400 nm to λ = 1200 nm varies to a very little degree and lies within the interval from
n = 1,0002982 (for violet rays) to n = 1,0002886 (for infrared rays) [3, p. 181].
Since Newton life time it is known that the white light consists of the elementary rays system with
different wavelength values covering the spectral interval 400-750 nanometers. Analysis made
within the bounds of physics unified theory shows that the light propagation velocity с0 is the
property only of white light violet part representing the light's front as on trace from start to finish
with receiving equipment the ray bundle is the subject to structural changes resulting in fact that the
most short-wave violet rays with wavelength of λ = 400 nm achieve the finish first while the red
rays with wavelength of λ = 750 nm are the last, according to formula (2):
119,916 984 m2 / s
с1 = μ / λ1 ⋅ n1 = −7
= 2,997 030885 ⋅108 m / s (3)
4 ⋅10 m ⋅1, 0002982
– the violet ray velocity in atmosphere,
119,916 984 m2 / s
с2 = μ / λ2 ⋅ n2 = −7
= 1,598 429 016 ⋅108 m / s (4)
7,5 ⋅10 m ⋅1, 00029035
– the red ray velocity in atmosphere.
These theoretical results derived from the physics new theory confirm that the violet rays both in
vacuum and in atmospheric air propagate faster than the red ones k = с1/с2 = 1,874 985 times!
Since 1973 when The International committee on numerical values for science and engineering
General assembly have made decision concerning the numerical value of light velocity in vacuum
с0 = 2,99792458·108 m/s the world scientific community is in a state of calmness regarding to this
question. However we all should wake up and take a serious view of new results in physics obtained
in theoretical and experimental way during last 30 years because the light velocity, accepted and
recognized as the constant but actually not such, became a dogma preventing the further
development of fundamental science. Just that very circumstance dictates necessity to revert to this
question using the new qualitative level, i.e. to measure experimentally the natural light
monochromatic beams propagation velocity in atmospheric air within the spectral range of
300–1200 nm. While soling this problem it is necessary to take into account that the natural light
structure radically differs from the laser ray structure that leads to difference to their propagation
velocities up to 3.4%. The laser ray and radar radiation have the velocity υ0 = 2,8992629·108 m/s
and do not depend on neither the wavelength nor generation frequency, but the laser ray velocity
can be function of an axial field charge being unknown until the "Principals of physics unified
theory" book was published.
The second aspect of problem concerning the light is its structure and material composition. The
existing point of view stating that the light represents electromagnetic wave does not withstand to
any critics due to fact that this assertion is in non-decidable contradiction with one of the light most
important properties – energy which the light has and which the light transfers. The matter in the
fact that in existing theory neither magnetic nor electric field has not structure, it does not contain
material particles with mass mi and cannot be the carrier of energy in joules as dimension of this
quantity cannot be expressed without participation of mass with finite mass mi:
Ei = miυi2 / 2 = miυi ui = miυi2 ⋅τ i⋅ ⋅ν ед , J , (5)
where: υ and u - are the velocities of body with mass mi, τi is duration of this body
movement, νед = 1 s-1 – act of body interaction with force source, according to Newton's first law.
From (5) it is evident that if m = 0 the energy equals zero as well. But the light carries energy and,
subsequently, consists of photons possessing the finite mass and is not the electromagnetic wave!
Just that provision was proved by me experimentally in N.S. Kurnakov General and non-organic
chemistry institute in 1999-2000, and this experiment having the 100 % repeatability is described in
"Photon charge and mass" («Заряд и масса фотона» [М., изд. Педагогика/Pedagogika, 2001-
2002]. The role of Lewes "photon" and Newton "corpuscle" is played the truly elementary particle
called by me as "electrino" (symbol ε) and derived from Planck's constant during solution of its
physical content in 1982, as follows:
h = mε ⋅ μ ⋅ 3 4π / 3 / 2 = 6, 626 2681⋅10−34 kg ⋅ m2 / s = const (6)
where: mε=6,855757299 63·10-36 kg = const – is electrino mass, μ – is Milliken's constant.

According to results the famous Planck's formula
Ei = h*fi, J (7)
According to results the famous Planck's formula expresses the gas and liquid oscillators' energy
per second, where fi is frequency of test oscillator in continuum. Other constant called as Hertz
constant, ħ, was obtained from Planck's constant:
= = h / 3 4π / 3 = 4,110 608 69204 ⋅10 −34 kg ⋅ m 2 / s = const (8)
Exactly Hertz constant is applicable for calculation of natural light elementary ray's energy per
second, Ei:
Ei = = ⋅ν i = = ⋅ μ / λi2 , J , (9)
where: ν i = μ / λi – frequency of photons along the ray axis, λi – wavelength of this ray in meters.
2
To demonstrate these solutions let's consider energy per second of mono-ray passing from the Sun
and having the wavelength λ1 = 4·10-7 m (violet ray).
119,916 984 m 2 / s
ν1 = μ / λ =
2
−13
= 7, 494 8115 ⋅1014 s −1 (10)
1, 6 ⋅10 m
1 2
violet ray frequency,

Ei = ħ·ν1 = 3,080 823 729 71·10-19 J – in vaccum (11)
According to physics new theory the photon performs two kinds of movement
simultaneously as it displaces along the ray axis by half-circle steps and every its step regardless of
the wavelength is forming angle γ = 4 rad, while the velocity ci of ray propagation in space and the
electrino's orbital velocity ui are connected by relationship:
ui = 2ci = 2μ/λi, m/s (12)
that allows calculating the violet ray energy not using the frequency and Hertz constant but
mechanically:
mε ⋅ c1 ⋅ ui mε ⋅ c1 ⋅ 2c1 2mε ⋅ c12 mε ⋅ c12
E1 = = = = =
γ γ 4 2
6,855 737 29963 ⋅10−36 kg ⋅ (2,997 9246 ⋅108 m / s ) 2
= = (13)
2
= 3, 080 823 72971 ⋅10−19 J
Full coincidence of violet mono-ray energy per second according to (11) and (13) finally disproves
the obsolete conceptions of light's nature as electromagnetic wave and De Broyl's wave-particle and
at the same time confirms validity of Newton's views at nature of light who already in 1687 has
stated that the light consists of corpuscles, although ha time it was impossible to prove such
statement.
Paragraphs 13 and 14 in "Principals of physics uniform theory" are devoted to light
structure and generation. There is considered the light ray energy base determined by electrino's
positive charge, ε = 1,68766436671·10-27 C, with ray axial field negative charge equal in its
modulus to ε. Now the violet ray energy per second looks as follows:
α ⋅ε ⋅ q α ⋅ε ⋅ q ⋅ μ
E1 = ⋅ν 1 = = −3, 080 823 72871 ⋅10 −19 J , (14)
ν ед ν ед ⋅ λ12
where: α = 1,04044721942·1020 J/C2 = const – is electro-dynamical constant of physics uniform

theory, q = -ε = -1,98766431671·10-27 C.
In (14) the sign minus (-) appears and shows that movement of electrino playing role of photon
occurs around the force center along the second order trajectory which determines the photon
constant sectorial velocity:
λ1
μ = u1 ⋅ r1 = 2c1 ⋅ = c1 ⋅ λ1 = 119,916 984 m 2 / s = const (15)
2
where: r1 = λ1|2 – of the violet ray photon orbit radius, с1 = с0 – velocity of this ray in vacuum, λ1 =
4·10-7 m – pitch of photon of the same ray, both these values were determined long ago by means of
direct measurements.
Thus, the fundamental physics in the light structure is not its propagation velocity in vacuum but the
photon sectorial velocity – the same for whole natural light spectrum.
And finally, it is necessary to add few words about the meaning of Planck's constant physical sense
solution and deduction from it the second, truly elementary particle. Note that the first truly
elementary particle is electron discovered by J. Thomson in 1897 in Cambridge and being the
carrier of negative charge. This solution allows make the following conclusions:
1. The electrino discovery has led to recovery of charge symmetry in the atom's structure
and physics theory as this particle is the charge antipode of electron.
2. The electrino is the carrier of magnetic field, carrier of electric current, photon in all types
of radiation and plays the role of neutrino during the movement along trajectory of the first order
with velocity of movement in interstellar space υν = 1020–1030 m/s.
3. The electrino portion in atom's structure is 50 % of charge and 99,83 % of mass beginning
from the elementary atom with mass mu =1/12·12C = 1,66057·10-27 kg to uranium and all other
bodies including the planets, stars and galaxies.
§ 2. Results of light propagation velocity in atmospheric air as function of wavelength
Diagram of optical system test plant is shown in figure 1: polychromatic light of ДРШ-500 mercury
lamp with power W = 500 W propagates from point S as the expanding beam to convex lens located
at distance of 2f = 13,062 m (f = 6,531 m – lens focal length). The ray bundle from lens passes to
rotating mirror in point A and focuses at it. The mirror consists of two parts: the plane of its lower
part, 4(2x2) cm2, is parallel to rotating axis, and the upper part with the same dimensions of 4(2x2)
cm2 has the incline in direction of rotating axis by angle β = 1°22´. The mirror is secured on MA-
30M DC motor shaft with power of 95 W (i = 3,6 А, V = 27 V).
During rotation of mirror the rat bundle under investigation starts from the lower mirror and with
expansion passes at the first spherical mirror in point B, with curvature radius R1 = 22,9 m; the ray
reflected by this mirror is directed to the second spherical mirror in point D, with curvature radius
R2 = 26,27 m; from this mirror the beam returns to rotating mirror, finishes at its upper part and is
directed to the screen in point А1 located at distance R = 7,2 m from rotating mirror, where it
focuses. The overall length of trace from start to finish equals L = 89,10 m. At power supply voltage
V = 29 ± 0,25 V the rotation frequency was equal n = 12 831,05 rpm = 213,850833 rps; the
maximum value (51408/4 = 12 852 rpm) differed from average one by Δ n = nmax – n̄ = 20,95 rps
that is 0,001632 of average value and therefore this instability had no noticeable negative affect to
experiment.
In point A instead of screen there was installed the three-support massive table where the "Zenit"
camera with removed objective lens and equipped with shutter release cable was placed.
The essence of experiment was in photo fixing of monochromatic beam tracks made by the beams
on photoemulsion of commercially available color film "Kodak" with sensitivity of 400 units (27
dynes according to old classification). Before the camera it was installed the thin celluloid film with
vertical bars located at interval of a = 5 mm and playing the role of coordinate scale on the photo
film. This scale allows easy determining the enlargement factor during photocopying, ki:
k = a1/a, (16)
where: a1 - is distance between bars on photo measured by ruler in millimeters with
accuracy of 0,1 mm.
If in case of mirror rotation absence, by means of manual control, to direct the light beam, reflected
by the mirror upper part, through camera, the continuous beam track from camera input point
(reference point) to camera output point with length li is detected on photo film. However, when the
mirror rotation occurs the beam track changes consisting of two parts: non-visible part due to fact
that during the time period τi when the initial beam front passes trace the rotating mirror turns by
some angle φi and the beam front finishes at incidence angle has been changed. Therefore the beam
deviates from the reference point by distance Δl presenting the non-visible segment of track. The
second par of track is the result of actual effect of light onto photo emulsion, and the length of this
part can be easily measured on photo and provides to us the complete information concerning the
experiment's dynamics.
It is absolutely clear that the ray deviation from the reference point is the function of its propagation
velocity at equality of all other conditions. The matter that if the old point of view is true and с0 is
fundamental constant being the same for all types of radiation we'll obtain for all monochromatic
beams under investigation the same deviation Δl and the same length of explicit track for all beams.
On the contrary, if in experiment we'll obtain tracks of several monochromatic beams which are not
equal to each other but correlating with the wavelength, we come to conclusion about failure of с0
as fundamental constant and about necessity to reverse all physics theory created during twentieths
of XX century, as well as metrology.
§ 3. Air refractive index as function from light ray trace length
Initial data for analysis:
nв = 1,0002918 – surface air refractive index at temperature of t = 20°С and P0 = 101325 Pa

[3, p. 138].
n1 =1,0002827 – air refractive index under the same conditions for violet monochromatic beam with
wavelength λ1 = 4·10-7 m (front boundary of sunlight visible spectrum),
n2 =1,0002802 – – refractive index for blue monochromatic beam with wavelength λ2 = 4,6·10-7 m,
n3=1,000 277 8786 – air refractive index under the same conditions for green monochromatic beam
with wavelength λ3 = 5,4607·10-7 m (middle of visible spectrum),
n4 = 1,00027524 – air refractive index for red monochromatic beam with wavelength λ4 = 7,6·10-7 м
(rear boundary of visible spectrum) [n1 – n4, 4, p.791],
Δn = n1 – n4 =0.000 0074 = 0,00073979 % n1 – difference of air refractive indices for rays of the
front and rear boundaries of light visible spectrum.
Analysis results
It is accepted that refractive index of any medium transparent for light is determined by ratio
of the light velocity in vacuum, с0, to its velocity in investigated medium, сi:
ni = c0/ci (17)
However, from position of physics unified theory this formula is erroneous as the light
velocity in vacuum, с0, is not the universal constant and characterizes only the violet rays with
wavelength λ1 = 4·10-7 m in vacuum, according to formula (1):
119,916 984 m 2 / s
с0 = μ / λ1 = = 2,9979246 ⋅108 m / s = const (18)
4 ⋅10−7 m
Why is с0 constant value? First, distance between the photons along the ray axis, i.e. λ1 =
const; second, λ1 remains constant due to fact that dispersion and absorption of photons in vacuum
is absent. If taking into account these provisions to consider the light velocity in real medium, from
interstellar space to crystalline structures, we'll get other expression where сi always less than с0i as
ni in all real mediums is always greater than 1:
μ c0 i
ci = = , (19)
λi ⋅ ni ni
where coi is the velocity of i-ray in vacuum.
However, (19) does not contain very important factor – the ray trace length in investigated medium,
Li. This factor has the great importance as the ni represents the continuous function of the ray front
co-ordinates.
Refractive index of the air and other gases is measured by means of Jamin interferometer equipped
with two cells. The first cell contains the reference gas and the second one – the investigated gas.
Without particular information about these cells length I accept it equal to
lед = 1 m. Here it is necessary to take into account the ray wavelength change at its interaction with
the air's molecules at cell trace lед as in cell input point the ray wavelength equals λ0i while in output
point – λi at constant ray frequency ν0i along the entire path of ray:
ν0i = μ/λ0i = const, (20)

that allows transferring from propagation velocity to wavelength during determination of ni:
λi
ni = , (21)
λ0i
and further – to determination of spatial factor of refractive index kn:
λi − λ0i −1
kn = ,m (22)
λ0i ⋅ lед
The light ray, contrary to existing conceptions, never represented electromagnetic wave and is not
such today. Ray represents the extended in a space electrodynamic system with the base in form of
axial negative field around which the positively charged electrinos move by circular pitchs. The
electrino movement pitch equals λi being simultaneously the average distance between them along
the ray axis. If even one electrino-photon comes out the ray composition the immediate reformation
of ray occurs that leads to uniform distribution of released space equal to one pitch λ0i after which
the pitch length in the ray takes the new value λi::
μ μ
ci = = , (24)
⎛ n ⋅λ ⎞ ⎛ n ⎞
⎜⎜ λ0i + i 0 i ⎟⎟ λ0 i ⋅ ⎜⎜1 + i ⎟⎟
⎝ ki ⎠ ⎝ ki ⎠
where: ni - number of photons leaving the ray during passing the cell.
Now taking into account (17) – (24) let's carry out the quantitative analysis of dynamics of violet,
blue, green and red rays during their passing the cell in Jamin interferometer.
3.1. Violet ray
λ01 = 4·10-7 m – pitch length in the cell input point,
λ1 = λ01 ·n1 = 4·10-7 m·1,000 2827 = 4,001 1308·10-7 m (25)
– pitch length in the cell output point,
119,916 984 m 2 / s
с1 = μ / λ1 = = 2,997 077 326 23 ⋅108 m / s (26)
4, 0011308 ⋅10−7 m
– ray velocity in the cell input point,
1
k0 = = 2,5 ⋅106 m −1 (27)
λ0t
– number of photons per running meter in the cell input point,
1
k1 = = 2, 499 293 449 74 ⋅106 m −1 (28)
λt
– number of photons at ray segment lед = 1 m in the cell output point,
Δk1 = k0 – k1 = 706,55026 (29)
– number of photons dispersed from ray by air molecules during passing the cell,
λ1 − λ01 λ01 ( n1 − 1) (n1 − 1) 0, 0011308 ⋅10−7 m
kn1 = = = = = 2,827 ⋅10−4 m −1 (30)
λ01 ⋅ lед λ01 ⋅ lед lед 4 ⋅10−7 m 2
– spatial refractive factor,
n1 (L) = (n1 + kn1·L) = 1,000 2827 + 0,025 18857 = 1,025 471 127 (31)
– spatial refractive factor of air on trace L = 89,1 m being the base in our experiment,
μ
с1′ = μ / λ01 ⋅ n1 ( L) = −7
= 2,923 460 35203 ⋅108 m / s (32)
4,10188508 ⋅10 m
– violet rays velocity at the end of passing the trace L,
c01 + c1′
c1 = = 2,960 692 47601 ⋅108 m / s (33)
2
– average velocity of ray on trace L,
89,1 m
τ 1 = L / c1 = = 3, 009 431 095 ⋅10 −7 s (34)
c1
– violet ray delay time on trace L = 89,1 m
λ1 = μ / с1 = 4, 050 3019132 ⋅10−7 m (35)
– average pitch of photon on trace L,

1
k1 = = 2, 468 951 75083 ⋅106 m −1 (36)
λ1
– average linear density of photons on trace L,
Δk1 ( L ) = k0 − k1 = 31 048, 24917 m −1 (37)
– number of photons dispersed from violet ray by air molecules on trace L.

From (35) it follows that during passing the distance of 89.1 m only the photon pitch has increased
by 5,03 % that characterizes very essential red shift. And what can be the result when this ray
passes from the Sun to the Earth at sunrise and sunset the distance L1 = 1·104 m along the Earth
surface through the most dense and contaminated air layer? Let's calculate:
n1 ( L1 ) = n1 + kn ⋅1 ⋅104 m = 3,827 2827 (38)
– the air refractive index for violet rays at sunrise and sunset,
λ1′ = λ01 ⋅ n1 ( L1 ) = 15, 309 1308 ⋅10 −7 m = 1, 53091308 μ m (39)
– the violet rays come out the spectrum visible part and transfer to near infrared part of spectrum,
c1′ = μ / λ1′ = 7,833 036 739 ⋅107 m / s (40)
– the violet ray propagation velocity in the surface air layer output point post passing the trace L1,
c01 + c1′′
c1 ( L) = = 1,890 614 137 ⋅108 m / s = 0, 63 ⋅ с0 (41)
2
– average velocity of ray on trace L1,
1
k ( L1 ) = = 6,532 049 487 74 ⋅105 m −1 (42)
λ1′
– average linear density of ray photons on trace L1,
Δk ( L1 ) = k0 − k ( L1 ) = 1,846 795 05123 ⋅106 m −1 (43)
k1 ( L1 ) = Δk ( L1 ) ⋅ L1 = 1,846 795 05123 ⋅ 1010

– total number of photons lost by the ray on trace L1.
Now it becomes clear why the sunrises and sunsets on our planet always have red-yellow colors –
high the red shift factor within the entire range of solar spectrum, greater for short-wave and smaller
for long-wave part of spectrum.
3.2 Blue ray

λ02 = 4,6·10-7 m – photon pitch length in the cell input point,
n2 = 1,000 2802 – refractive index [4, p. 791],
λ2 = λ02 ·n2 = 4,601 288 92·10-7 m (44)
– photon pitch length in the cell output point,
с02 = μ / λ02 = 2, 606 890 95652 ⋅108 m / s (45)
с2 = μ / λ2 = 2, 606 160 71029 ⋅108 m / s (46)
– ray velocity in the cell output point

1
k0 = = 2,173 913 043 47 ⋅106 m −1 (47)
λ02
– linear density of photons in the cell input point,
1
k2 = = 2,173 304 0839 67 ⋅106 m −1 (48)
λ2
– linear density of photons in the cell output point,
Δk2 = k0 – k2 = 608,9598 m-1 (49)
– number of photons dispersed by air molecules in cell,
λ2 − λ02 12,8892 ⋅10−11 m
kn 2 = = = 2,802 ⋅10−4 m −1 (50)
λ02 ⋅ lед 4, 6 ⋅10−7 m 2
n2 (L) = (n2 + kn2·L) = 1,025 24602 (51)
– the air refractive index on trace L = 89,1 m,
λ2(L) = λ02·n2(L)= 4,716 131 692·10-7 m (52)
– photon pitch at the end of trace L,
λ2 + λ2 ( L)
λ2 ( L) = = 4, 658 710 306 ⋅10−7 m (53)
2
– average photon pitch on trace L,
c2 = μ / λ ( L ) = 2, 574038 22353 ⋅108 m / s (54)
– ray average velocity on trace L,

89,1 m
τ 2 = L / c2 = = 3, 461 487 05895 ⋅10−7 s (55)
c2
– ray delay time on trace L,
1
k2 = = 2,146 516 813 27 ⋅106 m −1 (56)
λ2 ( L)
– average linear density of photons in ray on trace L,
Δk2 ( L ) = k0 − k2 = 27 396, 2302 m −1 (57)
– average number of photons lost per every meter of the ray path,
k 2 ( L) = Δk 2 ( L) ⋅ L = 2,441 004 110 82 ⋅ 106 (58)
– number of photons dispersed from ray by air molecules on trace L.
3.3. Green ray

λ03 = 5,4607·10-7 m – – photon pitch length in the cell input point,
λ3 = λ03 ·n3 = 5,462 217 411 67·10-7 m (59)
с03 = μ / λ03 = 2,196 000 219 75 ⋅108 m / s (60)
с3 = μ / λ3 = 2,195 390 1678 ⋅108 m / s (61)
– ray velocity in the cell output point,
1
k0 = = 1,831 267 053 67 ⋅106 m −1 (62)
λ03
1
k3 = = 1,830 758 32511 ⋅106 m −1 (63)
λ3
Δk3 = k0 – k3 = 508,728 56 m-1 (64)
– number of photons cut off by air molecules in the cell,
λ3 − λ03 15,174 1167 ⋅10−11 m
kn3 = = = 2, 778 785 99823 ⋅10−4 m −1 (65)
λ03 ⋅ lед −7
5, 4607 ⋅10 m 2
– spatial refractive factor of air for given ray,

n3 (L) = n3 + kn3·L = 1,025 036 861 84 (66)
– refractive index of air on trace L,
λ3(L) = λ03·n3(L)= 5,597 418 791 44·10-7 m (67)
– photon pitch at the end of trace L,
λ3 + λ3 ( L)
λ3 ( L) = = 5,529 818101 55 ⋅10−7 m (68)
2
– average photon pitch on trace L,
c3 = μ / λ3 ( L ) = 2,168 552 05357 ⋅108 m / s (69)
– average velocity of photon on trace L,
τ 3 = L / c3 = 4,108 732 36145 ⋅10 −7 s (70)
– ray delay time on trace L,
1
k3 = = 1,808 377 74703 ⋅106 m −1 (71)
λ3 ( L)
Δk3 ( L ) = k0 − k3 = 22 889, 30664 m −1 (72)
– average number of photons lost by the ray per every meter of trace,
k3 ( L) = Δk3 ( L) ⋅ L = 2,039 437 22162 ⋅ 10 6 (73)
– total number of photons lost by the ray on trace L = 89,1 m.
3.4. Red ray

λ04 = 7,6·10-7 m – photon pitch length in the cell input point,
n4 = 1,000 27524 – refractive index [4, p. 791],
λ4 = λ04 ·n4 = 7,602 091 824·10-7 m (74)
с04 = μ / λ04 = 1, 577855 05263 ⋅108 m / s (75)

с4 = μ / λ4 = 1, 577 420 8833 ⋅108 m / s (76)
– ray velocity in the cell output point,
1
k0 = = 1,315 789 47368 ⋅106 m −1 (77)
λ04
1
k4 = = 1,315 427 415 44 ⋅106 m −1 (78)
λ4
Δk4 = k0 – k4 = 362,058 24 m-1 (79)

– number of photons dispersed from ray at passing the cell,
λ4 − λ04 20,918 24 ⋅10−11 m
kn 4 = = = 2, 7524 ⋅10−4 m −1 (80)
λ04 ⋅ lед −7
7, 6 ⋅10 m 2

n4 (L) = n4 + kn4·L = 1,024799 124 (81)
– refractive index of air on trace L,
λ4(L) = λ04·n4(L)= 7,7884733424·10-7 m (82)
– photon pitch at the end of trace L = 89,1 m,
λ4 + λ4 ( L)
λ4 ( L) = = 7, 695 282 5832 ⋅10−7 m (83)
2
c4 = μ / λ4 ( L) = 1,558 318 134 56 ⋅108 m / s (84)
– average velocity of ray on trace L,
τ 4 = L / c4 = 5, 717 702 82485 ⋅10 −7 s (85)
– ray delay time on trace,

1
k4 = = 1, 299 497 437 79 ⋅106 m −1 (86)
λ4 ( L)
Δk4 ( L) = k0 − k4 = 16292, 03589 m −1 (87)
– average number of photons lost by the ray per every meter of trace,
k 4 ( L) = Δk 4 ( L) ⋅ L = 1,451 620 397 79 ⋅ 10 6 (88)
– total number of photons dispersed by air molecules on trace L = 89,1 m.

Thus, all above-stated information represents the theoretical base within the bounds of new physics
applied to considered experiment. In conclusion of this section of paper let's compare some
coefficients sequent from considered theoretical material.
с1 2,997 077 326 23 ⋅ 10 8
α1 = = = 1,149 997 125 81, (89)
c2 2,606 160 710 29 ⋅ 10 8
с1 c1
α2 = = = 1,365 168 4198, (90)
c3 2,195 390 1678 ⋅ 108
с1 c1
α3 = = = 1,899 985 83, (91)
c4 1,557 420 8833 ⋅ 108
λ4 7,602 091 824 ⋅ 10 −7
β1 = = = 1,899 985 83 = α 3 , (92)
λ1 4,001 1308 ⋅ 10 − 7
λ3 5,462217 411 67 ⋅ 10 −7
β2 = = = 1,365 168 4198 = α 2 , (93)
λ1 λ1
λ2 4,601 288 92 ⋅ 10 −7
β3 = = = 1,149 997 125 81 = α 1 , (94)
λ1 λ1
These coefficients confirm that transfer from considering the ray propagation velocity in medium to
considering of the photon pitch dynamics allows deeper understanding the light refraction physical
essence.
§ 4. Influence of chromatic aberration on the experiment results
As in carried out experiment there is used the long-focal-length lens with f = 6531 mm and 2f =
13062 mm according to manufacture's certificate (State optical institute, St. Petersburg), the
chromatic aberration is unavoidable and significant. In other words the own focal length exists for
every monochromatic beam. But as it was difficult to ensure displacement of rotating mirror along
the lens optical axis while investigating different monochromatic beams the rotating mirror was
installed in stationary manner in the point where the mercury lamp luminous plasma image
(diameter d1 = 5 mm) on rotating mirror was equal to d2 = 5 mm (at distance of 2f from lens) white
light ray bundle.
Analysis of optical system has shown that at such arrangement of lens and rotating mirror
the violet rays focus in front of the mirror at distance of l1 = 106 mm, and the red rays - behind the
mirror at distance of l2 = 201 mm. As the result the trace length was permanent and the same for all
⎛l +l ⎞
investigated beams but with some error ΔL = ± ⎜ 1 2 ⎟ = ±153,5 mm, equal to 0,172 % of the trace
⎝ 2 ⎠
length L = 89,1 m and not introducing the considerable error to final result, especially taking into
account that the expected differences in beams velocities constitute (17–85)%.
§ 5. Analysis of experimental data
5.1. Technical characteristics of optical system
The experiment was carried out in underground part of Moscow State University Mechanics
Institute wind tunnel where day light was absent. It is necessary to inform the readers that during
the work I've made the mistake which leaded to failure of interference filters manufactured by the
famous firm “Balzers” Due to experience absent I located the filters close to light source with heat
action destructive to filters. Only one series of photos of 21.05.2005 has the scientific importance.
The attempt to place the vertical reference line to each exposure appeared difficult task. With great
difficulty it was achieved for the beam of white light on photo No. 1 where the reference line
virtually coincides with right-hand edge of frame and with the seventh vertical line (from left to
right) of coordinate scale. The attempt to place the vertical reference line at red monochromatic
beam shooting failed (photo No. 4), and this photo is not considered in our analysis. The essence of
reference line in fixing the spatial point of entering the front of investigated beam into camera; this
line is the same for all light beams under investigation since during exposure series all assemblies of
optical system remain immobile while the filters are changed and the camera is reloaded.
L = 89,1 m – – trace length,
n0 = 213,85 obr/s – mirror rotation frequency = const,
ω0 = 2π·n0 = 1343,659 178 rad/s = 76 986 stopni/s – mirror angular velocity,
R = 7,20 m – distance between the rotating mirror and the screen,
υ = 2π·R·n0 = 9 674,346 0812 m/s
– velocity of ray sliding along film, the same for all beams,
γ = a1/a = 40 mm/5 mm = 8 – photos enlargement,
φi = τi ·ω0 – mirror turn angle during waiting time τi,
τi = L/ci – beam front delay time,
Δli = τi·υ – deviation of beam from the reference point on film during the mirror rotation,
Δli = φi·R – as previous, calculation according to mirror rotation,
l0 = 252 mm – total length of track on photos, the same for all photos,
l0 = li + Δlif,
where li is the track length value measured on photos from the right-hand extreme point of track to
exit from frame near the photo left-hand edge,
Δlif = Δli·π·γ, mm,
where π - is the beam sweeping angle by the rotating mirror,
γ is photo enlargement.
The measurement error on photos does not exceed ± 2 mm.
5.2. White light, photo No. 1
с1 = с1 (см. 33) = 2, 960 692 476 ⋅108 m / s – average velocity on trace,
τ1 = 3,009 431 095·10-7 s (см. 34) – front delay time,

φ1 = τ1·ω0 = 4,043 649 71135·10-4 rad (95)
– mirror rotation angle,
Δl1 = φ1·R = 2,911 427 79217·10-3 м = 2,911 mm (96)
– deviation of rays on film,
Δl1′ f = Δl1 ⋅ π ⋅ γ = 73,172 mm (97)
– deviation of rays on photo, theoretical value,

Δl1f = 60 mm (98)
– value measured on photo,
l1′ = l0 − Δl1′ f = 178,827 mm (99)
– length of white light beam track, theoretical value,

l1 = 192 mm - track value measured on photo,
Δ = l − l1′ = 13,172mm ⎫
⎬ (100)
Δ = Δl2′ f − Δl1 f = 13,172 mm ⎭
– divergence of experimental and theoretical values of the white rays front.

The following question is arising: What is the cause such significant divergence of
theoretical and experimental values? The answer from position of physics new theory is such simple
as unexpected or even impossible from position of existing theory – the initial point of track is
formed not by the violet rays with wavelength λ01 = 4·10-7 m but the ultraviolet ones passing the
trace faster than the violet rays. Note that the high pressure mercury lamp ultraviolet spectrum part
is rich, and in zone of near ultraviolet radiation it has the intensity sufficiently high to spoil the film.
This statement can be easily checked by means of calculation, and its validity can be proved:
Δl1 f 60 mm
Δlu = = = 2,387 324 146 mm (101)
π ⋅γ 25,132 741 229
– deviation of expected ultraviolet ray on film,
23,873 24146 ⋅10−4 m
τ u = Δlu / υ = = 2, 467 685 28469 ⋅10−7 s (102)
9, 674 346 0812 ⋅103 m / s
– delay time of expected ultraviolet rays front,
89,1 m
cu = L / τ u = = 3, 610 67112377 ⋅108 m / s (103)
2, 467 685 284 69 ⋅10−7 s
– average velocity of expected ultraviolet rays on trace L,
119,916 984 m 2 / s
λu = μ / cu = = 3,321182 680 15 ⋅10−7 m (104)
cu
– average pitch of photons in expected rays which truly represent the near ultraviolet radiation!
3, 610 671123 77 ⋅108 m / s
nc = cu / c1 = = 1, 219 536
2,960 692 476 ⋅108 m / s
– the ultraviolet rays propagation velocity exceeding with respect to light velocity on trace L,
n(c0 ) = cu / c0 = 1,204 390 23842
– the ultraviolet rays propagation velocity in air exceeding with respect to light velocity in vacuum,
с0!
( nu − 1)
k nu = = 2,876 ⋅10 −4 m −1 (105)
lед
– spatial factor, where nu = 1,000 2876 for λu = 3,321·10-7 m [4, p. 791],
nu ( L ) = nu + k nu ⋅ L = 1, 025 912 76 m −1
– refractive index of trace L air for ultraviolet rays,

2λu 6, 642 365 3603 ⋅10−7 m
λ0u = = = 3, 279 168 077 ⋅10−7 m (106)
(2 + knu ⋅ L) 2, 025 62516
– pitch of photon of ultraviolet rays forming beginning of the white light beam in the cell input
point (initial pitch of photon).
To avoid the paper text overloading I consciously miss consideration of lens absorption and
reflection factors and the factors of reflection by all mirrors used in this experiment, because the
final result depends on them slightly.
The results (101) – (106) prove that the near ultraviolet radiation propagates even in the air
with velocity exceeding the light velocity in vacuum by 20,4%. This result excellently confirms
discovery of electrino playing the role of photon and at the same time refutes Einstein's theory of
relativity that makes the further works on accelerators including the collider in CERN to be
meaningless.
5.3. Blue light, photo No. 2
с2 = с2 (см. 54) = 2,574 038 22353 ⋅108 m / s
τ2 = 3,461 487 05895·10-7 s (см. 55)

φ2 = τ2·ω0 = 4,651 658 85628·10-4 rad (107)
– mirror rotation angle
Δl2 = φ2·R = 3,348 762 376 52·10-3 м = 3,348 mm (108)
Δl2′ f = π ⋅ γ ⋅ Δl2 = 84,163 mm (109)
– theoretical value of ray deviation from the reference point,

l2′ = l0 − Δl2′ f = 167,836 mm (110)
– theoretical length of track

Δl2f = 86 mm (111)
– experimental value of front deviation,
l2= 166 mm (112)
– the track length value measured on photo; exposure during the blue rays shooting occurred to be
insufficient although its duration was 120 min.
Divergence of experimental and theoretical values in this case does not exceed the
experiment error limits.
5.4. Green light, photo No. 3

с3 = с3 = 2,168 552 05357 ⋅108 m / s (69)
τ3 = 4,108 732 361 45·10-7 s (70)
φ3 = τ3·ω0 = 5,520 735 5474·10-4 rad (113)
– mirror rotation angle during time τ3
Δl3 = φ3·R = 3,974 929 882 12·10-3 m = 3,975mm (114)
– deviation of beam front on film,
Δl3′ f = π ⋅ γ ⋅ Δl3 = 99,90088 mm (115)
– deviation of front on photo, theoretical value,

l3′ = l0 − Δl3′ f = 152,1 mm (116)
– theoretical length of track,

l3 = 154 mm ⎫⎪
⎬ − experimental values. (117)
Δl3 f = 98 mm ⎪⎭
Experimental value of green rays characteristics does not differ from value predicted by
means of new theory.
5.5. Red light, photo No. 4

с4 = с4 = 1, 558 318 13456 ⋅108 m / s (84)
τ4 = 5,717 702 824 85·10-7 s (85)
φ4 = τ4·ω0 = 7,682 643 877 68·10-4 rad (118)
Δl4 = φ4·R = 5,531150359192·10-3 m = 5,531 mm (119)
– deviation of red beam front on film,
Δl4′ f = π ⋅ γ ⋅ Δl4 = 139, 022 mm (120)
– deviation of front on photo, theoretical value,

l4′ = l0 − Δl4′ f = 112, 978 mm (121)
– track length on photo,

Δl4 f = 137 mm ⎫
⎬ − experimental values. (122)
l4 = 115 mm ⎭
As it is seen for the red ray beam the divergence of experimental and theoretical values does
not exceed the experiment error limits too.
Considering the ratio of track length to deviation length we'll obtain:
lu 192mm
δ1 = = = 3, 2 , (123)
Δluf 60 mm
l1 178,828mm
δ2 = = = 2, 44 , (124)
Δl1 f 73,172 mm
l2 166, 0mm
δ3 = = = 1,93 , (125)
Δl2 f 86 mm
l3 154mm
δ4 = = = 1,57, (126)
Δl3 f 98 mm
l4 137mm
δ5 = = = 1,19 , (127)
Δl4 f 115 mm
The coefficients are the result of experimentally received and fixed on the color film results
repeatable in any optical laboratory. They confirm that the every monochromatic beam of natural
light has its own velocity depending on the photon pitch (or wavelength according to old
terminology) both in vacuum and in air.
Conclusions from described experiment
1. Velocity of light propagation in vacuum, с0 = 2,9979246·108 m/s, is not the fundamental

constant which is the same for all radiation types as it was considered heretofore.
2. This value с0 characterizes the velocity of propagation in vacuum only for violet rays with
the photon pitch nanometers according to Baziev's formula and has the following corrected
value:
с0 = μ/4·10-7 m = 2,9979246·108 m/s = const
3. Light is not electromagnetic wave but represents the electrodynamic system formed by the
ray axial negative field and electrino's continuum having the finite mass and finite positive
charge which do not depend on movement velocity in space.
4. Term "photon" introduced into scientific vocabulary by G Lewes in 1929 is equivalent of
Newton's "corpuscle" of 1687, and functionally they are represented by the real truly
elementary particle - "electrino" discovered in 1982 and published in 1994 in PPUT.
5. Forecast of physics new theory created by D.H. Baziev after discovery of electrino have
been confirmed by this experiment results.
Referencies
1. Базиев Д.Х. Основы единой теории физики. М., изд. Педагогика, 1994 г., 640 стр.
2. Базиев Д.Х. Заряд и масса фотона. М., изд. Педагогика, 2001 и 2002 годы, 75 стр.
3. Аллен К.У. Астрофизические величины. М., Мир, 1977 г. 2-ое изд.
4. Физические величины. Энергоиздат, М., 1991 г.
Москва, 24.09.08.
All photos and table with the experiment results see below.
Website: http://eee.electrino.pl/
Forum: http://www.electrino.pl/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=51

DC Power Supply 5KV PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DC Power Supply 5KV PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

50,000 Volt DC Power Supply

Capacitor’s rated at 360 V x 200 uf, Diodes rated at 400 v x 6 amps

Optional: For higher amperages

WARNING: We are not responsaible for

Be carefull high voltage can kill..... Use rubber gloves

and rubber shoes when working at anytime around

high voltage, it only takes one mistake and it's over

4 amp, 4 diode bridge rectifier under glass!

MEASURING HIGH VOLTAGE DC

Connected in series, as shown in figure 4. There are three leads,

to be measured on the 200 volt meter scale.....

HV HVDC TV CRT FOCUS DIVIDER

white wire black wire

dc volt meter Page 9

A computer casing makes a great project case

Cascade Voltage Doublers

Chapter 1. The Aether

The Michelson-Morley Experiment

Other Difficulties with the Aether Model

A Working Model of the Aether

Fig 2.1 illustrates this idea for an electron proton pair.

Fig 2.1 Aether vortex model of the electron.

Fig 2.2 Superposition of spherical waves from 3 sources.

Teleportation as Inter-dimensional Travel

Fig 2.3 Teleportation through the 4th dimension.

where B is the magnetic field and j is the electric current

Fig 3.1 Comparison between magnetic field and fluid flow.

Moving Charges and Magnetic Fields

Fig 3.2 Electron vortex motion in 4D.

Aether, Magnetism and Relativity

Differences Between the Aether Model and Standard Theory

Further Experimental Support for the Aether Model

Fig 3.4 The Marinov experiment:

He reported the following results for 3 variations of the experiment:

Fig 4.1 Generation of an aether wave.

Aether, QED and the particle/wave duality of light

Fig 4.3 Double slit diffraction of light.

Fig 4.5 Trying to detect which slit a photon goes through.

Fig 4.6 Light scattering by a diffraction grating.

Fig 4.7 Photon scattering by a diffraction grating.

Fig 4.8 Electron-positron annihilation.

Fig 5.1 The shadowing effect of two bodies resulting in an 'attraction'.

Fig 5.5 Compression forces on a falling body.

Aether and General Relativity

Resolution of the Conflict between Quantum Electrodynamics and General Relativity

Fig 6.1 The radial node jumping for a rotating object.

Aether and Quantum Mechanics

The basic quantum mechanical wave equation is of the form:

The Problem of the Non-Radiating Electron

where vk = kinematic viscosity, h = Plank's constant and m = particle mass

Fig 7.1 An electron-positron vortex pair.

Fig 7.2. The double slit experiment with electrons.

Sub-atomic Particles and Higher Dimensions

4D Wave Explanation of the Casimir Effect

Free Energy and Charge

Fig 8.3 Different forms of rotation plus translation.

Free Energy and the Spiral

Fig 8.4 DePalma's spinning ball experiment.

4D waves, Rotation, Magnetism and Anti-gravity

Antigravity and High Voltage

What is Wrong with Relativity?

Aether, Time Dilation and Special Relativity

Fig 10.1 The light clock for two cases: