|Reducing Our Dependence on Fossil Fuels|
T. E. Bearden
Dependence on fossil fuels is a direct result of continuing serious flaws in the classical electrodynamics (CED) model used for electrical power system design and production. CED eliminates what actually powers an electrical circuit, and this error is still propagated by the scientific community nearly half a century after the discovery of broken symmetry in physics. The asymmetry of opposite charges means that every dipolarity extracts energy from the vacuum and outputs a continuous stream of observable EM energy. By correcting the flawed CED model and its resulting electrical power technology, a permanent solution to the energy crisis is possible, significantly reducing the usage of fossil fuels and nuclear power systems.
The source charge and its associated surrounding virtual charges of opposite sign in the vacuum comprise a dipolar ensemble. By its asymmetry, this dipolar ensemble absorbs virtual photon energy from the vacuum, transduces it into real observable EM energy, and continuously emits observable photons radially in all directions The emitted energy establishes and replenishes the associated fields and potentials expanding toward infinity at light speed. This solves the long-vexing problem of how the charge produces its associated EM fields and potentials and what furnishes the input energy.
In classical power engineering and CED, the charge's absorption of disordered virtual photons from the seething vacuum is excluded. The CED model assumes that every EM field, potential, and joule of energy is and has been freely created by its associated source charge(s) from nothing at all—in total violation of the conservation of energy law. We correct this erroneous assumption, in accord with Leyton's hierarchies of symmetry and object-oriented geometry, which yield the iteratively self-ordering universe demonstrated experimentally by the source charge. Substantial implications for electrodynamics, thermodynamics, and electrical power engineering are discussed.
All EM energy in an electrical circuit or power system comes directly from the local vacuum, via the proven asymmetry of the charges as dipole ensembles. With significant effort and funding focused in the "energy from the vacuum" area, the escalating energy crisis and much of the biospheric pollution crisis can be stopped in its tracks and permanently solved for less than the cost of a single major power plant.
Speaking in Science on behalf of the scientific community, Editor Emeritus Philip Abelson has clearly stated the case for expanded governmental initiatives to lessen fossil fuel dependence (1). However, the cause of the critical worldwide energy situation and fossil fuel dependence is a long-standing problem in the scientific community itself, not in the government. Until the scientific community corrects this fundamental problem, the energy crisis will escalate as worldwide needs for energy and fuels steadily increase.
Present design and engineering of electrical power systems is archaic, starting with the aged Maxwell-Heaviside (MH) model that electrical power engineers use. The model does not include some major physics discoveries since Maxwell's seminal 1865 paper (2) and particularly since the final regauging by Lorentz (3,4,5) of the Heaviside-Gibbs vector truncation. To explain the problem, we contrast some erroneous MH model assumptions to what has been proven in particle physics since the MH model was formed. The comparison provides a quite different perspective of where EM energy comes from and how every EM circuit and device is powered and always has been powered. In any electrical power system, all EM fields and potentials—and their energy—comes directly from the local vacuum, via the asymmetry of the source charges.
For its fundamental environment, the MH model assumes a flat spacetime (falsified since 1915 by general relativity) and an inert vacuum (falsified for decades by particle physics). Since it assumes force fields in space and force requires mass as a component, it also still assumes the material ether, and has done so since its inception in Maxwell's theory (6). Not an equation was changed after the Michelson-Morley experiments falsified the notion of the material ether prior to 1900. From these assumptions alone, the MH model is at best an approximation, and not at all a definitive model.
Specifically, the active local vacuum and the active curvatures of local spacetime comprise a special "active environment" of the Maxwellian system, constantly exchanging energy with every charge in the system. The MH model falsely assumes that this external general relativistic vacuum environment is inert, hence arbitrarily discards all permissible EM systems which would receive and utilize extra energy from it. In short, the model discards all "electrical windmills" taking their energy from free "electromagnetic winds" in their general relativistic vacuum environment. It does permit "electrical windmills" such as the solar cell with coefficient of performance (COP) of COP = , but only because the energy input is conventional rather than from the vacuum.
The MH model also assumes that all EM fields, potentials, and their energy come from their associated source charge(s). With its assumed inert environment, the MH model assumes that this EM field energy and EM potential energy generated by the source charge(s) is freely created from nothing at all, violating the conservation of energy law. This embarrassing MH assumption has been concealed for some decades, although occasionally begrudgingly acknowledged. E.g., Sen (7) stated it this way:
"The connection between the field and its source has always been and still is the most difficult problem in classical and quantum electrodynamics."
In the 35 years since Sen's statement, no work on this fundamental CEM problem has been done, and the problem has been successfully "scrubbed" from the textbooks, hiding it from students. The scientific community continues to propagate modeling all EM fields, potentials, and energy as freely created from nothing at all.
For clarification we introduce a gedanken experiment. One suddenly forms a source charge at the origin of a radial line of regularly spaced measurement instruments spread across a substantial distance, and from the charge one then measures along that single radial a steady outward flow of EM energy (a flow of real, observable photons). One sees each instrument suddenly read with the sudden appearance of the field and the potential, and then the readings continuously remain thereafter at each point. One shows by experimental measurement that an observable continuous EM energy flow is emitted from the source charge in all directions at light speed, forming and continuously replenishing the associated EM fields and potentials expanding from the charge across the universe.
Also there is no observable EM energy being input to the charge, since none can be measured. Hence either the conservation of energy law is experimentally falsified by every charge, EM field, EM potential, and joule of EM energy in the universe, or a continuous input of nonobservable (virtual), nonclassical EM energy is furnished to the source charge, provided by the active external environment. Either one gives up the conservation of energy law entirely, or one must include in the CED and MH model the active vacuum and its nonobservable (virtual) input energy to the source charge.
Accepting the conservation of energy law falsifies the MH and CED models' implicit assumption that no nonobservable energy is received and utilized in a circuit or electrical power system. Long ignored and perpetuated by the scientific community, this false assumption has been and is the real cause of the escalating worldwide energy crisis and the increasing use of fossil fuels.
We published the solution to the above source charge problem in 2000 (8), and in 2002 (9,10), taking it directly from particle physics.
The basis for the solution is the proven broken symmetry of opposite charges, such as for any dipolarity. Wu et al. (11) experimentally proved broken symmetry (including the asymmetry of opposite charges) in 1957, very quickly after Lee and Yang strongly predicted it (12,13). Because of the revolutionary impact on physics, Lee and Yang were awarded the Nobel Prize in December of the same year, 1957, at unprecedented speed.
From quantum field theory, in the local vacuum the "isolated" source charge is surrounded by clustering virtual charges of opposite sign. Hence the source charge ensemble is actually a special dipolarity, and it must express and obey the asymmetry of opposite charges. This asymmetry means that the source charge ensemble continuously absorbs virtual photons from the seething vacuum, transduces (coherently integrates) the virtual energy into observable (quantum-sized) energy, and re-emits the energy as observable photons radiated in all directions—establishing and continuously replenishing the associated expanding EM fields and potentials, precisely consistent with our gedanken experiment. As T. D. Lee stated (14):
"Since nonobservables imply symmetry, any discovery of asymmetry must imply some observable. The experiment of Wu, Ambler, Hayward, Hoppes and Hudson… established the asymmetry between the positive and negative signs of electricity."
The emitted energy, of course, does establish and continuously replenish the associated macroscopic EM fields and potentials and their energy (15), as the MH model assumes. What differs is that there is a proven nonobservable energy input to the source charge, of nonclassical form (16,17,18,19,20), that the MH model neglects.
With the source charge problem solved, the conservation of energy law is saved after all, but the MH model itself is falsified. The solution—based on the broken symmetry of opposite charges—contradicts two of the fundamental assumptions of MH theory and electrical engineering—that the local general relativistic vacuum environment can be neglected, and that all EM fields, potentials, and joules of energy are freely created from nothing. Therefore MH, CED, and electrical engineering models require significant correction and extension since their contradiction is already experimentally proven in particle physics.
The solution to the source charge problem is also a change to classical thermodynamics. The change to thermodynamics is so dramatic that we certainly do not attempt such formidable work in this paper. Instead, we only indicate some of the important assumptions which must be changed.
The charge continuously consumes positive entropy (of the disordered virtual photons it absorbs from the vacuum) at one level and converts it to negative entropy (the increase or delta in organized observable potential energy and field energy of the charge itself) at a higher level, falsifying the present Second Law. Then broken symmetry (by excitation decay) at the new (observable) level results in the charge emitting the converted extra energy as real observable EM energy in its ever expanding and continuously replenished associated fields and potentials.
However, in turn this latest broken symmetry has also negentropically generated yet another higher level symmetry—the macroscopic deterministic ordering of the associated intensities of the fields and potentials, with the intensities appearing and ordered as a function of the radial distance and of the time from formation of the charge.
The charge is a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) system in its interaction with the vacuum. The charge converts positive entropy at the virtual particle level in the vacuum to a new symmetry and negative entropy at the next higher level, the quantum microscopic beginning of the macroscopic domain. We have nominated the source charge as the first physical example of such negentropic systems—shown theoretically by Evans and Rondoni (21)—where a NESS system produces entropy that is initially negative and thereafter continuously decreases toward negative infinity as time passes.
To adequately explain this remarkable iterative result where a broken symmetry at one level automatically generates negative entropy and a new symmetry at a higher level, a new geometry and extended group theoretic procedures are required. Fortunately Leyton (22) has already written the necessary extended object-oriented geometry and the necessary group procedures, extending Klein's geometry (23) and replacing Klein's Erlanger project (24), which has driven much of physics since 1872. Klein geometry is only a subset of Leyton's geometry. In Leyton's geometry, hierarchies of symmetry emerge where a broken symmetry at one level generates a new symmetry at the next higher level. Further, the new symmetry enfolds all information as to the lower symmetries and asymmetries, so it is internally ordered and none of the lower symmetries and asymmetries are lost (25).
For the source charge, Leyton's effect generates all the successively higher symmetries from their broken symmetries at lower levels, extending from the virtual particle flux exchange between vacuum and charge to the formation of deterministic macroscopic EM fields and potentials reaching across the entire macroscopic universe.
Remarkably, by obeying Leyton geometry, the source charge generates its own characteristically ordered external parameters, contrary to other thermodynamic systems. The charge is an entropy-to-negentropy converter, converting disordered vacuum virtual energy to organized observable energy—a negentropic process violating the present Second Law's assumption that all processes progress with time to yield the same or increased entropy.
Violations of the Second Law at micron size levels and for up to two seconds have previously been experimentally proven by Wang, Sevick, Mittag, Searles, and Evans (26). From the source charge, the dissipation of emitted observable photons is from an already-ordered external parameter—the excitation potential produced on the charge. The envelope of the emission (i.e., the external parameters, being the fields and potentials) is deterministic, a requirement for obeying the negentropic NESS system requirement shown by Evans and Rondoni (21).
With the Leyton process, the generation of a higher level symmetry from a broken symmetry at a lower level is a negative entropy process, at least for any system generating its own characteristic external parameters.
The new geometry is self-organizing, also solving the long-vexing problem of how macroscopic order can arise from random microscopic disorder. Mere integration cannot do it, since randomness does not integrate to order. Without further discussion, we point out that Leyton's geometry has a form of hidden variables—the enfolded information at any given level of all the lower levels of symmetry and asymmetry. The potential analogy to Bohm's hidden variable theory is striking (27).
The Leyton self-generating hierarchies of symmetry appear to resolve the fundamental problem of thermodynamics—its asymmetry. The asymmetry problem is succinctly described by Price (28):
"A century or so ago, Ludwig Boltzmann and other physicists attempted to explain the temporal asymmetry of the second law of thermodynamics. …the hard-won lesson of that endeavor—a lesson still commonly misunderstood—was that the real puzzle of thermodynamics is not why entropy increases with time, but why it was ever so low in the first place."
At its formative inception a century or more ago, classical thermodynamics inadvertently eliminated half the thermodynamics of the universe—the universal negentropic Leyton interactions where broken symmetry at any level automatically generates a new symmetry (and a new ordering) at the next higher level. Indeed, negative entropy continually arises from positive entropy by the actions of a self-ordering universe (29), as shown by Leyton.
The present thermodynamics definitions of "open" system and "closed" system are in error, and again can only be approximations.
A closed system has been defined in thermodynamics as one which does not exchange mass across its boundary, but can and does exchange energy. However, any change of energy of the system automatically changes its mass, by the simple Einstein equation for mass-energy. In the modern view, energy and mass are two sides of the same coin. So a "closed" system changing its energy also changes its mass, contradicting the conventional definition. A closed system should logically be defined as one in which neither mass nor energy exchanges across the boundary, but that is already given as the definition of an "isolated" system. In modern physics, there is no such thing as a truly "closed" system (truly "isolated" system) in the entire universe. This fact, established now for decades, should be incorporated in a thorough revision of thermodynamics.
An "open" thermodynamic system is presently defined as one which exchanges mass-energy across its boundary, and may exchange energy as well. Again, if mass is exchanged, then energy is exchanged, and if energy is exchanged, then mass-energy is exchanged. Rigorously there is no system of "energy-only" exchange or "mass-only" exchange. If the present definitions continue to be used for convenience under situations where the error is not great, then it should be clearly specified in thermodynamic textbooks that these definitions are assumptions for convenience, and do not always apply.
Energy and work have been defined as equivalent in thermodynamics, and that is logically false. Work is not energy, but the change of form of energy. Also, it is not the change in magnitude of energy. It involves a change in magnitude of some form of energy, so that a new form of energy for that change can be had.
As an example, in thermodynamics the change in magnitude of any of the system's external parameters (e.g., the electrostatic scalar potential ) is erroneously defined as work (30). This assumes that any change in the system's potential energy must involve work. Mere change of system potential (voltage) is not work, but regauging, which is entirely work-free by the gauge freedom axiom of quantum field theory. It is accompanied by work only when the input energy involved in the gauging change is also changed in form. Inputting potential itself, to increase the potential of a system, does not require work because no change of form of the input energy is required.
When one joule of energy is changed in form, a joule of work is indeed accomplished, but there is still a joule of energy remaining though now in different form. That second joule of energy can again be changed in form, to do a second joule of work, and there is still a joule of energy remaining in a different form. So one joule of input energy can result in several joules of successive work if the form of the energy is iteratively changed several times in the system, in several interactions therein.
The conservation of energy law is simply that energy can neither be created nor destroyed (but its form can be changed). This is equivalent to "energy can be freely added or subtracted by transfer, and work can result if the form of the energy is also changed."
If the energy input to the system to change the magnitude of its potential energy is in the same form as the system's potential, no work is required since that is simple regauging of the system. An example is merely changing the voltage (scalar potential) of an EM system or circuit with the electrons temporarily pinned and the current zeroed. No work is done in that case.
So this present assumption in thermodynamics—that change of magnitude of system potential energy always requires work—erroneously excludes gauge freedom, widely used in physics. The assumption is therefore falsified by the gauge freedom axiom (31).
The Lorentz symmetrical regauging of the Maxwell-Heaviside equations (32), for example, assumes that the potential energy of the system is changed twice, but very restrictively and carefully selected so that the two extra free force fields that appear are equal and opposite. In that case, the free force fields in equal opposition constitute stress, and the net translation vector force field is zero. In this assumption, the system may indeed freely exchange energy by potentialization from its environment, but any excess energy received is deliberately "bottled up" as additional internal stress energy of the system. It is thus assumed not to be available for use to translate current through a load and power it.
The standard closed current loop system self-enforces Lorentz symmetrical regauging and "locks-up" all free extra forcefields by making the back emf and forward emf equal. Thus it arbitrarily discards the innate ability for the system to use self-regauging for powering external loads. We accent that deliberately (asymmetrically) regauging so that the two free force fields are not equal and not necessarily opposing, can allow excess EM energy from the external environment (e.g., from the active vacuum and local curvatures of spacetime) that is available to be used for powering loads. A solar cell is an example of such a system with COP = , but with a well-recognized conventional external environment.
An asymmetrically regauging system is a system far from equilibrium a priori, and such a dissipative system is permitted to exhibit five extraordinary functions. It can (i) self-organize, (ii) self-oscillate or self-rotate, (iii) output more energy as useful work than the operator inputs (exhibit COP > 1.0; the excess energy being freely input from the environment), (iv) "self-power" (exhibit COP = , where the operator need input no energy at all and the environment inputs all the energy freely), and (v) exhibit negative entropy.
The conservation of energy law continues to be upheld, even when the EM system exhibits 1.0 < COP .
Adding thermodynamics' missing Leyton negentropic interactions, the present form of the Second Law is revealed to be an oxymoron assuming that its own contradiction—the occurrence of negative entropy—has previously occurred to form the initial order. Consistent with experiments proving the Second Law's violation, and also consistent with Leyton's principle, a suitable new form of the second law is:
"First a broken symmetry occurs at a given level, generating a new symmetry at the next higher level, the level of interest. Positive entropy at the lower level is consumed and transduced, producing a negative entropy interaction (Leyton effect) which generates controlled order (available energy) and symmetry at the higher level of interest. This produces the initial controlled and available order at the level of interest. Thereafter the entropy at the level of interest may remain the same or progressively increase in subsequent interactions at that level,, unless additional negative entropy interactions (Leyton effects) occur below that level of interest, consuming entropy and producing additional new negative entropy and additional symmetry and additional available ordered energy at the level of interest."
This somewhat awkward but rigorous statement also seems generally consistent with the known characteristics of dissipative systems far from thermodynamic equilibrium (33), for which Prigogine received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977. The difference is whether the reordering occurs by fluctuation statistics or by a Leyton mechanism of hidden order generation.
The source charge has a coefficient of performance (COP) of COP = , though we do not know its efficiency , but only that 100%. This is similar to a common solar cell, which is a NESS system with COP = , even though its efficiency may be only =17% in a nominal case. The 17% efficiency merely means that 83% of the energy input to the solar cell is wasted, while COP = means that the operator himself inputs none of the required energy, since all of it is freely input by the active environment. Other examples of systems with COP = and < 100% are the common windmill and the waterwheel, used through the ages.
Since any charge is a NESS system far from equilibrium, it permissibly performs one or more of those previously listed five "magic" functions permitted to such systems. Actually, every charge in the universe already performs all five functions.
It follows that all EM field energy and EM potential energy in EM circuits and power systems comes directly from the local vacuum, via the asymmetry of the local source charge ensembles in the system. The energy does not come from the mechanical energy input to the shaft of a generator, or from the chemical energy dissipated in a battery. In short, every joule of EM energy in the universe is extracted and transduced directly from the active vacuum via that asymmetry of the associated source charges. In addition to requiring the MH model be changed, this forces a complete reassessment of what powers an electrical circuit attached to a generator.
The new Leyton geometry and self-ordering of higher level symmetries is demonstrated by electrodynamics when it is extended to the new geometry and subjected to higher group symmetry examination. This means that self-organizing, COP = electrical power systems taking all their energy from the local vacuum are permitted by nature and by the laws of physics and thermodynamics, once present models are updated. It is only our own present flawed models and consequent flawed technology that have prevented such electrical power systems from being developed (the solar cell, of course, is an exception). The analogy of a heat pump—including one with clamped positive feedback for self-powering—does apply to permissible electrical power systems (34) freely taking excess energy from their active relativistic vacuum environment.
In a standard power plant the fossil fuel is conveniently burned to produce steam, which is then used to power a steam turbine cranking the shaft of the electrical generator. As the rotor inside the generator rotates, the mechanical input energy to the shaft is transduced into magnetic field energy inside the generator. This magnetic field energy is then dissipated on the internal charges inside the generator, forcing the positive charges in one direction and the negative charges in the other, separating them and forming the source dipolarity between the generator terminals (35). That is all the power plant accomplishes by burning fossil fuel so that the shaft of the generator is turned.
Once the dipole is formed, then by the asymmetry of opposite charges the dipole itself continuously extracts unusable EM field energy from the seething local vacuum exchange. It transduces the absorbed virtual energy into observable and usable energy form, and continuously pours it out of the terminals, filling all space surrounding the external conductors. Some of this external energy flow—the Poynting component—is diverged into the conductors to potentialize the Drude electron gas, thus powering the circuit and its loads and losses (36,37,38,39).
The closed current loop circuit forces the spent electrons from the ground return line back through the back emf of the generator, scattering the charges and destroying the dipolarity. This in turn destroys the free extraction of EM energy from the vacuum. Consequently, the shaft of the generator must be forcibly rotated some more, to again separate internal charges and reform the dipole. It is easily shown that more energy is required to continually reform the source dipolarity than is dissipated in the external loads.
Presently we pay the power company to deliberately design, build, and implement electrical power systems that extract all their EM energy freely from the vacuum, but also deliberately kill that extraction process faster than they can use it to power their loads. A very large but ignored nondiverged Heaviside energy flow component pours from the terminals of every generator and is wasted. When that available but ignored Heaviside energy flow component is considered, every generator and battery already is a COP>>1.0 energy converter system. It is ironic that every EM circuit and electrical power system already produces—from the local vacuum—far more energy than the scientific community acknowledges, accounts, or models.
Inexplicably, the scientific community continues to teach and advocate that wasteful process. That process and its accompanying scientific mindset produce the escalating energy crisis, pollute the biosphere by harmful byproducts of electrical power systems, contribute to global warming by green house emissions, kill off entire vulnerable species, and poison the planet including the oceans, the land and its waterways, and the atmosphere.
Regrettably, leaders of the scientific community's energy research—the National Academy of Sciences, National Science Foundation, the great national laboratories, the Department of Energy, etc.—apparently do not have a single well-funded and staffed effort to vigorously investigate and further develop the technology for extracting EM energy from the local vacuum. There appear to be no serious graduate level or post doctoral level programs and no substantial funding to unleash young, vigorous graduate students and post-doctoral researchers in this area. To the contrary, those scientists urging strong "energy from the vacuum" research are subjected to ad hominem attacks, loss of jobs, rejection of papers and publications, withholding of tenure, and character assassination. With approval of the scientific community the government and industry are spending billions of dollars on fuel cells, more efficient combustion of hydrocarbons, and similar stopgap measures. Little or nothing is spent or planned for investigating and further capitalizing on the free "vacuum energy fuel" that already powers every circuit and electrical power system.
Meanwhile, unfunded work in higher group symmetry electrodynamics has been published (10,40-45), showing that energy from the vacuum is indeed permitted and strongly indicating that direct engineering is possible.
Our conclusion is that sufficient technical work—both theoretical and experimental—already exists to warrant an urgent, high priority national scientific program to investigate and rapidly develop electrical power systems freely taking and using part or all of their "fuel" energy directly from the local vacuum. Every charge in every circuit and electrical power system already does it, but we ignore it and waste it. We only have to recognize and work out the principles and concepts with insight gained from extending our present scientific and engineering models. Once this is done, we can proceed directly to design and build real power systems analogous to "electrical windmills", drawing all their required energy directly from the active local vacuum. Once that is accomplished, the energy crisis will be permanently solved and the stranglehold on humanity of its need for fossil fuels will be released.
Our recommendations are a variant and extension of Abelson's recommendation:
If these recommendations are implemented with adequate emphasis and funding, the present critical energy problems can be solved in three years, with full implementation following within a single decade.
References and Notes:
Magnetic Energy Ltd.
P.O. Box 1472
Huntsville, AL 35807, USA