The Tom Bearden





Energy from the Vacuum

"Energy from the Vacuum - Concepts & Principles"
Order Now!

Help support the research



Subject: RE: [FE_updates] wind videos; hot solar techs; methan hydrates unlocked; U.S. no longer majority

Hi *****,

Presently we have a very viable alternative to carbon-based fuels etc. that is beginning to rapidly emerge. That is “watergas”, which has a history going back to the 1920s. Several legitimate inventors right now have viable watergas systems and processes, where the H-O-H molecule can be tricked to just “fall apart” because the O-H bond is “unhappened” by use of negative energy in the local vacuum and the accompanying negative probabilities.

In the 1930s, some of our leading physicists and mathematical scientists so hated negative energy (from the Shrödinger equation and from Dirac’s relativistic extension of it, and also in Dirac’s original electron theory) and its associated negative probabilities, that they arbitrarily tossed it out of physics – out of the Dirac relativistic extension to the Shrödinger equation, and out of Dirac’s electron theory. The problem is given in this quote from Ian D. Lawrie. A Unified Grand Tour of Theoretical Physics, CRC Press, 1990, p. 130 (speaking of the Shrödinger equation and derivation of the Klein-Gordon equation from it with two problems – negative energy states and negative probability density):

“The negative energy solutions are an embarrassment, because they imply the existence of single-particle states with energy less than that of the vacuum. Intuitively, this is nonsensical. In fact, there is no lower limit to the energy spectrum. This means that the vacuum is unstable, since an infinite amount of energy could be released from it by the spontaneous creation of particles in negative energy states. … it is the negative energy states which give rise to a negative probability density.”

Dirac himself at first adhered to negative energy and negative probabilities. Quoting:

“Negative energies and probabilities should not be considered as nonsense. They are well-defined concepts mathematically, like a negative of money." [P. A. M. Dirac, “The physical interpretation of quantum mechanics.” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A, Vol. 180, 1942, pp. 1-40.]

 However, later Dirac caved in to the fierce peer pressure of his adamant colleagues, and then personally participated in eliminating the negative energy. Quoting Dirac later:

“I remember once when I was in Copenhagen, that Bohr asked me what I was working on and I told him I was trying to get a satisfactory relativistic theory of the electron, and Bohr said ‘But Klein and Gordon have already done that!’ That answer first rather disturbed me. Bohr seemed quite satisfied by Klein’s solution, but I was not because of the negative probabilities that it led to. I just kept on with it, worrying about getting a theory which would have only positive probabilities.” [Conversation between Dirac and J. Mehra, Mar. 28, 1969, quoted by Mehra in Aspects of Quantum Theory, ed. A. Salam and E. P. Wigner, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1973.]

You see, the “problem” reduces to this: In modern physics a thing that has “occurred” or “happened” (and is thus sustained and observable), is based on subsidiary statistical operations ongoing between the active vacuum and all the charges. All observable forces are generated in interacting matter by the exchange of virtual particles between the local vacuum and the material particles. So underneath that “observable or happened entity” in physics there is a sustaining and producing set of more subtle statistical processes – calculated (usually) with a positive energy vacuum and thus with positive probabilities. So when the positive probabilities in those underlying processes – of that observable or happened entity – reach a total of 100%, that is “certainty” and so there is the resulting physical (observable) entity present and sustained – so long as the local vacuum is not altered to add negative energy and negative probabilities to those underlying processes. The observable entity/state has “happened” and it “stays happened”, normally – in a positive energy vacuum.

But if one’s theoretical model allows negative energy of the vacuum and thus negative probabilities in underlying and ongoing primary statistical processes and interactions with the vacuum, then by conditioning the local vacuum with negative energy (very easily done, by the way, as clearly shown for more than 20 years by Bedini), one also creates those negative probabilities in those underlying statistical processes. And that is a very profound change to present science and scientific method.

That means that the probability of something that has “happened” and is observably sustained, can be lowered from 100% to 70% or even to zero percent. This in turn means that something that has physically “happened” and is thus being sustained observably, can be “unhappened” deliberately by simply conditioning the local vacuum to have negative energy. Indeed, it can be “unhappened completely” so that it disappears and is not there at all, regardless of how many instruments one employs to look.

In the watergas technique, e.g., an inventor uses one or another of the methods of conditioning the local vacuum with negative energy. Specifically this strongly affects the O-H bonds, so that to us (observably) they seem to just “fall apart”. They actually fall apart because of the changes resulting in their underlying sustaining processes in interaction with the active vacuum. Technically this means that the previous 100% probability of those established O-H bonds are lowered, or even totally vanished or “unhappened”. The O-O bonds and H-H bonds, on the other hand, are more firmly increased, so that in the affected water there appear bubbles of H2 and O2, as the H-O-H molecules fall apart because of the vanishing and “unhappening” of their O-H bonds. Done correctly, this then becomes a pretty safe thing, because in that changing water (in its negative energy vacuum) the freed O2 and H2 will not explode as in a normal vacuum, because of the difficulty in forming O-H bonds in the presence of a negative energy vacuum and negative O-H probabilities.

This means that one can then direct the stabilized bubbles of H2 and O2 to a short distance (even a few inches) away from that conditioned negative energy vacuum, to a “more normal” vacuum – and then the O2 and H2 will again burn very nicely (as in the chambers of a piston engine in a car). In this way, one can power an automobile from watergas alone, or augment the use of normal gasoline with simultaneous combined use of watergas, etc.

The same process, applied to cancers in the living body, can “unhappen” the cancer (which is being maintained by those same statistical underlying processes that formed it in the first place). And the cancer will then “heal up” or, in other words, “unhappen” gradually and disappear because of the addition of negative probabilities.

Engineering negative energy of the vacuum and thus negative probabilities is indeed a vast leap forward in science and physics – because the physicists just arbitrarily discarded it back there decades ago. Tesla originally discovered negative energy, before the term was even available, and he called it “radiant energy” to differentiate its phenomenology from that of normal positive EM energy. Bedini uses negative energy in his epochal battery chargers, so the “happened” sulfation of a battery can be “unhappened” and eliminated. The lifetime of the battery can thus be extended dramatically, and this is very important, e.g., in large expensive batteries (as in large battery-powered materials handling equipment in warehouses, in which the Bedini process and system have been very successfully tested).

Kanzius, e.g., achieved that negative energy local vacuum and thus negative probabilities process (though he himself doesn’t appear to know the exact nature of his process) for his epochal cancer treatment process. That process has now been through animal trials, and in the animals it cured 100% of their cancers. An independent and well-recognized cancer research institute has studied it, and pronounced the Kanzius cancer treatment as the greatest advance in cancer therapy in a century. Next must come human trials, then seeking out FDA approval for use in humans.

In other words, by the same “precursor” engineering of the local vacuum with negative energy, it is possible to produce curative process for any and all our present human diseases. Without the use of harmful drugs and all their side effects, etc. As you can see, some very powerful people and organizations flatly do not wish that to be developed.

Kanzius also noted that the same process affects salt water. So he developed a very good adaptation for use on the water and making watergas, with the characteristics we previously mentioned. He then took his watergas process and system to a world-recognized authority on water chemistry, who subjected the process to some 50 rigorous tests. When finally finished, the expert publicly proclaimed this was the “greatest advance in water chemistry in the last 100 years”.

Late last year, Kanzius stated that his watergas process had now achieved overunity (coefficient of performance, which means the burning of the resulting fuel resulted in more usable energy in the powered system than the operator had to input to the watergas process), and so he would not be saying anything else about it for awhile. In short, now it was time for patenting and protecting intellectual property rights.

In short, this (use of the negative energy asymmetric vacuum) is one process by which asymmetrical EM processes can be engendered in water, in living bodies, and in other physical material systems. The impact on science and engineering is likely to be profound – it is a great leap forward at least by 200 years.

Boyce also has a very viable watergas process, and it is my understanding that strong work is underway to be able to power automobiles and demonstrate it widely and publicly. He uses the Aharonov-Bohm effect of a toroidal coil and RF pulsing to achieve conditioning of the local vacuum uncurled A-potential with negative EM energy. A sharp little RF gradient (each little pulse) pops some electrons out of local Dirac sea holes, leaving the empty holes behind – which are negative mass energy electrons, NOT positrons.

The result of using the AB effect to smoothly condition the local volume of vacuum in which the water resides, with negative energy (a negative energy “froth” of emptied Dirac sea holes), Boyce is able to very smoothly “unhappen” the H-O bonds, strengthen the H-H and O-O bonds, and make a very viable and very useful watergas process.

With the escalating world fuel crisis and the resulting world energy crisis, it appears that the watergas process and “engineering the local vacuum” to accomplish precursor engineering of the underlying precursor statistical processes creating and sustaining a given object or process is something whose “time has come”. It can be rigorously tested by our academic community, and some rigorous testing has already been done with extraordinarily positive results.

The potential for powering our automobiles, trains, ships, etc. with watergas is tremendously important. One inputs water only, and the engine outputs water only. So one takes some water from the environment, uses the vacuum to engineer it, then uses the watergas to power out loads, and exhausts only WATER back to the same environment. Thus it is an environment-enhancing process par excellence, and it could greatly clean up our present pollution of our precious biosphere.

We point out that the Fogal semiconductor has also demonstrated the ability to directly engineer its surrounding local spacetime for nearly 20 years now, and Fogal has continued to be rigorously suppressed, even though several important and competent independent laboratories have tested his chip and verified its unique functioning – such as instant communication to any distance without travel through the “intervening” ordinary space between the two widely separated points. He actually uses a multiply-connected spacetime for that communication, so any number of widely separate points can have “instant communication” between them with no time delay at all. Again, this has been independently tested and verified.

For example, Dan Solomon, (Dean of the College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, North Carolina State University) has also rigorously and theoretically shown that throwing out negative energy from physics (the relativistic extension of the Shrödinger equation, Dirac’s theory, and from quantum field theory) was and is a serious mistake. One may Google quite a few important papers by Solomon, many published in high quality scientific journals.

E.g., see Dan Solomon, "Some new results concerning the vacuum in Dirac’s hole theory," Physica Scripta, Vol. 74, 2006, p. 117–122. Quoting:

“In Dirac’s hole theory (HT), the vacuum state is generally believed to be the state of minimum energy. It will be shown that this is not, in fact, the case and that there must exist states in HT with less energy than the vacuum state. It will be shown that energy can be extracted from the HT vacuum state through application of an electric field.”

See also (1) Dan Solomon, “Some differences between Dirac's hole theory and quantum field theory.” Can. J. Phys., Vol. 83, 2005, pp. 257-271; (2) “Mathematical Inconsistencies in Dirac Field Theory,” 1999. Available at quant-ph/9904106.

Particularly see Dan Solomon, “Negative energy density for a Dirac-Maxwell field.” 1999. Available at gr-qc/9907060. See  .
     Abstract: It is well known that there can be negative energy densities in quantum field theory. Most of the work done in this area has involved free non-interacting systems. In this paper we show how a quantum state with negative energy density can be formulated for a Dirac field interacting with an Electromagnetic field. It will be shown that, for this case, there exist quantum states whose average energy density over an arbitrary volume is a negative number with an arbitrarily large magnitude.

We posted a write-up on the watergas process on our website, the little article “MEG Aharonov-Bohm Effect, Watergas, Negative Energy, Negative Probabilities, Precursor Engineering, Extending the Scientific Method, and EM Limitations,” 7 April 2008.

The late Eugene Mallove published two very important articles by D. L. Dotson, “Dirac’s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy, Part I, New Energy, Issue 43, 2002, pp. 1-20 (available at available at and D. L. Dotson, “Dirac’s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy, Part II, New Energy, Issue 44, 2002, pp. 1-24; available at

Quoting Hotson:

“I think if one had to point to a single place where science went profoundly and permanently off the track, it would be 1934 and the emasculation of Dirac’s equation.” [D. L. Hotson, “Dirac’s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy, Part I, New Energy, Issue 43, 2002, pp. 1-20. Quote is from p. 1.]

So watergas and the use of precursor engineering (conditioning the local vacuum/spacetime first, and then allowing that conditioned vacuum/spacetime to directly alter a situation, an object, or a state, are two things whose “time has come”.

And it couldn’t come at a better time than now, with the energy crisis and a great economic debacle descending directly upon the U.S. and Western Europe.

Best wishes

Tom Bearden