______________________________________________________________________________
|  File Name      : TILLEY.ASC       |  Online Date     :  09/19/95          |
|  Contributed by : Rick Andersen    |  Dir Category    :  ENERGY            |
|  From           : KeelyNet BBS     |  DataLine        :  (214) 324-3501    |
|           KeelyNet * PO BOX 870716 * Mesquite, Texas * USA * 75187         |
|        A FREE Alternative Sciences BBS sponsored by Vanguard Sciences      |
|              InterNet email keelynet@ix.netcom.com (Jerry Decker)          |
|      Files also available at Bill Beaty's http://www.eskimo.com/~billb     |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Tilley.msg   6/21/95   by Rick Andersen

***** Hi Jerry! I started writing this to Robert Tilley who has been asking
a lot of questions lately on the Message base about "Potential" as Tom
Bearden treats it in his "Final Secret" papers...

Well, it got long and I figured you might want it as a file... if not,
could you please post it on the message board as a reply to Tilley, since
I don't know how to upload a text file (not in real time) to the message
area. -- Thanks.   Rick  ********************
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FROM: Rick Andersen
TO: Robert Tilley
SUBJECT: Potential

Dear Robert,

I don't get on here very often because I end up with a nasty phone bill too
quickly... however, I've been reading your many inquiries about Potential and
especially Bearden's treatment of it, and I wanted to let you know that you're
not alone on your rocky road. I don't know if HE knows what he's talking about
either-- yet I continue to be intrigued by his papers. (I've been pulling my
hair out over them for about 3 years now.)

Bearden's "Final Secret of Free Energy" paper(s) hinges upon the concept of a
mysterious material called a "Degenerate Semiconductor" (DS), which is
switched across a source of potential (i.e., a battery) for a very short
time-- so short, in fact, that electrical current doesn't even get a chance to
start flowing yet (but the Potential does, supposedly), before we switch the
DS material AWAY from the source potential.

Supposedly, the potential itself races down the wire (or the DS) at the speed
of light; however, since current is not yet flowing, it is pure potential
gradient distributed across a chargeable mass. Bearden claims that we can thus
'synthesize' current & power when our now-isolated potential gradient
"couples" to the electrons in the DS. Then, like anxious horses straining at
the bit to get out of their stalls and into the race, we "gate" the DS to the
circuit load, and IT now becomes a temporary power source for the load:
somewhat like charging and discharging a capacitor or inductor, but without
using any current from the battery to do the charging... yet SUPPLYING
discharge current from the DS to the load.

Bearden's whole concept stands or falls on whether or not you can extract a
current-free potential gradient from a battery (with NO discharge of current
from that battery) and transfer it across a load, powering that load until the
DS itself is discharged by the load.

I refer to the DS as "mysterious" because, when I asked Bearden over the phone
what it was made of, he told me that I ought to "engage that mass of gray
matter between my ears and come up with" a suitable material.  (See my
KeelyNet file POLARIZE.ASC)

Translation:  He doesn't know, any more than you or I, because this is a
mental CONCEPT he is writing about, not a real experiment!  You will find that
in all of his writings he tells wonderful anecdotal stories about lonely,
misunderstood inventors and their incredible inventions that run on scalar
energy-- but any details that would enable you or me to build the devices are
always proprietary. He says, "Go get 'em, tigers!" to us, but we never know
how to get started because the salient details are never available. I've
whined about this more than once on the net but I never hear any official
rebuttals or clarifications. It's just like the "I've been had" feeling you
get when you send for "get-rich-quick" books and systems in the mail and find
that, once you've read through all the fluff, there was nothing to sink your
teeth into.

Yet will all this, I'm still fascinated by his books! Why? Because there's
just enough good stuff in them to keep you wondering if he's not on to
something very important. (Maybe I'm a compulsive gambler at heart!) I'm
speaking here of his Scalar EM in general, as outlined in his pre-1990's
books; I'm not very impressed with his latest "free-energy" revelations.

Anyway, that short time between initial switching of the DS material to the
battery, allegedly called "Relaxation Time", when no current has had a chance
to flow yet, needs to be checked up on.

A friend of mine with degrees in Physics and Electronics has been checking up.
(He, too, is intrigued by Bearden's Scalar EM but is very leery of his more
recent papers on free energy, especially since Bearden takes it upon himself
to re-define many key terms such as energy, potential, voltage, etc.)

The following is from his own notes written in response to Bearden's "Final
Secret" paper:

Bearden's definition of Relaxation Time is

   "The time it takes for the free electrons in a conductor (or material)
   to reach the skin of the wire after potential is applied"

Here's the "real" definition of "relaxation time" (compare to Bearden's):

Relaxation Time is the amount of time required to orient the randomly-arranged
dipoles in a DIELECTRIC (i.e., a non-conductor) in the direction of a locally-
applied potential gradient. Nothing more, nothing less.

[McGraw-Hill "Handbook of Physics", E.V. Condon, editor; pp. 4-117, 4-118.]

In response to Bearden's remark that the relaxation time of quartz is about 10
days, my friend responds, "Ten days?! You could wait ten YEARS and never see
current flow through quartz!"

Here is the reason that Bearden's idea won't work (and I'm as sad about it as
you are):

Anytime you attempt to place a potential difference across a load, EVEN IF IT
DRAWS NO CURRENT, a current will flow IN THE SOURCE ITSELF, causing it to lose
energy. This IS in Maxwell's original quaternion equations (under the term
"Displacement Current", though Bearden never mentions it. I wonder if he is
aware?).  Even if you tried to impress a potential gradient across a classical
(empty) vacuum, current would be drawn (and flow through) the source of the
potential. Again, current flow in a load is NOT required for transfer of
energy from source to load. This is a very important point and needs to be
mulled over for a while.

When Bearden says

   "The scattering of energy in the internal resistance is actually doing
   work to upset the chemistry that is maintaining the battery's charge
   separation (the bipolarity)... the source's separation of charges...
   is being destroyed as the current flows, and this in turn destroys the
   source of the potential gradient"

My friend responds that this is an invalid argument: A charged capacitor is
electrically identical to a battery with ZERO internal resistance--yet it will
eventually discharge, will it not?  But no current flows through it, nor is
any power dissipated in it! [Non-electrical people often don't realize that
capacitors and inductors DON'T obey Ohm's Law, nor do they dissipate POWER.]
The act of using anything to generate a potential necessitates the removal of
charge carriers (namely ELECTRONS) from it, as they represent, in effect, a
quantum of potential.

It needs to be understood that the above facts instantly nullify any "free
energy" scheme which is based upon placing a potential difference across a
load that is initially at a constant potential (e.g., a conductor).  In
Bearden's terms, this is an "anti-dissipation of potential", which mandates
current from somewhere-- the SOURCE.

Reality always "bites" when it slaps you in the face and wakes you up from the
trance you've been in while reading some of the "free-energy" stuff out there
(I'm not throwing out the baby with the bath water, mind you).

I hope this has been of some help to you; I know you have 10,000 other
questions, and so do I.  Wouldn't it be neat if Tom Bearden were to make
himself available for direct discussion on the net???????

-- Rick Andersen

                      (See my KeelyNet file POLARIZE.ASC)

          Translation:  He doesn't know, any more than you or I.....
        (sorry, Rick, some stuff at the end of the file was garbled...)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------