- Delivering Truth Around the World
Custom Search

Tom Bearden

Smaller Font Larger Font RSS 2.0

Tom sends out periodic "up-dates" regarding his thoughts about the energy crisis and the ramifications of getting free energy. Below is a copy of a note he sent today:

I've been sending "close hold" messages to various high level persons, trying to engender some appreciation of the unsuspected cause of the escalating energy crisis and the dependence on oil, coal, etc. All this can be solved, once the problem is understood from the proper perspective.

It doesn't have to be that way at all, once the unsuspected reason is understood. But it's quite "eerie", and so has rather completely escaped the notice of our own scientific community, etc.
Anyway, perhaps this will do some good, perhaps not. But it's a try anyway.
Hope you like the little informal write-ups and the attempts to explain what is actually a very subtle subject.
Hang in there,
Very best wishes,

To. Mr. "X"
International Organization "Y" 
Dr. Mr. "X": 
I wanted to share with you some insights into the rapidly escalating world energy crisis that are almost completely unknown by our scientists and engineers worldwide. The energy problem is a physics problem, not an electrical engineering problem. In as close to layman's terms as possible, we will reveal why the electrical engineers can never solve it, and yet the solution sits there in physics right now, in quantum field theory and quantum electrodynamics. So for your technical evaluation of this correspondence, please utilize one or more good physicists, not conventional electrical engineers. 
Please bear with this ensemble of communications; I assure you that the information is of the utmost importance if we wish to solve the world energy crisis before it destroys the U.S. economically -- and perhaps destroys much of the Western world. As another example, it could be pursued by China to very quickly solve it's "soot strangulation" problem for its cities, due to the rapid deployment of so many rather dirty coal-burning electric power plants.  
The energy crisis is quickly solvable, once it is really understood. Al Gore's "new Manhattan Project" -- if properly directed -- would do it in about two years. 
Also, please check particularly the article by Les Pastor (with some input from me) at link .
If you never read anything else on the energy problem, please read the article at that link. It is heavily referenced, it is startling, and it is quite true!

 The material is also documented by cited hard references, and your physicists can check them as you wish.  
If you read down to the end, there's also a surprise waiting. We present substantial evidence that our own U.S. Department of Energy may have had self-powering permanent magnet motors and motor-generators since at least 2001, and have hidden it from the U.S. President, the Congress, and the American public. Please read the three patent references there, and realize that with asymmetric permanent magnets one can easily assemble self-powering permanent magnet motors at will. See how the U.S. DoE took over an already-patented process to easily make asymmetric permanent magnets, and then draw your own conclusion as to why they did it. And as to why they have deliberately kept it very, very quiet.

So let us begin.
First, we point out that it is incredibly easy to evoke a steady and unending free flow of real, observable, usable EM energy from the local vacuum environment. That is a piece of cake, already proved in every electrical engineering textbook on the planet, but totally not comprehended by our electrical engineers. Here's an easy way to demonstrate it. 
E.g., just lay an ordinary permanent magnet on the table. On top of it, lay an electret so that the E-field of the electret is at right angles to the H-field of the magnet. Costs $2, perhaps takes a minute or two. Then just leave it alone, and don't let anything change it. 
By every EE textbook in every electrical engineering department in every technical university on this planet, that silly gadget will sit there and freely pour out a steady Poynting energy flow S, given by the simple little equation S = E X H. It will do so until the end of time, if not disturbed or changed. 
Well, let's just believe the standard texts on that gadget. If you already have a free and steady "EM energy wind", that will flow unceasingly, then all you need is a proper "EM energy windmill" system. This "windmill system" must sit in that flow, completely disconnected from the magnet and electret, and divert a bit of that freely flowing energy into its own separate circuit and collect it there. Then it must separately dissipate that collected free energy in the loads to power them. 
We now speak in terms of rigorous group theory (which is known to give as penetrating an insight in mathematical equations and systems as is possible).  Physicists are trained in group theory, but electrical engineers are not. 
You see, that "windmill" system we now need is a priori an "asymmetric" system. And eerily, by their own highly mutilated model, our electrical engineers are totally prohibited from building such asymmetric systems, even though asymmetric systems occur in Maxwell's actual theory. Our EEs have been deliberately conditioned to only build symmetrical systems since the very birth of electrical engineering itself. 
Maxwell died in 1879, and immediately the electrical scientists -- who hated the quaternions with a passion -- leaped in and tore Maxwell's equations apart. Most notable were Heaviside, Gibbs, and Hertz. 
In 1892, just before electrical engineering was born, the leading electrical scientists (there were only a few of them, worldwide) were working with the Heaviside equations (which are already a terrible curtailment of Maxwell's actual theory; Maxwell's theory is 20 quaternion-like equations in 20 unknowns and contains both symmetric and asymmetric systems). The plan was to use these highly simplified Heaviside vector equations as a "new" model of Maxwell's work, and set up a new thing to be called "electrical engineering", using the Heaviside equations as its mathematical model. 
At the time, Tesla -- who gave us AC power, radio, the rotating magnetic field that made modern generators possible, and many other advances. -- had already discovered asymmetric Maxwellian systems. He had discovered that the "medium itself was active" and that one could extract free EM energy directly from the active medium. And he was hell-bent on giving the world free, clean EM energy on a grand scale, just as he had given them AC power instead of the Morgan/Edison highly limited and terribly expensive DC systems.  
Quoting Tesla: “Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can drive the world's machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any other of the common fuels." [Nikola Tesla]. 
Here's how he stated it when speaking to the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, in 1891: 
"Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point in the universe. This idea is not novel... We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who derives power from the earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians...Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static our hopes are in vain; if kinetic – and this we know it is, for certain – then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature." [Nikola Tesla, in a speech in New York to the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, 1891. Quoted from back cover of his biography, Margaret Cheney, Tesla: Man Out of Time]. 
Was Tesla "nuts" or had he really discovered how to freely extract EM energy from the local active medium? In other words, had he uncovered asymmetric circuits that allowed this to be done? 
Barrett, a co-founder of ultrawideband radar and a higher group electrodynamicist of note, analyzed some of Tesla's actual patented circuits, using quaternion electrodynamics. See T. W. Barrett, "Tesla's Nonlinear Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC) Theory," Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie, 16(1), 1991, p. 23-41. Barrett rigorously shows that EM expressed in quaternions allows shuttling and storage of potentials in circuits, and also allows additional EM functioning of a circuit that a conventional EM analysis cannot reveal. He shows that Tesla’s patented circuits did exactly this.
In the hard physics literature, rigorous proof that eliminating the arbitrary Lorentz condition provides systems having free additional energy currents from the vacuum is given by M. W. Evans, P. K. Anastasovski, T. E. Bearden et al., “Classical Electrodynamics without the Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the Vacuum,” Physica Scripta, Vol. 61, 2000, p. 513-517.

By destroying J. P. Morgan's (and Edison's) dreams of a vast DC power plant empire, Tesla had incurred the undying hostility of Morgan, who was a ruthless empire-builder. Morgan recognized Tesla as his mortal enemy, and he set up procedures that destroyed Tesla. Morgan also destroyed Westinghouse, Tesla's backer. 
But Morgan was also concerned about this new-fangled "electrical engineering" that was to be set up. So he called in his scientific advisors, and demanded to know if that Heaviside model contained any of those confounded Tesla "energy from the active medium" systems.  
Now we have had group theory in our universities since 1870s. And Morgan had the best scientists available (such as Fleming) as his scientific advisors. They simply recognized that the Tesla "energy from the vacuum" systems were actually asymmetrical systems, in terms of group theory. So they did a standard group theory analysis, and found that yes, the Heaviside equations were indeed asymmetrical and thus they still contained some of those dreadful Tesla "energy from the active medium" systems. And they so-informed Morgan, their ruthless boss. 
Morgan coldly commanded them to "Fix it!"

Lorentz -- a great scientist who was also noted for appropriating and using other scientists' work and taking credit for it -- was the man who was "tinkering" with the Heaviside work to come up with the new model for electrical engineering. And brother Lorentz was a "fellow one could deal with". [For who did what and who took credit for it, see particularly J. D. Jackson and L. B. Okun, "Historical roots of gauge invariance," Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 73, July 2001, p. 663-680. Discusses roots and history of gauge invariance, verifies that Ludwig Lorenz (without the “t”) first symmetrically regauged Maxwell's equations, although it has been misattributed to H. A. Lorentz (with the “t”) as being first.] 
Morgan's scientists slyly elicited Lorentz to "fix the problem". And so he did, quickly and easily. 
In 1892, Lorentz simply appropriated some work already done by Lorenz (without the "t") and symmetrized the Heaviside equations, taking credit for it himself. That meant that Lorentz deliberately and arbitrarily discarded all remaining Maxwellian asymmetric systems -- from the equations that a little later were used for the electrical engineering model itself. 
Oops! There went all the original Maxwellian EM energy flow "windmill" systems! They were all deliberately discarded by Lorentz, at the elicitation of Morgan in order to prevent teaching any theory that made possible those confounded Tesla "energy freely from the active medium" systems.
That mutilated Heaviside-Lorentz model is what was then adopted as the model to be used by the new "electrical engineering" just being formed and to be taught in the universities worldwide. And that mutilated model is still what is sadly being taught in all electrical engineering departments in all our universities worldwide. 
And all the proper "EM energy windmill" systems were already totally excluded from that EE model. Since its very inception, electrical engineering has thought, designed, built, and deployed only symmetrical Maxwellian systems -- none of which can freely extract and use excess free EM energy from the local environment. Indeed, the symmetrizing of their EE model was deliberately done so that all future young electrical engineers would never think, design, build, and deploy free EM energy "windmill" systems a la Tesla's energy from the active medium discoveries. 
So since 1892, none of our electrical engineers has ever dealt with a single asymmetrical Maxwellian system. And none do so today. 
Eerily, that is the reason -- and the total reason -- for the present world energy crisis, our dependence on fuel and big nuclear power etc. -- and for electrical engineers not even being taught what actually powers every electrical circuit. It ISN"T cranking the shaft of the generator! All that cranking the generator shaft does is continually restore the internal source dipole of the generator, that the silly EE symmetrical circuit keeps deliberately destroying faster than it uses some of the free EM energy -- freely extracted from the local vacuum by the proven broken symmetry of that source dipole formed inside the generator -- to power its loads. 
Our engineers are, and always have been, trained to build systems which (1) use their internal source dipole's asymmetry to extract the free flow of EM energy from the vacuum, which then pours out of the generator terminals and through space along the external conductors. If the circuits and systems were ASYMMETRIC and just left the source dipole alone once it was formed, it would not be destroyed once made. Then we would not have to crank the shaft of the generator at all, once the dipole was made at the beginning. Then all such asymmetrical circuits would exhibit COP>1.0, and -- with addition of clamped positive feedback -- they would be self-powered by energy already freely extracted directly from the seething virtual state vacuum (by the broken symmetry of that source dipole that is now being preserved). 
Please bear with this exposition! 
Note that the discovery of modern broken symmetry, predicted by Lee and Yang, was a great revolution in physics. With Lee and Yang's startling prediction, the major experimental physicists leaped on it immediately, and Wu and her colleagues proved it experimentally in Feb. 1957. So dramatic a physics revolution was this, that with unprecedented speed the Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Prize to Lee and Yang in the same year, in Dec. 1957. 
And in the  intervening half-century, the tremendous impact of that discovery has not made it across the university campus from the physics department to the sad old electrical engineering department.  
Electrical engineers still do not actually comprehend what powers every electrical system and circuit. They are taught that it is the mechanical energy one inputs to crank the generator shaft. Let's track it and see. We crank the generator shaft, introducing mechanical shaft energy. All the mechanical shaft energy does is get transformed into the internal rotating magnetic field (courtesy of Nikola Tesla). Since changing the form of energy is the rigorous definition of "work", then cranking the shaft of the generator requires work. 
Then that internal rotating magnetic field energy is dissipated from right there inside the generator to force internal opposite charges apart and form the internal source dipole. That dissipation of the rotating magnetic field energy from the system is the end (as far as the system using it) of the mechanical shaft input energy. It has NOT powered the external circuit and the loads, and it DOES NOT power them at all. 
Once that dipole (with its proven broken symmetry) is made, modern physics tells us that the dipole's proven broken symmetry steadily absorbs virtual photons from the seething virtual state vacuum, integrates the absorbed virtual energy coherently to quantum size, and re-emits the absorbed energy as a steady stream of real, observable photons that continually form and replenish the so-called "static" EM fields and potentials associated with the source charge or dipole. (A "static" field or potential is thus actually a nonequilibrium steady-state system, and so nonequilibrium thermodynamics applies, not the sad old equilibrium thermodynamics with its infamous second law). 
So every EM system and circuit ever built is already powered by energy taken directly from the seething modern vacuum. If we would just let the formed internal source dipole alone and not continually destroy it, we would never have to input any more mechanical shaft energy, once the source dipole had been formed. 
Our input of energy is necessary only because we very stupidly build only symmetrical EM circuits, which continually destroy their own source dipolarity (cutting off the free extraction of EM energy from the vacuum) faster than they use a bit of that free energy to power the loads. 
As Nobelist Lee remarks, when we have a broken symmetry, then something virtual has become observable. Every source charge is actually a part of a dipolarity when its polarized modern vacuum is considered. 
For your information, attached below is a copy of some correspondence I've had with high level agencies, omitting their names out of courtesy. We also include the actual reference citations; please have some PHYSICISTS -- who understand quantum field theory and group theory -- check the references. In modern physics, e.g., every charge is already comprised of a bare charge in the middle surrounded by a charge of opposite sign. Each of the two charges -- even for a single classical electron! -- is infinite, and each already has infinite energy. But the difference between these two infinite charges is finite, and our instruments (peering through the surrounding screen of opposite charge at the bare charge in the center) see only that finite difference. That is standard modern physics -- but the EEs certainly do not know it and probably not a single one of them would even believe it. 
For your information, attached below is the copy of some correspondences with higher agencies, so you can also see the reference citations. 
Very best wishes, 
Tom Bearden
Huntsville, AL
(256) 533-3682

From: Tom Bearden

Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 8:46 AM

Hi (high-level correspondent) 
Glad to hear from you, and sorry you're still in problems from your serious car accident. Hang in there and our prayers are with you for your complete recovery. 
Here Doris and I are still just only able to keep plugging a bit. She has had a stroke followed by two heart attacks, so I am very fortunate to still have my beloved wife with me. As you know, I had a heart attack in 2001, after undiagnosed 33 years of biological warfare poisoning done by my own governmental "guys". I was diagnosed with it finally in Dec. 2001, spent 2002 as my "year on antibiotics", and thereby finally rid my system of the BW-modified mycoplasma in my red blood cells after 33 years. But everything was damaged in that 33 years -- brain, nervous system, muscle system, skeletal system, internal organs, blood vessels and heart, etc. And nothing known to medical science can restore all that. 
I'm able to stand about two minutes, walk about 100 feet, and can drive locally but cannot travel. I buy all our meals precooked at restaurants and cafes and bring them in; neither of us is able to cook etc. 
Nonetheless we still are doing our best to keep hanging in there.

Just recently I posted on my website the negative energy/negative probabilities mechanism for Dr. John Kanzius' proven watergas process, whereby one simply "tickles" the local vacuum (in which the water is located) a bit so that it takes on some negative energy froth, and then this "unhappens" the O-H molecular bond. It just disappears due to the negative probabilities now adding into the underlying fundamental statistical operations (all the way up from the seething virtual state vacuum particle flux) that continually creates and sustains the observable world and all its parts -- in this case, particularly the water molecule. When the O-H bonds start "unhappening" and just vanishing, one gets bubbles of H2 and O2 being freed. Not explosive, however, since in that bubbling region it is difficult for the O-H bond to form at all again. But just pipe the gas bubbles a few inches away from the "negative vacuum energy froth" region, and into the combustion chamber of a combustion engine, and one is back to the normal positive energy/positive probabilities situation and the O-H bond is now quite possible again. The H2 and O2 will now give good, clean hydrogen combustion in the chamber, powering the engine and producing nothing but water vapor out of the exhaust. 
Water in, water vapor out. Very simple and easy, using sharp gradient but tiny RF pulses to create a "froth" of little sharp energy gradients in the local Dirac sea, popping out some electrons and leaving behind the Dirac Sea holes, which are negative mass-energy electrons (the dark matter our astrophysicists are so avidly seeking) which -- as source charges -- produce negative energy EM fields and potentials (the so-called "dark energy" our astrophysicists are also so avidly seeking). 
Kanzius' watergas process was rigorously tested and validated by a renowned water chemist, and he pronounced it the greatest advance in water chemistry in 100 years. 
That is the same mechanism Dr. Kanzius uses in his cancer cure process, now being developed by a legitimate cancer research institute. Phase one animal experiments have just been completed, and the tumors in the lab animals were cured 100%, easily and efficiently. Just by properly "tickling the vacuum" in the region in which the tumor resides -- so that the tumor's local vacuum has a "negative energy froth" in it. The tumor (and all its processes) then just "unhappens", solving the problem.
When negative energy appeared in physics back in the 20s, its implications severely shocked and frightened the leading mathematical physicists. It meant that, using a judicious combination of positive energy vacuum and negative energy froth in it, one can directly engineer physical reality itself. What one is able to "unhappen" depends on how one shapes the "tickling" and thereby shapes the resulting "negative energy froth". So one result of developing this technology is that it will eventually allow very easy and simple cure of all diseases, including reversing the effect of aging etc. 
But the leading physicists such as Heisenberg and Pauli, frightened out of their minds, then beat the physics community scientists (such as Paul Dirac) so fiercely that they forced the abrupt and arbitrary removal of negative energy and negative probabilities from physics, including from Dirac's theory, in 1934. (They could not remove it from quantum electrodynamics (QED), because the QED vacuum can indeed have negative energy values. What so frightened them was their realization that negative energy and negative probabilities could be judiciously added to positive energy and positive probabilities to enable the direct engineering of physical reality itself. 
Nonetheless, this "precursor engineering" -- the ability to directly engineer the interacting spacetime before it then interacts with the observable mass system of interest and generates forces and force effects to one's tailored desire -- is, I believe, the wave of the future in both medicine and physics.  
I'm doing all I can to call scientific attention to the totally unrecognized fundamental cause of the world energy crisis also, and to its solution -- simply, easily, quickly, cheaply, cleanly, and permanently. 
For your information, here is a copy of some correspondence I made to a high level agency, with of course the names of my correspondents removed. Hope it helps shed light on this area for you. 
Please hang in there and keep going! Your work is important, and we need all the good guys to keep charging until this next scientific breakthrough area is accomplished. 
Very best wishes,
Tom Bearden

Hi (Correspondent),
Per our phone conversation, below is an E-mail I sent to certain folks in a certain high-level agency to introduce them to what is actually the unsuspected true cause of the energy crisis. 
Check particularly the article by Les Pastor (with some input from me) at .
If you never read anything else on the energy problem, please read the article at that link. It is heavily referenced and it is quite true! 
If someone in the organization you are referring to wishes to send a good physicist down to see me, I'll be happy to give him a four hour briefing, answer all his questions to the best of my ability, etc. If really seriously interested, I'll spend a second half-day with him also. 
We need to get this presently unknown and startling information to Al Gore, Pickens, and to others at high levels who are true activists, and who already know that "business as usual" and "more of the same old same-oh" will not solve the energy problem but will simply guarantee the economic failure of the United States and perhaps even of Western civilization itself. 
The very first requirement is to inform the targeted audience of what the true -- and presently totally unsuspected -- energy problem really is, and then show them how easy it would be to solve it with the proper physics team. It is NOT an electrical engineering problem; indeed, electrical engineering itself (and its deliberate mutilation in 1892 by Lorentz at the elicitation of J. P. Morgan) is the real problem -- eerily -- as we explain. 
Hope this helps. 
Very best wishes,
Dear Mr. X and Mr. Y: 
Quoting an editorial in the New York Times:  
"...a nation holding less than 3 percent of the world’s oil reserves while guzzling 20 percent of the world’s production will never be able to drill its way out of its dependency on foreign oil." [Editorial, "T. Boone Pickens Rides the Wind," New York Times, July 22, 2008]. 
The Times editor is absolutely correct, and I couldn't agree with him more strongly. It is particularly true when we realize that the world oil supply rate has peaked while population and energy demands continue to steadily increase. 
Your forbearance is obviously requested in reading this note. If the real cause of the world energy crisis is quite unknown to all our scientists and scientific agencies, it must involve something very different and "peculiar" (of course, assuming that the present writer is sane and sober!). If the solution is actually quite simple, then the cause must also be simple. But to have escaped formal recognition so long, that simple cause must also be extremely subtle. So I urgently request that you get some physicists (particularly knowledgeable in group theory, quantum electrodynamics, quantum field theory, quantum mechanics, gauge field theory, etc.) to look at the information in this note. Specifically, they need to understand something of group theory (which has been in our universities since 1870), quantum field theory, and the physics of the modern vacuum. Good physicists just about always receive good training in group theory. As is known, some of the most powerful and penetrating insights into the physical reality world can only be stated in group theory form. 
But note that electrical engineers almost never receive any training in group theory, and so they have little or no notion what you have posed when you point out the arbitrary symmetrization of the Heaviside equations by Lorentz in 1892, to provide the present electrical engineering model and technology. 
It's amusing but also very sad (and economically disastrous) that our academics and scientific agencies still do not understand why we have an energy crisis, nor do they understand how it could be solved very readily. So I would implore you to go beyond the horribly (and deliberately) mutilated electrical power engineering and see what modern physics can do to shed light on the energy crisis and how to very quickly, cheaply, cleanly, and simply solve it -- permanently. 
Enclosed below is a little E-mail letter I wrote to a high level agency that was seeking to do something about the energy situation, etc.. This is for your information just in case anyone is really interested in how this was all deliberately set up by the Lorentz symmetrization (at J. P. Morgan's elicitation) of the Heaviside equations in 1892. 
Ugh! See the subtlety: No one ever asks the question: "What were and are the drastic ramifications of Lorentz symmetrizing the Heaviside equations and releasing that mutilated model in 1892 as the model for the new electrical engineering just being born?"  
First let's talk a bit about "getting EM energy copiously and freely available, for use in powering our loads and our civilization". 
You do not have to consume fuel or material of any kind, to evoke tremendous, free, continuing flows of real, usable Poynting EM energy from the modern seething vacuum. To get such free and continuous EM energy flow, you need spend only a few dollars, and a few minutes. It's easy, as we detail a bit later!  
So, given an unending and free "EM energy wind", then the entire remaining problem is this: How does one build a proper "EM energy flow windmill" system to sit in that unending and free energy "wind" flow, divert a bit of the freely flowing EM energy and collect it in the windmill system, and then separately dissipate that freely collected energy in our loads to power them? 
Electrical engineering -- back just before its birth -- was deliberately "fixed" so that it could never think, design, build, and deploy such "electric wind flow windmill" systems to catch and freely use the free energy flow already (unknowingly) evoked in every dipolar EM circuit and system. Electrical engineering of today cannot and does not build systems that "sit separately in the resulting energy flow and divert and collect some of the energy." Instead, it only builds symmetrized systems whose "collector" (external circuit) is wired in a closed current loop directly with the source dipole inside the generator. Such a system has equal forward and backward emf regions, and so it spends half its collected free energy from the vacuum to do nothing but destroy the source dipole inside the generator -- thereby cutting off the free flow of EM energy from the vacuum via that source dipole. The other half of the collected energy is used to power the loads and losses in the "external circuit".
Well, since (with a 100% efficient process) it takes as much energy input to do work on the internal charges inside the generator and restore that lost dipolarity, as was used by the silly symmetrical circuit to destroy that source dipole in the first place, the overall result is that we always have to put back in more externally-input energy just to restore the dipolarity and its broken symmetry, as we get out in the loads alone. 
Obviously that symmetrized circuit is arbitrarily limited to a COP<1.0. That is not a requirement of nature, but it is a requirement of our stupid symmetrized Heaviside-Lorentz circuit! 
So with our standard EE circuits and systems which self-enforce overall symmetry, we then have to keep cranking the shaft of the generator -- not to "power the circuit and the loads" directly, but to keep restoring that dipole inside the generator -- that the silly symmetrical circuit keeps destroying faster than it powers its loads, by unwitting but intentional design. 
If you never read anything else in your life on the energy crisis, please read the article at link  and also please read the following little note. Please have your physicist advisors also check the exposition and the references. 
Once you understand that paper, you will begin to understand why our own horribly flawed electrical power engineering has unintentionally limited us to having to burn fuel or consume nuclear materials, get some mechanical wind energy, get some water current energy, or use some of the sun's free radiation energy -- not to power our loads, but to keep restoring the source dipole in our generators and other electrical systems. 
Very best wishes,
Tom Bearden
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Retired)
(256) 533-3682

How To Solve the Energy Crisis -- Quickly, Cheaply, Cleanly, Easily, and Permanently
To (Agency X)

I would very much like to see your program take over the task of quickly solving the rapidly escalating world energy crisis, removing us from dependence on consumption of oil, fuel, and materials forever. This can be done readily, if:

     (1) the proper physics team is assembled (It is NOT an electrical engineering problem!), 
     (2) the Lorentz 1892 arbitrary symmetrization of the Heaviside equations is removed,
     (3) electrical engineering is corrected for its known falsities (pointed out by Nobelist Feynman, John Wheeler, and other eminent scientists but long ignored), and
     (4) negative energy along with negative probabilities is restored to physics after its totally arbitrary and unjustified discard in 1934. The latter move gives the shocking ability to engineer "physical reality" itself by directly engineering the precursor statistical interactions underlying and creating and sustaining it, and it represents a leap forward of a century in today's physics.  
Areas In Which Physicists Went Horribly Wrong
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.]  Available at . See also D. L. Hotson, “Dirac’s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy”, Part II, New Energy, Issue 44, 2002, pp. 1-24.  Available at
For very rigorous papers proving that, to be complete, we must restore negative energy and negative probabilities to physics, see the various published papers by Dr. Dan Solomon. For example, quoting Solomon: 
“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.” Comment: Adding a field (e.g., a gradient of a potential) across a region of space is a violation of Lorentz symmetry, since the “uniformity” of the vacuum energy density is directly altered in that region. Solomon references work in this area, performed by himself and several other researchers, for some time (since 1999). [Dan Solomon, “Some new results concerning the vacuum in Dirac’s hole theory,” Physica Scripta, Vol. 74, 2006, p. 117-122].

For many other Solomon references, simply Google on his name or see:  
Please have a good physicist read the documented story of the suppression of asymmetric EM circuits and systems (i.e., of systems capable of receiving and using excess EM energy freely from the vacuum and thus achieving COP>1.0. Then, with clamped positive feedback added, such systems with sufficient overunity COP can be made completely self-powering from the active vacuum). The long-hidden suppression story is located at .
Many eminent scientists (including some Nobelists) have pointed out the may startling and serious falsities that are presently being taught in all our universities in the electrical engineering department and EE curricula. Since the scientific community will not heed the Nobelists and other eminent scientists pointing out these blatant errors, I gathered together a listing of the major falsities the EEs are taught in their model, and placed it on my website.
For that statement of the major falsities that were and are imposed on electrical engineering, see T. E. Bearden, “Errors and Omissions in the CEM/EE Model,” available at ,
This paper on falsities taught in electrical engineering was formally reviewed by the National Science Foundation, and it passed their review.
For the National Science Foundation's statement that the "falsities" paper passed the NSF's formal review, see .
Even so, when Dr. Bement turned it over to his top EE staff for action (who are in charge of electrical power, communication, etc.) the attitude of that electrical engineering group was "There's absolutely nothing wrong with our model! We have a well-developed model. Your TV set works, doesn't it?"
In short, even though the NSF's own physicists had essentially pointed out that these falsities were indeed real falsities and not conjecture, the electrical engineers had no intention of making any changes at all in their seriously mutilated and deficient subject.
The real problem, as we shall see, is that all remaining asymmetrical Maxwellian systems were arbitrarily eliminated by Lorentz from the already-sharply-curtailed Heaviside equations in 1892. That is precisely what threw out -- quite arbitrarily -- the permissible asymmetric EM circuits and systems that are perfectly capable of producing COP>1.0 using energy from the vacuum, and also those with added clamped positive feedback that are then capable of freely powering themselves and their loads, again with EM energy freely extracted from the virtual state vacuum.
Indeed, Nikola Tesla in the 1880s had already discovered some of these permissible asymmetrical circuits, and he was hell-bent on giving the world free EM energy from the "active medium" itself, without the consumption of any fuel or materials. This is the early scientist who gave us AC power, the rotating magnetic field that makes modern electric generators possible, radio (upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1943), and many other innovations.
For proof that Nikola Tesla in the 1880s and early 1890s had in fact discovered asymmetrical EM circuits and systems (permitted by Maxwell's theory and by the original Heaviside equations), see T. W. Barrett, "Tesla's Nonlinear Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC) Theory," Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie, 16(1), 1991, p. 23-41. Barrett shows that EM expressed in quaternions allows shuttling and storage of potentials in circuits, and also allows additional EM functioning of a circuit that a conventional EM analysis cannot reveal. He shows that Tesla’s patented circuits did exactly this. [Paper is carried on the website at internet link ]
As you are probably aware, Dr. Barrett is one of the cofounders of ultrawideband radar and a very fine higher-group-symmetry electrodynamicist of considerable note. 
The Incredible Importance of Broken Symmetry Widespread Throughout the Universe
There is no problem to initiate copious free flows of EM energy directly from the local vacuum; any dipole already does it because of its proven broken symmetry, the prediction of which led to a very prompt award of the Nobel Prize to Lee and Yang with unprecedented speed, in Dec. 1957, after Wu and her colleagues had experimentally proven it in Feb. 1957. This was an astounding revolution in physics, the impact of which -- sadly -- has not yet made it across the university campus from the physics department to the electrical engineering department in the 51 years since Lee and Yang were so promptly awarded the Nobel Prize.
As Nobelist Lee remarked, whenever we have a broken symmetry, then something virtual has become observable. So the source charge (which is part of a dipolar ensemble when its polarized vacuum charge is considered) and any electric or magnetic dipole is a proven broken symmetry. It already freely and continuously extracts real, usable EM energy flow directly from the seething virtual state vacuum, according to modern physics. Indeed, since all EM fields and potentials are generated by the broken symmetry of their source charges and dipoles, then all EM energy in the universe is now and always has been extracted directly from the seething virtual state vacuum.
Quite simply, the source charge (or the source dipole) continually absorbs virtual photons from its seething vacuum interaction, coherently adds successive absorptions to reach the quantum level, and decays by re-emitting real, observable photons in a steady stream in all directions. This "steady stream of EM energy from the vacuum" is what an "EM field" or an "EM potential" really is. The so-called "static" field or "static" potential is not static at all, but -- thermodynamically -- it is a nonequilibrium steady state system, fed virtual energy continually from the vacuum and continually outputting (at light speed) real observable photons.
In short, just as Lee remarked, because of the broken symmetry of that source dipolarity, something virtual -- in this case, some virtual energy from the seething virtual state vacuum -- has been coherently integrated and re-emitted as real observable photons -- real observable, usable EM energy. 
Static EM Fields Are Not "Static" At All
You see, the so-called "static fields and static potentials" of the source dipole or source charge (together with its surrounding polarized vacuum) are actual nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) thermodynamic systems.
Here Van Flandern's beautiful analogy is of particular interest: Quoting him on the question of a "static field" actually being made of finer parts in continuous motion:
“To retain causality, we must distinguish two distinct meanings of the term ‘static’. One meaning is unchanging in the sense of no moving parts. The other meaning is sameness from moment to moment by continual replacement of all moving parts. We can visualize this difference by thinking of a waterfall. A frozen waterfall is static in the first sense, and a flowing waterfall is static in the second sense. Both are essentially the same at every moment, yet the latter has moving parts capable of transferring momentum, and is made of entities that propagate. …So are … fields for a rigid, stationary source frozen, or are they continually regenerated? Causality seems to require the latter.” [Tom Van Flandern, “The speed of gravity – What the experiments say,” Physics Letters A, Vol. 250, Dec. 21, 1998, p. 8-9]. 
A Cheap and Simple Example of an Unending Free Flow of EM Energy From the Vacuum
Here's how simple it is to extract a copious and free (and continuous) EM energy flow from the vacuum.
Lay a permanent magnet on the bench. On top of it lay an electret, so that the E-field of the electret and the H-field of the magnet are orthogonal. Then step back and leave it alone -- that's about $2 cost and one minute of your time.
By every EE text in every EE department in every technical university on this planet, that silly gadget will then sit there and steadily and freely pour out a real, usable Poynting energy flow S, given by the simple equation S = E X H. Just leave it alone, do not allow it to be broken or disturbed, and it will continue to freely pour out a free flow of real, usable Poynting energy until the end of time.
In short, even the horribly crippled electrical engineering model and theory agrees that this simple gadget will steadily pour out real Poynting EM energy flow, and it will do so until the end of time if one just leaves it alone and does not let it be changed.
So there is no problem at all in easily evoking tremendous and real EM energy flow (winds) from the vacuum -- energy flow winds that continue indefinitely and freely. 
So Why Don't We Use Free EM Energy "Wind" Flows (from the Vacuum) and Just Build Some EM "Windmills"?
The only remaining problem now is to how to build a proper and separate EM energy WINDMILL which will separately sit in that free flow of EM energy wind, divert part of it into its circuitry and collect it, then separately dissipate that freely collected energy to power our loads. That is the TOTAL problem -- and one which has been totally avoided by all our electrical engineers and professors since 1892.
That EM energy Windmill system is an asymmetric EM system a priori. It is NOT wired to the source dipoles that are extracting virtual energy from the seething virtual state vacuum and re-emitting it as real observable usable Poynting EM energy flow.
But our electrical engineering model was deliberately mutilated and crippled by Lorentz, as elicited by J. P. Morgan, in 1892, to arbitrarily eliminate all such asymmetrical "windmill" systems from the resulting horribly flawed Heaviside-Lorentz theory. Our electrical engineers build only closed loop current circuits connected directly to both the external loads and to the internal source dipole(s). In short, they build only symmetrical systems which use half their collected free energy from the vacuum to destroy their own inner source dipolarity, thus shutting off the free flow of EM energy from the vacuum.
And this is the result of the symmetrization of the Heaviside equations in 1892, by Lorentz, at the bidding of J. P. Morgan.
Since this mutilation occurred just before the birth of the new thing called "electrical engineering" that subsequently was gradually introduced into our universities, it means that EE -- from its very birth -- had already been deliberately altered so our EEs could and would never build a true asymmetric EM windmill system. 
Due to the 1892 Skullduggery, Our Scientific Community Doesn't Even Know the Real Reason for the Energy Crisis
Eerily, that is the real "energy" problem! It has laid there unrecognized for more than 100 years. Every EM system our EEs have ever designed and built, has been a symmetrical system that destroys its own free flow of EM energy from the vacuum (its source dipolarity) faster than it uses a wee bit of that energy to power the loads.
Cranking the shaft of a generator has nothing at all to do with directly powering the external system and loads! Here's what cranking the generator shaft does. We input mechanical shaft rotation energy, which is changed (by rotation of the generator) into the internal rotating magnetic field. That is a change of form of some energy, and thus rigorously it is "work". We crank the shaft just to get the transformation of mechanical input energy into rotating magnetic field energy inside the generator -- courtesy of Nikola Tesla, who invented it.
And all of that internal rotating magnetic field energy is dissipated against the charges, right there inside the generator. It is dissipated to force the positive charges in one direction and the negative charges in the other direction -- thus separating positive and negative charges to form the internal source dipole of the generator.
And that broken symmetry of that internal source dipole now continually absorbs virtual photons from the seething local vacuum and pours the energy out as real, EM energy flow -- real observable photons.
It is that "energy freely extracted from the local vacuum" that then pours out of the generator terminals through space along the external conductors.
Our electrical engineers, you see, are not even taught what actually powers our EM circuits and systems! It isn't done by cranking the shaft of the generator!
The generator actually pours out trillions of times more EM energy flow than the mechanical energy flow the  operator puts into the generator shaft. But most of it is in a very peculiar "curled" form discovered by Heaviside. Being curled, in all special relativity situations the divergence is zero, and so that huge Heaviside curled energy flow just does not normally interact with anything. It roars on off into space and is lost.
To prevent sharp young EEs from knowing of that gigantic but unused Heaviside energy flow component, Lorentz was elicited in 1900 to teach everyone to integrate the entire energy flow vector around a closed surface assumed around any volume element of interest. That neatly zeroes and discards the "nondiverging" giant Heaviside energy flow component, leaving only the divergent Poynting component that enters the circuit. You see, if some future sharp young EE had added in a general relativity situation, then the divergence of the curl need not be zero, and some of that giant Heaviside energy flow -- present with every flow of Poynting energy in every EM circuit and system -- could then be tapped and utilized. That of course would have led very quickly to circuits with clamped positive feedback, that were self-powering using some of that energy to power the switching and control, and powering all the loads continually and "for free" (with energy extracted continually from the seething vacuum).
The Poynting energy flow is not "the" total energy flow at all! But our modern classical electrodynamicists have continued to use Lorentz's sly statement that Heaviside's giant energy flow component "has no physical significance". E.g., quoting the eminent electrodynamicist Jackson:
"...the Poynting vector is arbitrary to the extent that the curl of any vector field can be added to it. Such an added term can, however, have no physical consequences. Hence it is customary to make the specific choice …" [J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, Second Edition, Wiley, 1975, p. 237].
Jackson is correct in any special relativity (fixed frame) situation. He can be quite wrong if we deliberately introduce a properly synchronized general relativity situation, since then the gradient of the curl need not be zero after all.
In that sly Lorentz integration, the remaining small energy flow component that is NOT in curled form -- i.e., the remaining small Poynting component -- is diverged into the external conductors to power up the electrons in the circuit (we are assuming a fixed frame and thus a special relativity situation).
But the EEs are trained to connect that external "collector" circuit directly to the internal source dipolarity of the generator, in a closed loop current system. This means that HALF the free "energy from the vacuum" that is freely collected in the external circuit is actually used to pump spent electrons back up through the back EMF of the source dipole inside the generator. This continually re-scatters and remixes the charges and thus continually destroys the internal source dipole -- thereby shutting off the free flow of EM energy from the vacuum.
So to get things going again, we have to crank the generator shaft some more, to get some more internal rotating magnetic field energy, to force those opposite charges back apart and re-form the source dipole, thus restoring the free flow of EM energy from the vacuum -- that our absolutely STUPID symmetrical circuit keeps destroying faster than it will power the loads.
And that is the total reason for the world energy crisis today! Continued sheer blindness in using only symmetrical Heaviside-Lorentz EM systems is the problem and the only problem.  But electrical engineering has become so vast and so extensive a part of everything in our society, that it has assumed the aura of a dogma or a religion. As we found in our experience with the NSF, to those actually in charge of all our electrical power system thought and study, asymmetric power systems are totally unthinkable and will not be sought or even allowed. 
Feasibility of Self-Powering Permanent Magnet Motors Via Asymmetric-field Magnets
In order to achieve self-rotation of a permanent magnet magnetic motor, one must produce broken symmetry (asymmetry) between the forward MMF and the back MMF in that otherwise symmetrical system. The bar magnets we are usually able to obtain have laterally-symmetric magnetic fields and field strengths, which is presently all that the industry manufactures. And for each such magnet, the field strength on the left side of it is equal to its field strength on its right side.
So when I have a stator N and a rotor S facing it, using such “laterally symmetrical forces”, then in the forward mmf region (where the rotor S is approaching the stator N) the rotor pole is being freely accelerated by the attractive force from the stator rotor pole in the forward mmf region, and so is having free angular momentum being generated and stored in excess in the flywheel and shaft. That's real, usable stored energy (specifically, energy x time).
But when the rotor magnetic pole passes by the stator magnetic pole, the direction of the mutual attraction force is now reversed (this is the back mmf region), and so the rotor is now decelerating and thereby decelerating the previously accelerated shaft and flywheel. If the magnetic fields of each magnet are laterally symmetric, and nothing else is done, then in the back mmf region the system will freely take back (decelerate) all the excess energy and angular momentum freely stored in the accelerated flywheel and shaft in the previous forward mmf region.
The silly symmetrical system freely stores some free energy from the vacuum during its forward mmf region, and then just as freely takes it all back from the flywheel and shaft rotation in the back mmf region.
The net force of this symmetrical arrangement is zero, and the net angular momentum generated and stored in the flywheel and shaft is also zero. In its back mmf (decelerating) region, the symmetrical permanent magnet motor system takes back all the free "energy from the vacuum" that it stored in its earlier forward mmf (accelerating) region.
So that silly thing will not give us any net self-rotation and free energy, because of that lateral field strength symmetry of the bar magnets used as stator and rotor magnets.
The only way we are going to get excess net angular momentum stored in that flywheel and shaft rotation acceleration, is to provide a broken symmetry between the forward and mmf regions. In short, we must reduce the back mmf force so that in that region not all the previously stored free angular momentum will be "taken back".
In a normal motor, we are trained to put in a coil (say, there in the back mmf region) and then we pay to put in a sudden surge of EM energy to that coil, so that its force field momentarily overrides (cancels) the back mmf force field. In short, we momentarily make the system asymmetrical, so that its net back mmf is now less than its forward mmf. That means that now the motor retains at least some of its excess acceleration and excess angular momentum added to the flywheel and shaft in its previous acceleration (forward mmf) zone, but we are “paying” to have this occur. Anyway, once that broken symmetry between forward and back mmfs is there, with the back mmf deliberately reduced to less than the forward mmf, the motor will self-rotate because of its own system asymmetry.
And so we can add a “drag load” to the shaft, to soak up all that excess energy gained in each rotation, to do work to power the load. In that case, the motor rotates continuously, furnishing energy and power to power the load continuously. But it does not do it “for free”, because we ourselves are paying for that broken symmetry all the time.
Let us be very clear! we are paying to break the symmetry, nothing else.
Now let us reason together. Nature and this system do not care how we get that broken symmetry between forward and back mmf forces. If we wish to continually "pay" for it, and thus be tied to consuming fuel to get our "payment" energy for breaking the symmetry, we can do so.
And that is precisely what everybody is and has been trained to do – ever since J. P. Morgan had Lorentz symmetrize the EE model itself, so our engineers would build only symmetrical systems and only symmetrical permanent magnets. In that case, we will always have to pay to make the required broken symmetry, and that keeps the world firmly tied to its energy crisis and its escalating economical problems.
But now suppose -- for argument's sake -- that we contract with some nanocrystalline folks, to build a special "laterally asymmetrical" permanent magnet -- i.e., a standard-looking permanent magnet (bar magnet) whose magnetic fields differ in strength laterally. The nanocrystalline folks will lay down a plane of crystals for the side edge, with full magnetic field at the beginning layer (say, on the left), then lay an adjacent plane to the right but with a slightly weaker magnetic field, and they continue laying layers to the right with successively slightly weaker magnetic fields.
The result is a permanent magnet (bar magnet) with asymmetric field strengths laterally. We can now get two of those laterally asymmetric bar magnets, and use them with a rotor and stator and shaft to make a self-rotating motor demonstrator.
Suppose we mount the rotor (say, S-pole facing the stator) and stator (say, N-pole facing the rotor) so that, when the rotor S pole is rotating and approaching the stator N pole, the strong sides of both bar magnets are facing each other. This gives a certain strong acceleration added to the flywheel and shaft, and it stores up a certain amount of free angular momentum in the rotor and flywheel, while the rotor is traversing through that “forward mmf” zone.So far, so good -- nothing unusual.
Then as the rotor magnetic S pole passes the stator magnetic N pole and enters the back mmf zone of the system, the weaker magnetic field sides of the magnets are now facing. So the deceleration in this much-weakened back mmf zone is now less than the incoming acceleration was (in the forward mmf zone). There is now a net "free" acceleration of the flywheel and shaft rotation, and thus an increase in storage of free angular momentum (energy x time) with each rotation.
That silly thing will sit there and self-rotate, till the end of time if nothing else bothers it or affects it, and so long as nothing breaks. And it will try to continually accelerate the flywheel and shaft with a net acceleration during each rotation.
This means I can now add a matched “drag (decelerating)” load to the accelerated rotating shaft, and use all that extra stored energy in the flywheel from each rotational cycle, to freely power my load.
If I match the "load drag" and the available “free asymmetry energy” net acceleration, that silly beast will sit there and self-rotate and freely power that load till the end of time, if nothing else intervenes.
In this asymmetric system (excluded deliberately by Lorentz in 1892), we do not have to pay anything for continually breaking the symmetry, after the initial costs of the laterally asymmetric magnets and assembling the system are paid!
Magnetic motors are powered by their broken symmetry, not by what breaks the original symmetry. We ourselves can continually pay to continually break the symmetry if we wish, or we can just build the system asymmetrically in the first place. Nature doesn’t care.
Note that, once the nanocrystalline folks have done their number to develop the laterally-asymmetry bar magnets, then such permanent magnets with laterally asymmetric field strengths can be put into production for not too much more than the cost of normal symmetric magnets. Or, one can find a cheaper extrusion process to make those asymmetric-field permanent magnets much more inexpensively. So we can then have those asymmetric-field magnets available worldwide and rather inexpensively.
And at that point, anyone in the world can order some laterally-asymmetric permanent magnets, and easily assemble his own self-rotating motor and thus his own self-powering system.
Indeed, there is strong evidence that precisely this has already been done, has been taken over by the Department of Energy, and has been withheld from the President, the Congress, and the American Public. Here is the evidence; the reader may draw his or her own conclusion: 
Is There a Department of Energy Suppression of Self-Powering Permanent Magnet Systems?
Consider first Vijay K. Chandhok and Bao-min Ma. “Method for producing a noncircular permanent magnet”.  United States Patent No. 4,915,891, issued April. 10,1990.

     Abstract: A method for producing a noncircular magnet having asymmetric magnetic properties along axes thereof. A particle charge of composition from which the magnet is to be produced is placed in a container, heated and extruded within the container to compact the particle charge to substantially full density. The particle charge may include at least one rare earth element. The particle charge may be extruded through a noncircular extrusion die, specifically a rectangular die. 

This apparently later came to the attention of the U.S. Department of Energy. The Department apparently contacted Chandhok and "made him a deal". They gave him a U.S. Government grant (to sweeten the pot) and then had him file a separate International patent on the process. For that second patent, see Vijak K. Chandhok, WO/2001/084569 A1) “Method for Producing through Extrusion an Anisotropic Magnet with High Energy Product”, International patent, 9 Mar. 2001. The U.S. DoE also added a note which -- translating the jargon -- means that the DoE (U.S. Government) assumed control of the process in its entirety.

     Quoting the DoE-inserted note in the patent: “This invention was made with government support under a small business research and development grant for "A Simple Process to Manufacture Grain Aligned Permanent Magnets" awarded by the U. S. Department of Energy (Grant No. DE-FG02-97-ER82313). The Government has certain rights to this invention.”  [Translating the jargon, "certain rights" means "total control"].

     Abstract: A method for producing an anisotropic magnet with high energy product through extrusion and, more specifically, by placing a particle charge of a composition from the which magnet is to be produced in a noncircular container, heating the container and particle charge and extruding the container and particle charge through a noncircular extrusion die in such a manner that one of the cross-sectional axes or dimension of the container and particle charge is held substantially constant during the extrusion to compact the particle charge to substantially full density by mechanical deformation produced during the extrusion to achieve a magnet with anisotropic magnetic properties along the axes or dimension thereof and, more specifically, a high energy product along the transverse of the smallest cross-sectional dimension of the extruded magnet. 

And then the DoE apparently had Chandhok file yet another U.S. patent! See Vijak K. Chandhok, “Method for producing through extrusion an anisotropic magnet with high energy product”, U.S. Patent No. 6,787,083 issued on Sep. 7, 2004.

     Abstract: A method for producing an anisotropic magnet with high energy product through extrusion and, more specifically, by placing a particle charge of a composition from the which magnet is to be produced in a noncircular container, heating the container and particle charge and extruding the container and particle charge through a noncircular extrusion die in such a manner that one of the cross-sectional axes or dimension of the container and particle charge is held substantially constant during the extrusion to compact the particle charge to substantially full density by mechanical deformation produced during the extrusion to achieve a magnet with anisotropic magnetic properties along the axes or dimension thereof and, more specifically, a high energy product along the transverse of the smallest cross-sectional dimension of the extruded magnet. 

One might conclude from all this that (1) Chandhok would most certainly have tested his asymmetric-field permanent magnets in actual circuits and systems, proving the asymmetry, and (2) therefore the U.S. Department of Energy has had very practical self-powering permanent magnet motors and motor-generators since at least 2001. 
Since no such announcements have been made at all, one might then conclude that therefore the Department of Energy has deliberately withheld this revolutionary information from the U.S. President, Congress, and Public. 
We leave it to the reader to draw his or her own conclusions. 
The Quick Answer to the World Energy Crisis
The quick answer to the world energy problem is to alter and change that horrid old 1880s/1890s EE model, restore its missing asymmetric Maxwellian systems, and proceed apace to rapidly develop true EM "energy windmills" to catch and utilize the free EM energy winds that are so easily and simply evoked anywhere and at anytime.
Further, It turns out that, if we add back into physics its presently missing negative energy and negative probabilities to physics (which were arbitrarily and erroneously removed in 1934), we can then proceed with direct engineering of physical reality itself. On my website, I have posted the true negative energy mechanism for watergas, specifically for Dr. Kanzius's proven and independently tested process which was independently tested by a world-renowned water chemist and pronounced the greatest advance in water chemistry in 100 years. Unfortunately, neither Kanzius nor the water chemist apparently know the exact mechanism "negative vacuum energy" mechanism that causes the O-H bond of the water molecule to just "unhappen" and disappear, immediately (and almost freely) giving H2 and O2 gases.
The same process was used first by Kanzius as a cancer cure, and is being developed by a legitimate cancer research institute. Phase One lab animal tests have just been completed by the institute, and the method easily cured 100% of the animal tumors. It is actually part of a general process that -- once developed -- will allow the ready and very simple cure of most diseases including even the effects of human aging. But our medical community has no understanding of negative energy and negative probabilities, and of just "unhappening" the cancer that has grown in the surrounding flesh. 
The Negative Energy Vacuum Froth Mechanism for "Unhappening" the Higher Energy Physical States and Entities
Very simply put, here's how the Kanzius watergas and cancer cure processes work:
If we "tickle" the local Dirac Sea with sharp gradient RF pulses of very small energy, we will pop out electrons from the local Dirac Sea holes, leaving behind the holes which are negative mass energy electrons (the so-called "dark matter" our astrophysicists are so strongly seeking). As source charges, the negative mass energy electrons (Dirac holes) then emit negative energy photons, establishing negative energy EM fields (the so-called "dark energy" our astrophysicists are also so anxiously seeking).
By use of such a local negative energy vacuum froth obtained by a little localized "tickling", we deliberately introduce negative probabilities into that entire entourage of virtual state energy/particle reactions that statistically interact along the positive energy direction to successively form higher and higher level things, including all observables. In the water molecule, e.g., the formation of the molecule depends on the availability of the O-H-bond in that set of creating and maintaining statistical interactions. When we arbitrarily then add some negative vacuum energy by "tickling", we also add in some negative probabilities -- and the last and highest energy "thing" being created and sustained is "unhappened". In a region of water contained in such a "tickled" negative energy vacuum, the O-H bond simply "unhappens" and the water falls apart into H2 and O2 bubbles mixed together. They are not very combustible or explosive there in the "tickled" vacuum region, since the O-H bond now has great difficulty in forming therein -- and to explode or burn, the H2 and O2 must again form O-H bonds and make the water molecule.
But if we then pipe the H2 and O2 gas bubbles a few inches out of the "tickled vacuum" water containment region, to the combustion chamber of a combustion engine, it is now in a "non-tickled" vacuum region again and the H2 and O2 will readily "burn" to power the engine, emitting only water vapor out the exhaust. Kanzius's proven process uses salt water, so we could easily and quickly be fueling watergas powered ships, locomotives, automobiles, and trucks with sea water taken directly from the ocean itself. 
Making Our Present Steam Boilers Self-Powering
There is also a "negative resonance absorption of the medium" (NRAM) process in optical physics, which has been there since 1967, and which gives a COP = 18.  In other words, in experiments conducted every year in the optical physics part of leading physics departments worldwide, this process produces some 18 times as much energy emission (from a self-resonating medium) as is thought to be input to it. The optical physicists are never allowed to say "excess emission" but must say "negative absorption". They are also not allowed to discuss the thermodynamics of the process.  If further applied and developed, this process used in the heat domain would immediately lead to self-powering steam boilers.  In short, once a modified steam boiler was up and running, clamped closed loop feedback could be switched in to make it self-powering.
Note particularly that the self-resonating charged particles of the NRAM medium have rotating frames to and fro. Hence a synchronized general relativity process has been deliberately initiated, and thus the conservation laws (which are purely special relativistic and apply only to one nonrotating frame) can be overcome and bypassed.
Really good physicists are aware that conservation laws -- energy, momentum, etc. -- apply only to special relativity situations, and do not necessarily apply in general relativity situations.  E.g., this was pointed out very shortly by the great Hilbert, after Einstein published the theory of general relativity. Quoting Hilbert:
"I assert... that for the general theory of relativity, i.e., in the case of general invariance of the Hamiltonian function, energy equations... corresponding to the energy equations in orthogonally invariant theories do not exist at all. I could even take this circumstance as the characteristic feature of the general theory of relativity." [D. Hilbert, Gottingen Nachrichten, Vol. 4, 1917, p. 21.].
Logunov and Loskutov comment:
"In formulating the equivalence principle, Einstein actually abandoned the idea of the gravitational field as a Faraday-Maxwell field, and this is reflected in the pseudotensorial characterization of the gravitational field that he introduced. Hilbert was the first to draw attention to the consequences of this. … Unfortunately, … Hilbert was evidently not understood by his contemporaries, since neither Einstein himself nor other physicists recognized the fact that in general relativity conservation laws for energy, momentum, and angular momentum are in principle impossible." [A. A. Logunov and Yu. M. Loskutov, "Nonuniqueness of the predictions of the general theory of relativity," Sov. J. Part. Nucl., 18(3), May-June 1987, p. 179].
Quoting Sir Roger Penrose:
“We seem to have lost those most crucial conservation laws of physics, the laws of conservation of energy and momentum!” [Penrose then adds the Killing symmetry arbitrarily, to get conservation again, when the Killing vector applies and gravity is separated.]. “These conservation laws hold only in a spacetime for which there is the appropriate symmetry, given by the Killing vector ĸ…. [These considerations] do not really help us in understanding what the fate of the conservation laws will be when gravity itself becomes an active player. We still have not regained our missing conservation laws of energy and momentum, when gravity enters the picture. ... This awkward-seeming fact has, since the early days of general relativity, evoked some of the strongest objections to that theory, and reasons for unease with it, as expressed by numerous physicists over the years. … in fact Einstein’s theory takes account of energy-momentum conservation in a rather sophisticated way – at least in those circumstances where such a conservation law is most needed. …Whatever energy there is in the gravitational field itself is to be excluded from having any representation…” [Roger Penrose, The Road to Reality, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 2005, p. 457-458.]

     Comment: This “solution” accepted by many general relativists is to just arbitrarily toss out the gravity and gravitational energy density of spacetime in a given troublesome case, and the problem of nonconservation of energy and momentum then vanishes. In short, separate the spacetime itself from the fields, and there is no problem! However, simply avoiding the problem itself is not solving the problem! Considering the neglected and unaccounted giant Heaviside energy flow always accompanying every Poynting EM energy flow, the gravity effect is always at least of importance, and this “solution” itself is in general nearly always untenable.

And application of that NRAM process to our present steam boilers is a very quick solution to most of the present world's commercial electrical energy crisis. Our electrical power plants mostly use steam boilers, and so -- once one modified NRAM steam boiler is up and running in the self-powering (clamped positive feedback) mode -- one can cut off the power plant (coal, gas, nuclear, whatever) and use that self-powering boiler to jumpstart as many more self-powering steam boilers as are needed to power the grid.
This way, we could salvage most of our present huge capital investment in steamboilers, steam powered turbines driving the generators and feeding the grid, etc. -- but we could do so without burning the fuel or using the nuclear fuel rods as now. One immediately notes the dramatic cleanup and decarbonization of the atmosphere that would occur from that step alone. 
The Impact of Self-Powering Steam Boilers on Wind Mill Farms and Solar Panel Power System Arrays
And it affects our planning on windmill farms also. One could just build a single windmill instead of a giant windmill farm. One could then use that windmill to "jumpstart' the first self-powering steam boiler, then one would not care whether the wind continued to blow or not. That single boiler could jump start all the rest that were needed.
Similarly with solar cell power systems. Instead of huge solar power arrays all over everywhere, just build one moderate system to "jumpstart" the first self-powering steam boiler. Then jumpstart as many other self-powering steam boilers as one needed to power the grid.
If, say, a couple hundred million dollars a year and a proper physics team were seriously put to work in these areas, then within two years the world energy crisis will have been solved permanently -- and cleanly and cheaply. It would dramatically clean up and reduce the present pollution of the biosphere, etc.
Please have the necessary physicists look at this message and its contents, and advise you properly. Frankly, the present scientific community -- left to its own devices -- will not do anything substantive to really solve the energy crisis, because they are not going to willingly change that horribly mutilated Heaviside-Lorentz electrical engineering model, but will just continue to exclude all proper EM "windmill" asymmetric systems. They will continue to "fiddle while Rome prepares to burn, and burn completely".
In Conclusion
It is tragic and ironic. In this universe, God has given us unlimited free EM energy pouring forth continuously from every charge and dipole in the universe. We continue to use a sadly mutilated "half theory" to deal with this EM energy, and we deliberately continue to teach packs of known lies in our EE classes worldwide. Specifically, we teach all our electrical engineers to only build symmetrical systems that will destroy their collection of energy from the vacuum faster than they use part of it to power our loads.
We have had group theory (necessary to deal with symmetry and asymmetry) in our universities since 1870. Morgan's scientific advisors circa 1890-91 had no difficulty in doing a group symmetry analysis of the Heaviside equations, being set  up for use in a new endeavor to be called "electrical engineering". And they easily found that those equations -- while being severe truncations of Maxwell's actual theory -- still contained some of those undesired "asymmetrical Maxwellian systems" that Tesla had uncovered, so that he was hell-bent on giving the world cheap, clean, free energy. Quoting Tesla:
"Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point in the universe. This idea is not novel... We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who derives power from the earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians...Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static our hopes are in vain; if kinetic – and this we know it is, for certain – then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature." [Nikola Tesla, in a speech in New York to the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, 1891. Quoted from back cover of his biography, Margaret Cheney, Tesla: Man Out of Time]. 
 “Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can drive the world's machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any other of the common fuels." [Nikola Tesla]. 
 “We have to evolve means for obtaining energy from stores which are forever inexhaustible, to perfect methods which do not imply consumption and waste of any material whatever. I now feel sure that the realization of that idea is not far off. ...the possibilities of the development I refer to, namely, that of the operation of engines on any point of the earth by the energy of the medium...” [Nikola Tesla, during an address in 1897 commemorating his installation of generators at Niagara Falls.]. 
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material." [Nikola Tesla, 1900].
Tesla gave us AC power, the rotating magnetic field that makes modern generators possible, radio, and many other things. His training was in physics of his day, not just what we would call "electrical engineering". Here's what Tesla had to say about the present electrical engineering model -- the Heaviside/Hertz/Gibbs mutilation of Maxwell's theory (which theory was actually 20 quaternion-like equations in 20 unknowns):
"The Hertz wave theory of wireless transmission may be kept up for a while, but I do not hesitate to say that in a short time it will be recognized as one of the most remarkable and inexplicable aberrations of the scientific mind which has ever been recorded in history." [Nikola Tesla, "The True Wireless,” Electrical Experimenter, May 1919.]
And this "crippled Hertz theory" itself, contained in the Heaviside equations, was deliberately further curtailed by Lorentz, just before the birth of electrical engineering, in 1892 and at the bidding of a ruthless J. P. Morgan who intended that we continue to have to consume fuel and material to get most of our energy (because of our stupid symmetrical electrical power systems).
Ironically, this has led to a most amazing but absolutely true fact, presently not recognized at all by our scientific community. Quoting:
“This has led to one of the greatest ironies in history: All the hydrocarbons ever burned, all the steam turbines that ever turned the shaft of a generator, all the rivers ever dammed, all the nuclear fuel rods ever consumed, all the windmills and waterwheels, all the solar cells, and all the chemistry in all the batteries ever produced, have not directly delivered a single watt into the external circuit’s load. All that incredible fuel consumption and energy extracted from the environment has only been used to continually restore the source dipole that our own closed current loop circuits are deliberately designed to destroy faster than the load is powered.” [Thomas E. Bearden, “Extracting and Using Electromagnetic Energy from the Active Vacuum,” Modern Nonlinear Optics, Part 2. Second Edition, Advances in Chemical Physics, Volume 119, Edited by Myron W. Evans. Series Editors I. Prigogine and Stuart A. Rice, John Wiley and Sons, 2001, p. 691-192]. 
For rigorous proof that removing that arbitrary 1892 Lorentz symmetry from the EE equations will result in vacuum currents becoming available for actual use in resulting asymmetric systems, we quote: 
"Abstract: It is shown that if the Lorentz condition is discarded, the Maxwell–Heaviside field equations become the Lehnert equations, indicating the presence of charge density and current density in the vacuum. The Lehnert equations are a subset of the O(3) Yang–Mills field equations. Charge and current density in the vacuum are defined straightforwardly in terms of the vector potential and scalar potential, and are conceptually similar to Maxwell's displacement current, which also occurs in the classical vacuum. A demonstration is made of the existence of a time dependent classical vacuum polarization which appears if the Lorentz condition is discarded. Vacuum charge and current appear phenomenologically in the Lehnert equations but fundamentally in the O(3) Yang–Mills theory of classical electrodynamics. The latter also allows for the possibility of the existence of vacuum topological magnetic charge density and topological magnetic current density. Both O(3) and Lehnert equations are superior to the Maxwell–Heaviside equations in being able to describe phenomena not amenable to the latter. In theory, devices can be made to extract the energy associated with vacuum charge and current." [P. K. Anastasovski, T. E. Bearden, C. Ciubotariu, W. T. Coffey, L. B. Crowell, G. J. Evans, M. W. Evans, R. Flower, S. Jeffers, A. Labounsky, B. Lehnert, M. Mészáros, P. R. Molnár, J. P. Vigier and S. Roy: "Classical Electrodynamics without the Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the Vacuum," Physica Scripta, Vol. 61, 2000, pp. 513-517.].   
Very best wishes,
Tom Bearden, LTC, U.S. Army (Retired)

MS, Nuclear engineering