by Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy
There has been much misinformation circulating recently on the Vortex discussion group about the work of my scientific colleagues and friends, Dr. Paulo and Alexandra Correa. They, and the companies or institutes they have founded - Labofex, Akronos, and ABRI (Aurora Biophysical Research Institute), are now located in the Toronto, Canada area. Their work has been published in Infinite Energy, in very limited part since 1996 (1-11), but its most extensive and comprehensive form can be found on the Aetherometry website at www.aetherometry.com. Anyone reading this essay should try to acquaint themselves with this material, both the non-fee public material and the extensive technical works of Experimental Aetherometry, which are available there for downloading in PDF format (12-34).
The history of science is filled with small groups of people observing first-hand remarkable phenomena (such as meteorite falls), reporting them, and then working to enlighten others by publication and other means (as well as with historical research on devices that have been observed and testified to by many, and later carefully considered by excellent scientists such as the late Dr. Paul M. Brown (39)). The Correas have done this in spades: A. By allowing others to test their PAGD device and demonstrating Aetherometry inventions to others, B. By publishing basic experiments and theoretical foundations of their aether models, and C. By building an extensive patent portfolio. If, after hearing of these reports no groups take sufficient interest in, say, building their own PAGD reactors, that is too bad, but it is the way the world works right now. Harold Aspden for one, who has extensively evaluated the Correas' work, is quite clear that the PAGD patents give far more information than is ordinarily given in patents, and this would lead others to be able to replicate the PAGD if they chose to. So, since the mid 1990s there has been publicly available information to reproduce PAGD physics, should anyone wish to do so.
Since I have a significant hands-on understanding of the Correas' work, their character, and goals, I wish to present an antidote to some of the rather poisonous misinformation - or disinformation - that has appeared on Vortex. But first some background.
My experience is foremost engineering, science journalism, and teaching, but I consider my highest calling that of a Scientist - and, more globally, a teacher-Scientist via Infinite Energy magazine and hands-on investigation of anomalous physics claims. So while people such as Robert Park of the American Physical Society or Prof. Ronald M. Parker of the MIT Plasma Fusion Center may call themselves "Scientists" (with a capital S) they are nothing of the kind. People such as these - and the VAST majority of so-called "scientists" (small s) - have NO real ability or desire to use Science to challenge their possible pre-conceptions of the universe. They are textbook-hugging Technicians of Science - little scientists (small s), capable in some instances (certainly not in Park's case!) only of recognizing (or themselves adding) additional bricks to the fortress of accepted knowledge. These bricks are of some value, to be sure, for it cannot be denied that quite often these are the physical observations reported in the mainstream literature that form the tissue of basic science and serve as jump-off points for re-examining basic assumptions, and for finding (or not finding) flaws in the fundamentals. Of course, this gets more complicated by the fact that whenever these bricks are not appropriately placed or the wrong bricks are inserted, the entire edifice of science is put at risk.
I entered the field of new energy and new physics beginning with the cold fusion announcement on March 23, 1989. In the spring of 1991, my book Fire from Ice: Searching for the Truth Behind the Cold Fusion Furor (John Wiley and Sons) was published. In it, I concluded that the evidence for cold fusion was "overwhelmingly compelling" - the very first book to render such an opinion. It took me the better part of a year, from March 23, 1989 to the First International Conference on Cold Fusion (in Salt Lake City, March 1990), to determine that the scientific evidence was STRONGLY trending in a positive direction in favor of the reality of the nuclear products, radiations, and the nuclear-scale excess heat. A year later the reality of cold fusion - generically, "low energy nuclear reactions" (LENR) - had been proved to my satisfaction. For over a decade I have been certain that nuclear-scale excess heat and actual nuclear products are real, in certain systems and under certain conditions in which hydrogen isotopes are placed in intimate contact with a variety of metallic and sometimes non-metallic substrates. I have been appalled and disgusted with how the scientific establishment and even some so-called new energy researchers have ignored, attacked, misrepresented, and generally marginalized this huge body of evidence.
(As an aside - I have formed a very strong impression that the material presented by the Correas on the Aetherometry website may well be essential for a full understanding of LENR - how could it be otherwise for such pervasive energy and charge phenomena? Dr. Correa himself has told me that they have conducted experiments that successfully increased up to 30% the intensity of the radiation emitted by defined radionuclides, as per aetherometric predictions.)
My horizons expanded further in 1993 when I was able to investigate with Jed Rothwell the HydroSonic Pump, manufactured by HydroDynamics, Inc. of Rome, GA. (I had originally met Jed thanks to a provocative quote of me in a cold fusion story by Bill Broad in the New York Times in the spring of 1991 -- the origin of Jed's involvement in cold fusion.) It is my opinion that the kilowatt-level excess power in the HydroSonic Pump is real, albeit not nearly as rigorously and as widely tested as the body of LENR results. It may or may not be the case that the excess power of the HydroSonic Pump has anything directly to do with LENR; only time will tell.
In January 1995, we launched Infinite Energy magazine. This was after an ill-fated experience with the WGI publishing company, which allowed me to help found, as Editor-in-Chief, the magazine called "Cold Fusion"; the title was deliberately in quotes to denote the uncertain theoretical origin of the excess heat and other nuclear phenomena. Indeed, theoretical models that encompass ALL of the LENR nuclear and excess heat effects still are very difficult to pose, though many models have been put forth to explain this or that hypothetical LENR reaction. Infinite Energy has also kept watch over the parallel development by Dr. Randell Mills of so-called hydrino physics and revised quantum mechanics, which in-part began with electrolytic experiments announced in 1991 - just after Fire from Ice came off the press.(12) (See Mills' work at www.blacklightpower.com)
Since 1995, Infinite Energy and its associated New Energy Research Laboratory (NERL) has had the wider perspective of investigating other devices (that are not presumptively in the LENR field), which are claimed to produce excess power. Many of these contemporary devices turn out, after closer inspection and testing, to be non-functional - incapable of supporting the claims of the purveyors or inventors. Recently, as an example, I personally investigated one such claim in New England, by a very good and sincere scientist. I showed him within a few hours of testing at his lab that his work was in error due to a serious input power mis-measurement. In some rare cases of hands-on investigation, we have encountered provable, outright fraud. In other cases we have proved anomalous excess power or anomalous physics. Some of these, including a particularly interesting purely electrical device of recent study, are under Non-Disclosure Agreements.
Much more often we at NERL encounter incorrect measurements that were imagined by the inventors to support excess power claims. Two inventors once came to NERL with a rotary cone-shaped device that demonstrably did not produce excess power. (They had been misled by Brookhaven National Laboratory scientists, who did not take measurements on-site, into thinking they actually had something!) However, the inventors were so consumed by their belief in the device that they could not believe that our tests had proved them grossly wrong - and they apparently continued to try to market said non-functional device! In still other cases, a tantalizing appearance of excess power arises, and it may not be reproducible or stable within one lab or in transfer to our lab - for whatever reason. It may even be an error, such as some work we have labored at in the sonofusion area with a modified device based on Roger Stringham's reactor, or in the Pope-Perkins cavitation device. In some of these devices an unqualified "Not Real" is difficult to pronounce, since it is always possible that uncontrolled factors and parameters are not properly set to give a positive result during the test.
We also encounter cases of data that appear to be very solid - having been taken by impeccable and simple means by others of good repute, which strongly support excess power claims or other unusual processes, e.g. the "nuclear combustion" results published by Harry Taplin et al in Infinite Energy (minute percentage - 5 ppm - lithium catalyst added to standard hydrocarbon combustion). The apparent excess power of Carbo-HydrogenTM gas by Wallman and Dammann is another favorable example. True enough, these latter two apparent augmented or excess energy processes have not been very widely reproduced - in the laboratory sense. But several truck fleets do use the Taplin et al methodology and apparently profit from it in greater mpg and cleaner exhaust. Unlikely as it seems, there could be some mistakes in these systems, but their evident remarkable pollution abatement characteristics have merit in their own right.
So the upshot of this extended introduction is that over the past 13 years I have learned much about what is or is not real in claims of scientific anomalies - especially in the energy field - and what is possibly real or not. I have my own personal evaluation system, which is not infallible, but it is certainly infinitely superior to that of the Parks and Parkers of this world. Above all, I am honest. If I make a mistake and find it out, it gets published - unlike the fraudsters and bureaucrats at MIT and DOE who passed off literally fraudulent null experiments against cold fusion, and then swept the whole matter under the rug. They are not even good "Technicians of Science."
At the Third International Symposium on New Energy held in Denver, CO in April 1996, I first had the opportunity to meet Dr. Paulo Correa, who spoke about his and his co-investigator Alexandra Correa's Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge (PAGD) Reactor. This is an evacuated glass tube with aluminum electrode plates which is set into auto-electronic discharge emission by associated and patented circuitry, and it produces reported excess electrical energy. Alexandra was not able to attend that meeting, but Dr. Correa gave an excellent keynote lecture at that time about the PAGD (which, incidentally, is still available on video from Infinite Energy). I was impressed with Dr. Correa's scientific demeanor and explanations. He copiously referenced the work of many others, but offered specific praise for Dr. Harold Aspden's work, which I had earlier encountered. Dr. Aspden is on Infinite Energy's Scientific Advisory Board and is a long-time scientific colleague of the Correas. (His web site is: http://www.energyscience.org.uk.) At the 1996 Denver meeting, Dr. Aspden spoke on "Vacuum Spin as a new Energy Source" (also available on video). Dr. Aspden has offered earlier assessments of the Correa PAGD work - see the recently posted 1996 Opinion.
Infinite Energy began publishing the work of the Correas on the PAGD soon after this Denver meeting and we also have continued to publish some of Dr. Aspden's work.(35, 36)
Readers should know that Paulo Correa is a Renaissance man, with a PhD in Cellular and Molecular Biology (Hematology) from the University of Toronto (1991); also from the same University an MSc in Biophysics (1987) and a BSc in Physics, Chemistry and Biology (1984). He has other degrees in Political Science and Sociology (HBA, 1979, York University, Glendon College), in Law (Bachelor), and piano and music composition. He is married to a Renaissance woman, Alexandra, who though without formal scientific training to the extent of Paulo, is thoroughly expert in the scientific studies and methodologies the two have pioneered together. She holds an HBA degree in Psychology and Sociology from York University, Glendon College (1979). She is also an expert scientific glassblower and a brilliant visual artist (one look at the computer art on www.aetherometry.com is convincing, but her paintings in their home are joyous also). She is an experienced administrator and a manager of investment portfolios. As I said, the Correa work has been entirely self-financed since the early 1980s. The PAGD work and technology originated from studies of low voltage X-ray production in the mid-1980s, but their joint interest in the work of Reich and Tesla was of even earlier vintage. In this effort, in particular recent publications on the web, the Correas work with Dr. Malgosia Askanas, a mathematician, logician, computer programmer and website developer as well as a renowned puppeteer, who supports their physics analysis and software effort.
Those who would like a very good overview of how the Correas' inventive talents and interests evolved over the years should read a very informative interview with the Correas, "Inventions That Did Not Change the World Because the World As We Know It Would Die of Joy," May 18, 2001, conducted for Akronos publishing by a colleague and friend, the architect Luís Balula, who is also professor of Urbanism at the University of Lisbon.
This interview sums up many issues for them - scientific, technical, philosophical, and business, but it is NO substitute for reading the technical monographs and other information on the web site.
Those who would like to know about the Correas' recent work on a host of aetherometric inventions, should read the testimonial letters posted by me, Uri Soudak, and Prof. Arthur Axelrad of the University of Toronto.
The letters by me in 2001 and 2002 on observations of PAGD and other devices, are detailed and self-explanatory. Presently, Mr. Soudak and I are collaborating in what we hope will be an independent offshoot of the Correa work. The Correas have agreed to assign four rather astonishing inventions to a new corporate entity to be based in the U.S., provided acceptable investment conditions can be met. One of the inventions, the Stirling Engine-Hyborac has been discussed by the Correas in Infinite Energy (10, 11).
Recently there has been a tempest on Vortex by some who have evidently not read Monograph AS2-05 (18) and other supporting monographs. There has been a suggestion that "RF" from local sources might explain the Stirling engine/Hyborac performance (10, 11). The outdoor experiments in AS2-05 prove that heat developed in an ORAC originates in significant part from within the inner Faraday cage, which then drives the Stirling engine with sensible heat. I forwarded some of the RF tempest to the Correas, and this was their response regarding TV and radio towers, etc.:
"Yes, one could do it with a maser, somehow hidden from sight in the middle of a large yard and targeting the box. But why bother? Isn't nature enough and that which WE are studying and hoping to use? As you saw and the videos demonstrate [Videos that I have viewed - EFM], the HYBORAC was placed in the middle of the yard, in the same approximate location for days and nights. There are no radio towers around, and the nearest TV and microwave communications tower was built three years ago (before the AS2-05 experiments) and stands ca 5/6 km away. There were no masers or hidden sources of radiation. Nor were there any when Reich discovered the thermal anomaly in Faraday cages and ORACs. From our latest work and calculations, the Stirling Motor was observed to perform work in the range of 20 to 500 mWh (it beats many a CF cell's claims). Putting the efficiency at near 8% (see our last Stirling report on nighttime operation) and the delta-T at 80% of a To-T value of 30°C, one easily realizes that the sensible heat evolved inside the boxes cannot account for the work of the Stirling motor. Evidently, its action must tap the latent heat of the box, likely acting upon the top of the box as a molecular pump that promotes conversion of latent into sensible heats. In other words, sensible heat alone cannot account for the Stirling action.
But if one intelligently tried a theoretical model where it did, then one would not need to take recourse to radio towers or a fraudulent emission of RF (or microwave) - it would suffice indeed to consider nature herself: there is release of heat from the ground and the atmosphere (the natural conversion of ozone back into oxygen; the loss of heat from settling water vapor, etc) ; and last, but not least, since it deploys in the 50 to 200 plus GHz region, there is the so-called synchrotron emission of the elements. But then, all of these processes are driven by massfree ambipolar radiation and involve the conversion of said radiation into latent and sensible heats, and the conversion of latent into sensible heat. And, as we have amply shown, the major beacon of radiation in all this is the sun, and what it emits is ambipolar electric longitudinal massfree radiation, not transverse electromagnetic radiation!
The call for proximity to an RF tower or for some fraudulent explanation in an experiment (the Stirling HYBORAC) that is this simple for anyone to set up is not a mere matter of admitted ignorance in 'RF matters' (yes, the ignorance is there, vain and convinced); it is an intentional and reckless discrediting of our work with complete disregard for the simple and obvious facts, as well as the consequences of what is being said and to whom. Anyone can see the diurnal pattern of the temperature difference we reported outdoors and drive a Stirling Motor the way we described it in our papers. A 7-year old can do it. And with a bit of reading and understanding, anyone will arrive at the same conclusions from the experiment. Reich did and we have: the sun, the atmosphere and the earth are all sources and transducers of ambipolar electric energy and storage houses of latent heat. The Stirling moves with sensible heat, not latent heat or electric energy. If there is an excess of heat inside HYBORAC or ORAC boxes, this heat did not get there as sensible heat or as electromagnetic radiation. It got there either as electric ambipolar radiation or as non-electric energy absconded and radiated by molecular substrates (ie latent heat), or as both, as it turns out. And once there, the simple rules of transformation of these two types of Aether energy into local blackbody photons (in ANY frequency range, whether RF, microwave, IR, visible, etc) go into play.
It is not very complicated. There is no such hybrid as RF because the frequencies being measured are those of the local photons (remember the Fc function of induction coils in papers AS2-13 to 16?) and not of the ambipolar radiation responsible for their local production and for the nonlocal transmission of the photon-stimulus. Moreover, in the useless lingo of electromagnetic engineers, the term RF does NOT designate, for instance, microwave radiation. Yet, for one to explain the thermal anomaly inside ORACs, say, within accepted theory, a difference of 3°C, on the basis of electromagnetic radiation, one would have to be adding to the sub-IR microwave radiation in the environment a substantial electromagnetic radiation greater by 4 GHz than the, say, temperature baseline of 0 to 20°C (in the thousands of GHz range); note that Aetherometry argues instead that for a 3°C difference the step-up radiation should have a frequency of 62.5 GHz, (near the oxygen synchrotron line). Because of the spherical propagation of the photon-producing ambipolar wave, the source would have to be in very close proximity to the HYBORAC in order for sensible heat photons to produce in a molar-statistical fashion such a temperature effect, let alone differences of 30°C. Then, you may as well bake the whole arrangement inside a microwave oven at 3Ghz with a thousand watt dissipation..."
What is Aetherometry and how to begin to understand it? It comprises the study and measurement of the aether - not the static, electromagnetic "luminiferous aether" of the 19th Century, but a dynamic non-electromagnetic aether that is amenable to measurement through the deflection of electroscope leaves, mercury thermometers, Geiger-Muller tubes, oscilloscopes, Tesla coils, Faraday cages, and other commonly available instruments and circuit elements. Of course, anyone who is a close-minded believer in Einsteinian relativity - the Special or General theories - would find little or no reason to investigate Aetherometry - any more than someone absolutely convinced of the impossibility of LENR would find a reason to look into the evidence for LENR.
The Experimental Aetherometry volumes are broken down into down-loadable monographs, numbering a total of 21 monographs so far released, AS2-01 through AS2-17c (13-34). These are grounded in the experimental program of the Correas to understand the physically measurable and observable effects of the aether - electrical, thermal, light, biological, etc. So, if one wishes to examine these modules from a purely experimental point of view, one can do just that. The Correas have chosen to integrate and motivate these published experiments by referencing theoretical arguments from their Aetherometric Theory of Synchronicity (AToS), which has been formulated in seven volumes that they later anticipate publishing. (These are enumerated in the catalog posted on their web site.) These theoretical discussions are, on many occasions, the more difficult aspect of the monographs. But remember, the experiments can stand alone - they do NOT need to be motivated by theory, but the AToS Theory evolved naturally from them. The experiments are fundamentally simple in conception. If some rare establishment physicist wants to try to "explain the effects away" or explain them in terms of conventional physics, so be it and - good luck on a long journey! (As with LENR, such physicists would ordinarily not even look at the data, i.e. "look through the telescope.")
There is much repetition in the abstracts and introductions to each monograph to properly link it with earlier and succeeding monographs. The monographs generally have two components: A. Experiments (when the monograph concerns experiments directly, as most do) and B. Theoretical arguments that motivate and link the experiments. The monographs are not always easy sailing, only because we are dealing here with concepts of aether structure and activity that is very alien to the fictions and omissions that 20th Century physics has given us - such as Einsteinian relativity, the Big Bang, the notion that all energy is electromagnetic, that all potentials are mechanical, etc. I dare say that relativity itself (SRT and GRT) is in some sense more difficult to understand, especially since these are paradoxical and wrong, as numerous critics who have nothing to do with the Correas have found.
Another feature of the monographs are the extraordinary references to historical scientific material, much of which has been conveniently forgotten by the mainstream. How many of you, for example, know that the "photoelectric effect" - for which Einstein was granted a Nobel prize -- was originally known as the Hallwacks effect - dating back to 1887? Guess what! The so-called "photoelectric effect" does NOT operate as the mainstream suggests it does, and the Correas have proved that point with an electroscope, the instrument with which the effect was first investigated. (Perhaps, in fairness to truth, the Correas will eventually be rewarded with a Nobel prize and Einstein's will be posthumously withdrawn! Hah!). There is also, of necessity, copious reference to the experimental work of Wilhelm Reich, and to Reich's theories. Reich (1897-1957) was evidently a brilliant scientist and medical doctor, quite the opposite of the false caricature presented by the criminals at CSICOP, Time Magazine, and in the FDA of the 1950s. (Read my editorial in Issue No.37 of Infinite Energy.) The Correas take Reich's observations as a starting point, and perform their meticulous detective work to reveal the properties of the aether.
But the Correas do not give Reich a free pass. Far from it. They point out precisely how the extraordinary pioneer Reich went wrong in some of his conclusions. The monographs thus unfold like a detective story - almost literally. The final chapters of that story, which we are all eager to see (the final monographs called out in the catalog and not yet posted, AS2-18 through AS2-24), are the unraveling of the orgone motor mystery, which has resulted in Aether-driven motors at the Correa laboratory. These have no electrical power source input save the Aether, as my on-site investigation determined. (Reich was apparently never able to make such a motor, but the Correas have done so - again, read the Letters of Support.) If an asteroid strike wiped out Toronto tomorrow, however, I am confident that sufficiently motivated scientists could, albeit with difficulty, make their way again to such Aether Motors, given the foundations laid out in AS2-01 through AS2-17C.
Of course, one cannot learn from the monographs if one does not read them. Or if one attempts to read them, one will fail to understand anything IF one resists the use of required new terms - e.g. "ambipolar massfree charge," and "latent heat" - to describe and characterize the functioning of the aether. New terminology is part and parcel of scientific revolutions and is, in part, why such revolutions are difficult. New terminology relating to previously not accepted concepts must be introduced. In the Correas' monographs, it is adequately referenced to the old views. Aetherometry has much new terminology, because so much must be revised. When one reads these articles, one does not necessarily agree with them a priori, of course. As in reading any other frontier research, one must "temporarily suspend disbelief" so that the integrated new concepts can be assessed with respect to the described experiments in proper relation to each other.
And as a matter of fact, neither latent heat nor ambipolar energy are necessarily new notions. Latent heat is a physical reality acknowledged openly by meteorologists, chemists and biochemists in basic textbooks! According to the Correas, Plyutto et al first suggested the term ambipolar (back in the 60's) to describe the dual polarity ion mechanism responsible for the anomalous cathode reaction forces in vacuum arcs. When Aspden invokes the existence of quons that have mass but escape the constraints of Relativity, he is referring to the same energetic reality which the Correas designate as massfree charge. If the charge were monopolar, like leptonic and baryonic charges are, and as are the pairs of virtual muons in Aspden's theory, then there would have been no need for any other term than monopolar. But what they claim they have discovered is that this radiated charge is not just noninertial or massfree, but also ambipolar or phenomenologically neutral. Is that so hard to comprehend?
The Correas declare at the very beginning of their web site: "The material made available by AKRONOS Publishing at this site is not for everybody. It is written for those who have a minimum of scientific, technical and philosophical experience, and who can and do think and discern for themselves." Indeed, there is much philosophical discussion blended into these monographs, but it is not oppressive and intruding. It is separate enough so that it can be ignored, if one wishes. I personally found the philosophical remarks stimulating, making me want to learn more about the lives and thinking of the figures who are referenced. I admit woeful ignorance of these old works, but if the findings of the Correas have precursors in such thought, that is of great interest.
The Correas provide this commitment: "AKRONOS Publishing intends to continue publication of the works of the Correas though Volume 4 of Experimental Aetherometry, and the full collection of The Aetherometric Theory of Synchronicity - as well as their work at Labofex [the PAGD work]. This is a long-term commitment to publish the fruits of a few lifetimes of research into physics, culture, the nature of Life and the Cosmos." They suggest in earnest with a playful spirit, "These pages are meant to be approached as if they were a green field of grass, replete with things such as poppies, butterflies, dragonflies, and buttercups."
To get an overview of the breadth of this work, one should simply read the abstracts (no down-loading fees required), which are provocative in the claims that are made. It is of course essential to READ the monographs to decide whether the experimental case for the claims has been made. After scanning the abstracts, it is a good idea to read the introductions and then the "Discussion" and/or "Conclusion" material at the end of each monograph. Later one can dig into the central body of writing, which in most monographs is copiously illustrated with graphical material and depictions of experiments. Alexandra's colored computer artwork for the title page of each monograph establishes the theme for that segment.
Some highlights of what the Correas claim to have found - taken, in their own words, from the website interview earlier referenced:
Electron Structure/Orgone Motor
AC: "... we also cracked the structure of the electron and rediscovered the functioning principle of Reich's Orgone Motor. Then we improved upon it."
Superimposition of Aether Energy Streams
PC: "The discovery of the principle [of the Orgone motor] at the bench took place in mid-1998. By the spring of 1999 we had developed our improved version. Since then we have steadily increased its performance. We have succeeded in driving it from a superimposition of the aether energy streams from the ORAC, with the earth, a body of water, living bodies, atmospheric antennas, vacuum cavities, and so on, employing or not vacuum tubes for this purpose."
Relation Between Heat and Electricity/ Massfree vs. Massbound Charge
PC: "... one of the critical developments in Aetherometry is a new understanding of the relation between heat and electricity, and in particular between what is called "latent heat" and electricity. But by then we had already cracked the structure of the electron and the functions that associate its mass-energy with any of a variety of physically distinct kinetic energies. Effectively this leap permitted us to understand the simplicity and reality of massless charge, as opposed to electrons or any other form of massbound charge, whether leptonic or hadronic."
Biological Energy Fields
PC: "...Yet, as Reich pointed out much later, how can we reconcile the tens of thousands of electrostatic volts which an insulated human body can develop by contact or loss of contact with the ground, with the millivoltages detected at the tissue interfaces or over erogenous zones? But if this problem itself was difficult enough, there are still two other angles to this. Indeed, the electrostatic potentials may not be what is indicative of a specifically biological energy, a bioelectricity. They may well be the result of capacitative functions of charge resulting from the interaction of the body with the ground, the earth, just as the millivolt potentials are established at fluid junctions by limited ion fluxes... as we see it, the primary biological energy fields are neither electrostatic nor electromagnetic, even if there is in fact a derived electromagnetic field."
Massfree Electric Energy / The Nature of "Orgone" Energy
AC: "...The heat or thermal photons emanating from the body are a clue to the nature of the underlying massfree electric energy that is both drawn into the body and discharged by it... The electromagnetic field or aura of the body, we were saying, is the result of a more fundamental massfree and electrically ambipolar field that produces it. It is this massfree electric energy that we claim constitutes in fact the true meaning of orgone energy - yet, even this electrically ambipolar field itself is also the result of a still more fundamental form of massfree energy, nonelectric and nonelectromagnetic."
Explanations of Natural Phenomena: Biological Energy, Cloud Formation, Intrinsic Potential Energy of Molecules, OR Effect of the ORAC, Energy Content of Water, Gravity, Anti-Gravity
PC: "...whether insulated or not, the action of the body is always to draw charge by contact with metallic objects charged with either polarity, and draw the kinetic energy of charge from the same objects through the radiative field of the body... If the ambipolar electric field were the dominant form of biological energy - and not the result of a transformation from a still more fundamental form of energy, neither electric nor electromagnetic - then the action of the body by contact, and in the absence of 'friction' with the ground, should charge metallic objects and, more important than any such residual rectification, the approach of the body, insulated or not, to the electroscope should not depress the charged state of the latter independently of electric polarity. Since none of this is observed, and since we demonstrate most rigorously that the action of the ORAC, the so-called orgone effect, it too is neither electric, nor electromagnetic, we are led to conclude that the most primitive layer of massfree energy which is specific to the living pertains to a realm others have referred to as latent energy, though no one presently knows exactly what its physical expressions are, nor how to connect or link them. This is what Aetherometry ties together into a stunning conclusion - there are all types of ways in which we can measure this fundamental nonelectric and nonelectromagnetic energy from which arise all the massfree electric and the 'tertiary' electromagnetic effects, and these paths have - up until now - remained unexplored with respect not just to action of the fundamental energy field of living systems, or the electroscope, but also with respect to such basic natural phenomena as cloud-formation, the intrinsic potential energy of molecules, the OR effect of the ORAC, the energy content of water and so on. This is what ultimately led us to understand the nature of both gravity and antigravity, or Celeritas, in a new way..."
Fundamental Nature of Charge
AC: "...How can all these researchers speak so much of the electron and have so little idea of what the beast is actually like? Another slight of hand is how they unconsciously slide from using the term electron to the term charge, as if they were interchangeable! We had to make both the mathematical and semiological languages of science become more precise, more exacting. The phenomenon of charge is more universal and fundamental than that of inertia or mass."
Relation Between Charge and Inertia / Conversion of Mass into Length!
PC: "...It would take us two years to fully disengage its [the electron's] structure - the mystery of its wave structure and how and why it changes between electric and electromagnetic configurations, as well as decode its volumetric aspects, and the relation between charge and inertia. No one at present has any idea of the actual electron structure. We intend to publish this material very soon - since this is ground that our modern physicists purport to understand and know full well, and yet do not. Our departure point was a confrontation of Aspden's brilliant theory of the electron and the quon particle with the conventional 'understanding' of the electron. In the process, we came to finally understand the conversion of mass into length that Reich had proposed as early as 1944, and which we had cracked numerically, but without fully understanding it, in 1991..."
Structure of Proton, Electron, and the Hydrogen Atom
PC: "...This opened the doors to the electromagnetic fine structure of the electron mass-energy, which inevitably led us to a new structure also of the proton and the hydrogen atom. Then came the problem of charge - which for years had been dogging us: how to understand charge? How to reduce it to fundamental dimensionality? How to extract the electric structure? Is charge always associated with inertia? Why are electrodynamic anomalies only observed in open or interrupted circuits? How to understand the coupling of kinetic energy to the mass-energy of an electron? Aspden here too, on these topics, wrote many beautiful pages that were of great inspiration to us. His notion that massbound charge resists acceleration because of an electric property of inertia which obeys conservation of the carrier's mass-energy was cardinal for our understanding."
Ambipolar Longitudinal Waves - NOT Electromagnetic Waves - Propagate Light Across Space; Light as a Local Phenomenon
AC - "...Effectively, modern physics knows nothing about these energy realms - it knows nothing about electric energy because it is ignorant of massfree electricity, nothing about gravity because it reduces it to mere questions of topological description, concentration of mass and geometry, and nothing either about energy capable of developing negative gravity. Even electromagnetic energy - the best known realm of physical science - is very poorly understood. We contend, for instance, that, aside from locally assembling a photon, there are no electromagnetic waves propagating light across space. Light is always produced locally in response to the propagation of an electrically ambipolar, longitudinal wave."
The Intellectual Poverty of "Reichians"
PC: "...The smashing majority of the followers of Reich have kept knowledge of the Aether and Orgone separate from any sensible contact with the scientific process, and thoroughly amalgamate the concept of Orgone energy to simplistic mysticisms. And official science is only too happy to comply. One of the targets of our work is to end this charade. To denounce it and expose it. It is neither life nor knowledge that this situation befriends. Confusion only breeds confusion."
State Sponsored "Knowledge"
(Note: This has been observed in spades during the cold fusion war. - EFM)
AC: "...The modern way is to validate knowledge by letting it be selected by market forces, supported by the State with the public purse and reassessed by peers protecting vested interests - knowledge has been, by that very same fact, made subordinate to human values that are set above life, to intermediaries that are in fact foreign to science and impose these values upon its quest. What we propose with Aetherometry is that knowledge only matters if it serves Life, if it serves as a line of escape from institutionalized Survival."
There is NO substitute for full examination of this work, which is not easy. However, one can at least read the abstracts that are public (non-fee) and get a good idea of the gist of each one. I thought it would be useful to point out some of the high points and the kinds of EXPERIMENTS that are embodied within each monograph.
|Nonequivalence between work performed by charge against gravity
and the electric energy of the same 'charge gas' (The gravitokinetoregenerative phenomenon)
A most astonishing and provocative result, and perhaps the most difficult monograph to come to terms with initially - given that it is suggesting that in every physics lab in every high school and college, the electroscopes that are quietly sitting on the shelf can provide evidence of perpetual influx of heretofore unknown energy. This work concerns the separated gold leaves of an electroscope and what holds them apart. Conventional physics naively says that it's just "static electricity" of the charge placed on or induced in the leaves that keeps them apart - in principle, indefinitely. (This, apart from the presumptively understood charge leakage or seepage phenomena - all is not what it seems as later monographs will show!) It is shown, by experiment and computation, that the work performed by leaf deflection against gravity by a quantity of 'charge gas' is NOT equivalent to the electric energy input!! A theory to account for the phenomenon is discussed (which relies on results from the AToS theory and Reich's so-called pendulum law.)
It is shown that the non-electric component of the kinetic energy of the trapped charges - which must perform both electric and antigravitational work - must be continuously regenerated. This regeneration must come from some "hidden variable" in the local medium (the later monographs identify this with an aspect of the Aether). Summing up, the Correas write: "We found therefore that, in order for the electric work of repulsion performed by charge against charge to be conserved, the work performed by charge against local gravity must be constantly supplied by regeneration of the kinetic energy of the trapped charges from the surrounding medium."
EXPERIMENT: Gold leaf electroscope is calibrated (angle vs. voltage). Then charge and discharge time profiles are examined oscilloscopically and the work of deflection computed and compared to experiment.
EXPERIMENT: Measured leaf deflection decay profiles - work-equivalent position energy vs. time - are integrated for two different atmospheric conditions. It is found that the kinetic energy electrically spent by the leaf-trapped 'charge gas' in opposing gravity field energy during the leaf decay is 228 times greater than the electric energy input, for one curve! The clear weather curve shows that charge spends 736 times the input energy! Ergo, there is a source of energy in the medium that can provide far beyond the electric energy input. (This conclusion is NOT dependent on any imagined particularities of charge leakage or seepage.) "Electrostatic potential" cannot account for the work of leaf deflection.
If this single monograph is correct in its conclusions - and it is hard to escape that conclusion (providing certain mathematical relationships concerning mass and length introduced are accepted), then there is EVERY reason to take all the remaining monographs very, very seriously. They deal with electroscopes used in different environments and much else...
|Addendum, concerning the pendulum formula as applied to the work performed against gravity by the electroscopic leaf
This brief addendum concerns a possible factor-of-2 error that may have crept in in AS2-01, prompted by the examination of some readers. The Correas stick by their result. But it is admirable how they openly address the critiques.
|Variation of the spontaneous discharge rate of atmospheric electroscopes induced by electric and nonelectric, local and nonlocal, hidden variables
Study of the roles played by electric and non-electric factors affecting and controlling the spontaneous discharge rates of electroscopes - both positively and negatively charged ones.
EXPERIMENTS: Study of the variation of the spontaneous discharge rates of identical, calibrated, gold-leaf electroscopes directly exposed for a month to varying outdoor atmospheric conditions, and how the observed rate variation correlated, or not, with local atmospheric parameters or nonlocal parameters of solar origin.
EXPERIMENTS: Comparative studies of the effect of a negative ion generator upon the electroscopes.
"We found that atmospheric electroscopes essentially respond to a total of five distinct hidden variables, which fall into two groups - those that accelerate the spontaneous discharge rate and those that slow it down or arrest the discharge. In the first group, we have two local and two nonlocal factors at play. The local factors are essentially nonelectric. The first local factor refers to the capacity or ability of cloud systems, particularly those associated with low pressure cells, to draw nonelectric energy from neighbouring localities and thus diminish the kinetoregenerative power of the medium local to the instruments."Four of the variables were found to only accelerate the electroscopic spontaneous discharge rate. The fifth hidden variable, which was found to be of solar origin (from its time of day correlation) arrests (stops) or tends to arrest the discharge. This is inferred to be a nonlocal variable that accounts for the power of the local medium to regenerate the kinetic energy (quoting) "...which charge spends in performing work against gravity when trapped in a conductor subject, in turn, to electrostatic repulsion. Essentially, the kinetoregenerative power of the local medium is in turn replenished by this component of solar radiation."
|A note on Reich's concept of an electroscopic OP and the concept of a nonelectric kinetoregenerative power of the local atmospheric medium
No new experiments introduced. This is a discussion of whether Reich's concept of an 'orgonotic potential' (OP) is a "physical, mathematical and scientific index of electric tension, or of charge? What energy function(s) does it correspond to?"
"..the notions of tension and charge distinctly evoked electric functions, whereas the concept that Reich really needed in order to explain that [electroscope] arrest should have instead referred to the nonelectric power of the local medium to regenerate the kinetic energy of charge, and thereby induce arrest of the spontaneous electroscopic discharge irrespective of electric polarity. This last is the critical nonelectric condition, given that arrest induced by electric fields or ion fluxes can only occur for either seepage or leakage, but not for both."This monograph eliminates flaws in Reich's methodology that can be seen as responsible for the inappropriate amalgamation by "Reichians" of orgone energy with negative ions and negative electricity.
|Electroscopic demonstration of reverse potentials of energy flow able to draw kinetic and electric energies
EXPERIMENTS: Possibly the most astonishing monograph of all, because very simple experiments with electroscope charging and discharging are shown to prove that a human being is a transducer of energy flows heretofore unknown. These experiments could be done and commented on by bright high-school students - after which, they might be observed burning their physics books!
Quoting in full the abstract:
"Methodological objections are raised to the conventional understanding of the charged states of the electroscope, and a new classification of charging methods is proposed. The existing hiatuses in conventional electrostatic theory of the electroscope stem from complete ignorance of the electroscopic action of observable reverse potentials, first proposed by Dr. Wilhelm Reich over sixty years ago, which establish centripetal radiative fields capable of drawing both nonelectric kinetic energy and the electric energy of charge trapped in conductors. From an experimental examination alone of the electroscopic interactions of the human body, the authors conclude, as Reich did, that there is an energy specific to living systems and to the ground, which is neither electric nor electromagnetic."
|The thermal anomaly in ORACs and the Reich-Einstein experiment: implications for blackbody theory
This was my point of entry into hands-on experiments with Faraday cages and calibrated, 0.05 deg division mercury thermometers. After the Correas sent me their paper to be published in IE (7), which is part of this monograph, a new world opened up. After reading the paper, I have made my own personal measurements of the Reich-Einstein experiment thermal anomaly (38). There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Einstein's reaction to Reich's observed thermal anomalies connected with Faraday cages, was indeed one of the biggest blunders in the history of science.
EXPERIMENT: Reproduction of the indoor Reich-Einstein experiment. Experimental verification of the thermal anomaly reported by Reich. Demonstration of how it can be "analytically and experimentally separated from the effect of convection air currents."
EXPERIMENTS: A series of outdoor experiments with black and white ORACs, conducted both in the shade and under full solar exposure.
"...we demonstrate how the thermal energy registered inside both chambers of controlled ORACs cannot be accounted for by the blackbody spectrum for solar radiation (for which we propose a new physico-mathematical treatment employing the tools we have developed elsewhere in the form of the Aetherometric Theory of Synchronicity, AToS), nor by the experimentally determined blackbody radiation spectra for the controlled ORACs employed in these experiments. The results formally demonstrate that whatever is the nature of the energy converting into thermal energy to produce the verifiable thermal anomaly, its ultimate source is definitely solar, and yet it cannot be thermal energy, i.e. nonionizing electromagnetic energy. These findings run dead counter to existing variants of thermal ZPE (zero point energy) theories. A formal treatment of all the consequences of these findings - for such disciplines as aether science, thermodynamics, thermoelectrics, and quantum blackbody theory - is deferred to a subsequent communication."
|Comparative study of the variation in the spontaneous discharge rate of atmospheric electroscopes and electroscopes placed within 'orgone accumulators'
EXPERIMENTS: A series of experiments with electroscopes prove that "the energy concentrated inside ORACs and responsible for the anomalous deceleration and arrest of electroscopes placed within them, irrespective of charge polarity, is neither thermal nor electric."
The Correas "determine the comprehensive values of the energy and power of ORAC devices (in Reich's idiom, to measure the actual orgone energy values, and their variation, within these devices)." And, they prove that the electroscopic kinetoregenerative phenomenon is not of thermal origin.
"...the Aether energy effect responsible for the thermal and electroscopic anomalies observed within the ORAC is neither electric, nor electromagnetic, nor gravitational per se, but antigravitational. In full agreement with our Aetherometric Theory of Synchronicity (AToS), we conclude that, by a heretofore unknown process, charges trapped in a conductor undergoing electrostatic repulsion - or, for that matter, in a dielectric undergoing electrostatic repulsion, as can be easily observed with electroscopic leaves made of dielectric materials - and subject to a local gravitational potential, are able to tap local Aether energy and to convert some of its nonelectric and nonelectromagnetic energy into their kinetic energy. This kinetic energy is associated with charge but distinct from it, and charge spends it precisely to counteract the continuous action of the local gravitational energy. This counteraction is maximal at electroscopic discharge arrest. The kinetoregenerative phenomenon demonstrates therefore that there exists another form of energy which is neither electric, nor electromagnetic, nor gravitational. Yet, this energy appears to be responsible for an array of electric, thermal and gravitational anomalies."
|Decoding the thermal and nonthermal equivalents of the org as a unit of aether energy
A monograph with no new experiments called out, but which analyzes the combined results of AS2-05 and AS2-06. It also proposes the basic foundations for the aetherometric theory of temperature, and provides a stunning new dimensional equivalence for temperature! These investigations are slipped in while it overtly deals with historical terminology used by Reich. The Correas state: "Reich once postulated the org as a natural and experimental unit of OR energy that was referenced to the thermal performance of the ORAC he invented. But he was unable to resolve its exact value, or to provide its thermal and nonthermal equivalences, both experimental and theoretical." This, the Correas carry out, to provide the org either in terms of sensible or latent heat. The former determination turns out to relate the org precisely to the molecular Boltzmann energy unit. The org is, in effect, a measure of the "heating powers of an ORAC."
|Photoinduced arrest of the spontaneous electroscopic discharge and the Hallwacks experiment revisited
This is a turning-point monograph, in its extensive discussion of the true character and divisions within the conventionally understood electromagnetic spectrum. The experiment of Hallwacks (which after Einstein became known as the photoelectric effect experiment!) is repeated to reveal a significant anomaly. A remarkable series of experiments is carried out:
EXPERIMENT: Measurement of the discharge rate of two gold-leaf electroscopes, one inside a dry incubator (to establish a large temperature difference with ambient air) and the other outside. Proving that the kinetoregenerative phenomenon is not thermal per se.
EXPERIMENT: Hallwacks Experiment of 1888 repeated with germicidal UV fluorescent lamp, also controls with fluorescent lamps with filters; also tests with IR and Solar-UV lamps.
The amazing discovery --contradicting Hallwacks - that far UV affects the fall of POSITIVELY charged electroscope. Also, far UV does NOT affect positively charged and negatively charged electroscopes equally - contrary to what ionizing radiation does. Major finding: under a variety of conditions, visible light and near-UV light promote electroscope discharge arrest. In other words, the Hallwacks effect is induced by nonionizing far and vacuum UV blackbody radiation (HFOT photons), whereas near UV and visible-light blackbody radiation (i.e. LFOT photons) mimic latent heat and sustain the kinetoregenerative phenomenon. The Correas say in the monograph: "This [the photoinduced regeneration] constitutes formal proof of [their] contention that charge trapped in a conductor immersed in a local gravitational field requires, in addition to the electric energy it consists of, a surplus of kinetic energy that it can borrow from the local medium, and which it spends by constantly performing work against gravity." The borrowed energy may be electromagnetic - for as long as it is nonionizing and non-free-radical-inducing - but of sufficiently high frequency (hence so-called thermal electromagnetic frequencies cannot efficiently support the kinetoregenerative phenomenon). In the absence of suitable blackbody radiation, the borrowed energy comes from the available latent heat - which, in any case, is the more ordinary pathway.
Many conclusions are drawn concerning qualitative and distinct domains of the electromagnetic spectrum. Too extensive and detailed for these brief highlights. Final remark links to work to be carried out in subsequent modules: "We do not yet know what is the aether-sourced physical process responsible for the production and disjunction of HFOT and LFOT photons - and this will constitute the object of follow-up communications."
|The allotropic atmospheric cycle of oxygen, ozone and water: foundations of photo- and aetherochemistry
Based upon existing data for the reciprocal chemical conversion of oxygen and ozone and, likewise, of water into acid ion and atomic oxygen, the Correas propose a novel way to balance the enthalpies of these processes, and separate the mechanisms of action of both HFOT and LFOT photons in the allotropic ('two-form') cycle that constitutes the most basic molecular material of the atmosphere. This is a must-read for environmentally-minded people. The monograph lays the ground for the later AS2-17B study, where the exact spectra of the radiations driving the two-part cycle are unveiled. The self-regenerative aspect of the cycle appears to be tied into the constant infusion of negative light leptons. It is suggested that this constitutes evidence for the asymmetric creation of massbound charges - astonishing observation: "... the existing photochemical relations fail to account for the physical, pre-atomic processes that generate negatronic charge independently from the known processes of pair production." In other words, it is required that electrons be created from the aether to explain this most basic atmospheric cycle! This monograph shows how potentially all-encompassing Aetherometry really is. There are also some provocative medical implications discussed.
|The kinetoregenerative phenomenon and the AToS model of a fundamental aether energy element capable of counteracting gravitons
A monograph concerning how the fundamental aether element identified by the Correas as being responsible for the asymmetric creation of negative light leptons can have an antigravitational effect. No new experiments are introduced here, but the analysis employs the data from the experiments reported in AS2-01, AS2-02, AS2-06 and AS2-08 to demonstrate a fundamental resonance between the gold graviton and this very aether energy element, thereby suggesting that a novel physical process is responsible for the kinetoregenerative phenomenon. In the process, and almost unnoticed, the Correas even provide the fine structure of the electron graviton! They also provide entirely new particle ratios and equations for photons, gravitons, electrons, gold atoms and aether energy units in both the Hallwacks experiment and the gravitokinetoregenerative phenomenon. No one claiming to be interested in QM should bypass this monograph.
SHORTENED ABSTRACT FROM THE CORREAS:
"Proceeding from our previous demonstrations that there are two distinct - with respect to work, energy and power - components to the electroscopic interaction, one electrokinetic and the other nonelectric, which we have designated as gravitokinetic (since it involves work performed against the local gravitational field), we propose in the present communication a novel mathematical, microfunctionalist treatment of the gravitokinetic interaction, that indicates how aether energy units abstracted locally by the charges trapped in the conduction band of the electroscopic leaf are employed to counteract the gravitational attractive effect upon the same leaf of a determinate number of gravitons that are provided by the local gravitational field to act upon the atoms of that leaf. In the process, we propose that the aether energy element abstracted by the trapped charges is the same element whose secondary superimposition yields, by the AToS, both the electron mass-energy and the graviton associated with the electron (the electron-graviton).We propose that this fundamental resonant aether element has a nonelectric massfree energy...
Furthermore, we propose that, by application of the AToS, we must conclude that the gold-graviton...is also a resonant state of the aether energy element fundamental to all elementary charges. Finally, we also suggest that the same aether element, being equally intrinsic to the structure of the electron mass-energy as a sub-element, interacts with blacklight photons to produce the Hallwacks photoelectric effect, whose true y coefficient we claim to have experimentally ascertained as shown in a previous communication. These findings also permit for the first time the identification of the basic graviton associated with the electron mass-energy."
|A light-irreducible split-aether continuum encompassing production of black (HFOT) and thermal (LFOT) photons
The history of the debate about the nature of light is central to our present understanding of physics. We normally think of the wave-versus-particle battles, culminating in the 20th Century with quantum mechanical descriptions positing a mystifying duality. But the subject is much more complex, involving as it does the imposition of Special and General Theories of Relativity on an already indeterminate historical situation. The Correas propose a new model that reforms the highly ambiguous picture, yet one should not expect that such a reformation will be easy to assimilate! Remember, modern physics has asked us to "believe" in many "impossible things" already, so it is not surprising that when these more or less firm mental images from modern physics that we have of what light and photons are - or are not - are challenged, the new picture does not go down easily. The Correas provide an historical overview of the evolution of their theory, which is motivated in this monograph by EXPERIMENT (see below). But first, their entire ABSTRACT quoted:
"From Descartes' Plenum of subtle matter defined by its luminous character, through Spinoza's Light and its effects of Colour and Shadow, to the classical electromagnetic theory of a luminiferous aether and modern ZPE theories, the problem of the Aether has always been posed as inseparable from that of Light, the action and transmission of Light. This often entailed a direct reduction of the concept of the aether to that of Light - as is the case with Spinoza -or to that of the electromagnetic field - as is the case with ZPE theories. The situation with Descartes is different, as with Maxwell and Lorentz, because here an implicit division is made between the Aether as support system and Light as either a corpuscular or an undulatory event. It was this concept of an aether as a support of Light which SR made superfluous, 'liberating ' Light in the form of an electromagnetic field of constant speed for all inertial mass, and converting all Matter into opaque forms of Light. Thereby, however, Light retained its primacy in physics and natural philosophy. One can contemplate GR as an attempt to eliminate this lingering primacy of Light in SR, by making Light heavy and thus subject to conditioning by the gravitational field, with the result that the gravitational aether becomes a geometric structure where the null intervals of Minkowski Spacetime become the curved geodesics of GR 's Spacetime.EXPERIMENT: Confirming Reich's observations with evacuated tubes (Vacor tubes) that indicated pulsatory activity of such tubes in response to a charged electrostatic rod (observed both oscilloscopically and via the recorder section of a Geiger -Muller tube). IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY APPLIED POTENTIAL TO THE VACUUM TUBE, some 2000 counts per second were recorded for a single pass near the tube of the charged rod. Lumination of the tube also observed.
But making Light heavy is only a way of either attributing the Dark (fuscum subnigrum) to Matter (as was done with the missing mass) or reducing it to a geometry of Light. The only philosopher to seize the Dark as the matrix from which Light and Colour emerge, was Leibniz. His approach to the problem of the vacuum ("there is no vacuum ") and his contention in First Truths that neither Space nor Time are things but multiplicities of a continuum that cannot be divided into points, intimate that the fundamental property of a Plenum is not Light but Darkness.
The Aetherometric Theory of Synchronicity (AToS) takes up Leibniz 's contention that the aether is not Light but the Dark, which alone explains how Light emerges when the Dark interacts with Matter to confer motion to it. We review Reich 's orgonometric theory of Light, and in particular his concept of an underlying aether excitation wave. Reich's theory is seen as a precursor to the aetherometric concepts of Light and the Dark. AToS suggests that Light is only a secondary pathway whereby energy returns back to the Dark. The Light spectrum is subdivided into discontinuous (ionizing) and epicontinuous (blackbody) portions, because only the latter results from the interaction of Matter with the Dark, while discontinuous Light results from the disintegration of Matter. But the Dark itself is not homogenous, being split in kind between life-beneficial energy (OR)and life-inimical energy (DOR). AToS holds that the Dark understood in this way designates the electrically ambipolar massfree radiation that serves as one of the major components of the Aether. It is this radiation which, through secondary superimposition, condenses massbound charges, and interacts with the latter to confer to them electrokinetic energy that, once shed, gives rise to blackbody photons which return the energy back to the medium. The nature of the underlying Dark continuum, and its very split in kind, becomes thereby reflected in the biochemical and biophysical nature of blackbody Light, which AToS splits into HFOT (high frequency optothermal - true blacklight) photons and LFOT (low frequency optothermal) photons. HFOT Light is indicative of an underlying DOR action just as LFOT Light is a sign of OR activity. It is the epicontinuous spectrum of Light that betrays the structure of the actual continuum of the electric aether. If the problem of Light is not separable from the problem of the aether, of the Dark, the latter, in turn, is not subsidiary to the problem of Light. As demanded by Leibniz, we must think the Dark independently from Light - as much as from Matter, even if it is the Dark that links both Light and Matter and transmits the excitation waves that produce Light. This Dark is in a permanent state of motion; it is a subtle imponderable energy that carries no mass. One of the major challenges this process of conceptualization poses to AToS is the understanding that the Dark does not just consist of electrically ambipolar massfree radiation. Free electric wave energy forms an electric continuum with definite frequency limits, but this continuum in turn is only a differentiated part of a much greater aether energy continuum formed by nonelectric massfree energy that one may designate as latent - because its 'heat 'is insensible and thus invisible, or because it appears, to modern physics at least, to lack any physical characteristics. The challenge that future presentations will pose is the experimental identification of the physical characteristics of latent aether energy, and of the differentiation process that produces electrically ambipolar massfree energy."
EXPERIMENT: Parallel pulsatory response to a charged electrostatic rod is seen when the rod is passed between metal plates in air.
EXPERIMENT: Electrostatic charged pendulum interacting with a rectification circuit - assessments indicate that this is a "direct gravito-electric converter which does not exhaust the charge trapped in the dielectric pendulum and employs the local gravitation field to both condense massbound charge and impart to it electrokinetic energy, at the receiver plates." That is, it is proposed that this experiment exhibits literally the creation of electrons from the aether, as a surface condensation process, much as if the apparatus converted gravitational into massbound electric energy.
EXPERIMENTS: With Wimshurst electrostatic generators (0.5 meter from a vacuum tube) and Tesla coils (1 meter from the tube), separately. Conclusion: "Something in the vacuum is more responsive or sensitive to neighboring disturbances of electrostatic potential, than is a wire pick-up under atmospheric conditions.
This brilliant monograph ends with this statement:
"Lastly, we would like the reader to note that the evidence we have provided for auto-electronic pulse signatures as markers for the local flux of ambipolar electric radiation is not a novel phenomenon per se. It goes unrecognized as such in the literature, with respect - in particular - to studies of lightning signatures picked up by antennas, it has long been employed with some realization of the longitudinal nature of the electric waves ultimately causing the observed pulsatory (auto-electronic emission) signatures."
[References to two works, one by C. Yost (2001) and the other by T. Ogawa (1982) are given.]
|AToS theory of the volt and the electron volt - an aetherometric perspective on longitudinal electric waves
This is an analytic monograph that is required for one to understand the subsequent monographs (AS2-13 to AS2-17C). Drawing from unpublished volumes of AToS, the Correas propose a variety of dimensional corrections to key electrical concepts, as well as the aetherometric value of key physical quantities. The ABSTRACT reads:
"We succinctly submit basic aetherometric theoretical and mathematical formulations for the electric functions of potential, charge, energy and power, as they apply to either massbound (monopolar) and massfree (ambipolar) forms of electricity. The microfunctional formulations are rigorously derived with aetherometric tools, and they put into evidence the common misconceptions of electric functions harking back to Maxwell. Fundamental aetherometric equivalences are provided for the volt, the electron-volt, the charge quantum e, Planck's constant, the electron mass-energy and the Duane-Hunt wavelength we have identified. A new constant is introduced (the Eta-Correa constant) and the potential of the electron mass-energy is demonstrated as being equivalent to a wavespeed having the exact value [Formula is given-EFM]. Electric charge is demonstrated to be a linear momentum function, and the authors propose that all electric potentials be understood as longitudinal wave-functions, whether produced by standing or traveling waves, and whether they are constitutive of mass-energy or kinetic energy. Such a standing voltage wave is identified as intrinsic to the structure of the electron mass-energy."A comment by H. Aspden is cited by the Correas up front:
"The origin of the electron must be a medium which is electrical in character and no amount of abstract thinking can avoid this conclusion. Relativity does not have the power to cross these boundaries either. The language of the aether is not Relativity. It is the physics of the electron, the properties of electric charge, which can reveal the secrets of the aether medium." (from H. Aspden, Modern Aether Science", p.91)
AS2-13 through AS2-16:
AT THIS POINT THE CORREAS THEMSELVES PROVIDE A MOTIVATION AND A MAP FOR THE NEXT FOUR MONOGRAPHS - THEY HAVE MADE MY WORK EASY! QUOTING THEM IN FULL:
"Monographs AS2-13and AS2-14:
The Dual Nature of the Energy Radiated by Tesla Coils, Parts 1 and 2
Tesla coils have now, for over a century, been objects of great wonder and also mystery. Tesla himself employed their principle in his famous patent for wireless power transmission. Yet, despite attempts by a few dedicated experimenters (R. Hull, the Corums) who have proposed new theoretical approaches to the operation of these devices, the coil has remained essentially miscomprehended, precisely because it superimposes two distinct oscillatory electric fields, one associated with massbound charge and the other with massfree charge. Moreover, the coil outputs neither electromagnetic radiation, nor an ion field. The basic demonstration of these stunning facts is carried out in these monographs, where aetherometric experimental and theoretical tools are employed to differentiate, on the basis of fundamental physical effects, the ambipolar massfree radiation of Tesla waves from the radiative effects of photons - whether ionizing, HFOT or LFOT photons - as well as from the monopolar electric field effects of ion fluxes or electrostatic charges. These reports establish, from basic scientific facts, the existence of a longitudinal, massfree, electric ambipolar form of energy radiation which is emitted from these coils, and provide the fundamental tools for aetherometric analysis of their operation. This leads the authors to a demonstration of the correct physical meaning of such basic functions as inductance and the characteristic frequency of the coil, laying the foundations for what will become the complete aetherometric analysis of Tesla coils carried out in companion papers AS-15 and AS2-16. The fundamental magnetic and electric frequency functions of the massfree and massbound currents are identified. And an exact aetherometric proof that the electric wavespeed of the ambipolar radiation known as Tesla waves is not bound by c and typically exceeds it, is provided. These two essays - AS2-13 and AS2-14 - are precisely what is needed before one can understand longitudinal, ambipolar, massfree radiation as something distinct from electromagnetism or photon energy."
|(Re-)examination of the energy radiation output by Tesla coils, Part
Experimental determination of its dual nature
Might as well cite the larger Correa ABSTRACT in full here, since it makes clear what has been found in EXPERIMENTS with Tesla coils:
"Experimental re-examination of the basic physical properties of the Tesla coil does not confirm the commonly held notions that it radiates "electromagnetic field energy", or that its loosely termed "electrostatic radiation field" is in any way mediated by ions formed as a consequence of the ionizing properties of the said electromagnetic radiation. Formally, we demonstrate how the Tesla coil is neither a source of ionizing photons (since it fails to discharge a positively charged electroscope, inside - or outside - of its electric or 'electrostatic' field), nor a source of HFOT or LFOT photons, including thermal ones (since it fails to trigger photoelectric cells and its diathermic effect can be shown to be an indirect one). It is also not a source of either negative or positive ions, given that it can bipolarize a doped full wave divider. Yet, its 'electrostatic field' charges most metallic (ungrounded) surfaces positively. To explore further the nature of the Tesla waves, we tested the effect of the Tesla coil output both with a proportional chamber and with a simple plate antenna connected to a radiation ratemeter: whereas, like ionizing and HFOT photons, Tesla waves triggered the proportional chamber, unlike either, and unlike any other, type of "electromagnetic radiation", Tesla waves alone were capable of triggering the ratemeter via the plate antenna, even at substantial distances.Most importantly - if one desires to understand the difference between ordinary electricity composed of the flux of monopolar massbound charges and ambipolar electricity composed of massfree charges, this monograph provides the essential experimental and theoretical distinctions between the two types of electricity. Likewise, if one wishes to understand similar differences between radiative fields - whether electromagnetic, ion fluxes or ambipolar - this is also the monograph where these distinctions are meticulously carried out (see its Table 6, which is an immediate eye-opener!)
Taken together, these results suggest that there is a complex process of conversion of energy at work in these induction coils. The pulsed input to the primary coil induces in the space of the closely coupled secondary a conversion of the local aether energy into electric form. Aether wave energy is tapped by the capacito-inductive properties of the secondary coil to yield resonant, synchronized, superimposed, but distinct 'electric' (electrocapacitative) and 'magnetic' (magnetoinductive) waves. These wave functions properly constitute the massfree radiative field energy emitted by the coil, but they also induce or assemble, within the secondary, an alternate current of massbound charges, or electrons. In turn, this alternate current of electrons in the secondary couples its own 'magnetic' field to the electrocapacitative waves of the coil, to yield a proximal field effect which is responsible for drawing valence and conduction charge from metallic bodies. Beyond the limit of this proximal massbound field effect, the radiated (distal) field of what is known as 'Tesla waves' is composed solely of the 'electric' and 'magnetic' massfree waves radiated from the coil, and is only able to draw charges from the conduction band of metallic bodies. There are therefore quite distinct field effects of Tesla coils. Unfortunately, the proximal field energy has been confusedly assimilated to a "DC or electrostatic field", just as the distal field has been confusedly assimilated to an "AC electromagnetic field". But both fields possess "AC characteristics" and their real difference stems from the fact that one is both proximal and distal, and composed of primary massfree charges, while the other is only proximal, and the effect of the secondary flux of massbound charges. All happens as if the these coils synthesized two different kinds of electric fields, one proximal and massbound, and the other massfree and responsible for all distal effects. It is the massfree electric field that serves as the conduit for the massbound electric field, since only the former exists both proximally and distally, and thus all observable distal effects are due to it - such as the observed acceleration of leakage rates in electroscopes placed at greater distances from the coil. Conversely, it is the induced massbound charge field that is responsible for the observed spontaneous positive charging of the electroscope in the proximity of the coil, but since the radiated electric energy is not an ionizing one, nor does it consist of ion emission, the observed proximal monopolar (positive) charging of metal objects depends solely on the metallic nature of the targeted bodies, not upon any supposed "DC characteristic of an electrostatic field" output by the coil. In a parallel fashion, the primary massfree charge field is no less electrical than the proximal field - and thus fully undeserving of the epithet "electromagnetic.
We can only speak of production of photons or the presence of electromagnetic energy when the primary superimposition of the two synchronous wave functions of the massfree energy field is resolved, at the surface of the metallic bodies that it is emitted from or strikes, to yield the "characteristic electromagnetic" or photonic frequency of the coil in the form of damped waves. Light, and also heat, are therefore indirect effects of Tesla waves, mere secondary emissions from metallic bodies exposed to Tesla radiation. The true "electromagnetic AC component "must therefore be understood as the secondary mechanical result of resolving the superimposition of Tesla waves. From this vantage point, the so-called 'electrostatic' and 'electromagnetic' fields of the Tesla coil cannot be thought of in the traditional manner where the former is the result of the latter, as mediated by ionization, and where the latter alone constitutes the primary emission. There is neither an electrostatic DC field nor an AC electromagnetic field (let alone an ionizing one), and we demonstrate this fact experimentally; both electrostatic and photonic fields are secondary effects resulting from the interaction of metallic matter with resonant 'electric' and 'magnetic' waves, such that the superimposition of these waves is subsequently resolved either to charge that matter or to induce it to emit light and heat.
Finally, basic aetherometric analysis formally demonstrates how the aether wave functions, whether formed capacitatively or inductively, are not limited at all by the photon limit wavespeed c, and thus cannot be thought of, in any way, as subfunctions of an "electromagnetic" wave that propagates transversely to the direction of its forward motion. Here, the critical element of the analysis is the electric frequency term which, in the "vacuum state", can be seen to exceed the blackbody radiation frequency limit , thus indicating that the aether continuum may not be limited, in its upper end, by the blackbody upper limit. This constatation is what originally led us to the discovery of the aether electric spectra, to be presented in companion reports."
|Aetherometric treatment of the energy radiation output by Tesla
coils, Part 2:
Massfree and massbound nonelectromagnetic functions and resultant characteristic electromagnetic frequency of the coil
A continuation of AS2-13 that examines in great depth the so-called Tesla equation, to find its correct aetherometric equivalence and a most peculiar and orderly set of frequency resonances in the operation of any induction coil, all of which are a function of the fundamental aetherometric frequency (64*1014) identified by the Correas as that which separates ionizing from blackbody photons.
"....in the present communication, we complete our demonstration of how the characteristic electromagnetic frequency of the coil, Fc, results from the resolution of the electrocapacitative and magnetoinductive wave frequencies, Fa and Fb, of electronic charges.
We further propose that this process, in turn, is driven by the capture of electric massfree energy by massbound charges, in the form of their kinetic energy, and that it is the shedding of this kinetic energy that directly gives rise to blackbody photon production."
|The aetherometric approach to solving the problem of magnetism
A non-experimental monograph that is based upon the data of existing physics but, by being consistent, corrects fundamental or basic physical errors and mistakes regarding the nature and dimensionalities of the magnetic field (intensity and density), their curls, and cyclotron frequency, for both massbound and massfree charges. The gauss and the tesla, and their equivalence, are redefined. Most interesting, a complete fine structure analysis of the wave interactions involved in the structure of the electron, its kinetic energy, and the structure of massfree charge is directly derived. Scientists and engineers apparently have a lot to learn! A highly shortened version of the Correas' abstract, giving salient points:
"Dimensional analysis of accepted fundamental functions of magnetic flux density B (Maxwell's 'magnetic induction') and magnetic field intensity H (Maxwell's 'magnetic force') exposes discrepant functions that are systematically inconsistent... We begin by demonstrating how the gauss and the tesla, which are supposed to be equivalent measures of the magnetic field B in separate systems of units, are dimensionally inconsistent with each other...The findings suggest a totally new way of treating the magnetic permeability of a medium, and very different relations of the magnetic field functions to the current density terms Jfree and Jbound. These functions are systematized, for both massfree and massbound charges, and contrasted to those of Maxwell and accepted electromagnetic theory. Lastly, we demonstrate how the dimensionalities of H and B are the same...even if one is the reciprocal of a radius and the other of a wavelength (composite or not), in contrast to the electric field....which is effectively a frequency function with dimensionality of t-1."
|Aetherometric treatment of the energy radiation output by Tesla
coils, Part 3:
Primary massfree electric-and-magnetic waves, secondary massbound capacito-inductive waves, and tertiary electromagnetic waves
Below is a much abbreviated version of the Correas' abstract, which suggests that Tesla coils are essentially "over unity" devices, when their true nature is understood! Let me lead with the abbreviated abstract, and follow with VERY brief summaries of the experiments. Clearly, this monograph should be delicious reading to those who have hungered for years for an understanding of electrical over-unity conditions. If this monograph is taken seriously (as it should be - if "free energy" advocates have any integrity at all!), there should be a global quest to confirm or reject the results. The circuits for the experiments are laid out clearly. There are elaborate tables provided which further specify the formulas that describe classical versus AToS analysis of the energy performance.
The abbreviated ABSTRACT:
"In the present communication we focus upon the theoretical and experimental demonstration that the century-old Tesla coil has all along, unbeknownst to modern science, functioned - when properly tuned and loaded - as a massfree electric energy generator that, in defiance of the corollary of the second law, outputs aether energy in electric form greatly in excess of the energy spent at the input by the 60Hz alternate current of massbound charges. This energy output has remained heretofore ignored because experimental and theoretical Physics is incapable of differentiating the electromagnetic energy associated with these coils from both types of electrical energy involved in the coil action - and incapable of differentiating further between these variants of electric energy that are affected to massfree and massbound charge. In the present communication, we propose an aetherometric method to determine the massfree ambipolar radiation of Tesla coils, as consisting of the superimposition of primary electric and magnetic massfree waves, and differentiate it from the aetherometric determination of the kinetic energy of massbound charge oscillating in the coil, as the latter deploys a secondary form of superimposition of capacito-inductive waves. The understanding of how ambipolar radiation is captured by massbound monopolar charges in the form of field-acquired electrokinetic energy is, in turn, critical to functionally comprehend, physically and mathematically, how blackbody electromagnetic spectra are indirectly produced from aether electric energy, via the shedding of the kinetic energy of massbound charge-carriers. "EXPERIMENT: Use of a wave divider to load a TC (Tesla coil) in resonance. Use of a Tektronix CT-1 current transformer for inductively measuring current through a conductor. Determination that the TC is performing as an "aether energy amplifier that inductively and capacitatively converts a given AC power input of massbound charges to the primary into a much greater AC output of massfree charges" (about 4X "over unity"). This is a MEASURED effect! There appears to be no classical explanation of the measurements. That is the point of this experiment. The TC is outputting two kinds of charge - massfree and massbound, and only aetherometric tools can separate one from the other.
A major implication leads on to hints about the technological devices that the Correas have already mastered: "...if only we were to learn how to harness massfree ambipolar energy for purposes of delivering work, then we could have at our fingertips, the ultimate solution to the social problem of energy - since it would suffice to tap the aether energy of any locality to obtain a significant power output from this type of device, with a much smaller input power."
|The indirect 'orgone effect' of Tesla radiation: ambipolar aether and blackbody radiation spectra
The Correa Abstract in Full:
"The authors demonstrate how Tesla coils produce an electrically ambipolar aether radiation field analogous to that emitted by the Sun, and explain how such massfree aether radiation fields interact with Faraday cages to produce two distinct types of radiation inside them: (1) a pool of 'latent heat' experimentally detected (in the dark) by a local increase in the antigravitic kinetoregenerative power of charged electroscopes irrespective of polarity; (2) blackbody spectra of high frequency LFOT photons generated by the shedding of electrokinetic energy from electronic and molecular charge carriers - energy that was captured from the electric aether energy radiated by the original source. Experiments performed with Tesla coils tuned to the modal spectrum of solar ambipolar radiation (OR subspectrum), show indirect generation of LFOT photons, and the tuning of such coils to generate ambipolar radiation in the DOR subspectrum is shown to generate HFOT photons. It is proposed that all blackbody radiation spectra result from aether (massfree) energy spectra formed within an aether electric (ambipolar) continuum of massfree energy, and a formal aetherometric model is introduced to permit correlation between the two energy spectra, aether and photonic, employing solar radiations as an example.EXPERIMENT: Demonstrate that massfree ambipolar radiation from a TC can activate illumination of high vacuum tubes within Faraday cages at a distance! Use of photoelectric circuits in novel ways to confirm this.
This effectively constitutes the first time that in the history of science the spectrum of ambipolar energy is characterized and identified, along with its two subspectra, ORgone and DORgone."
EXPERIMENT: Effects of TC's on electroscopes - discharge arrests similar to those produced by mid-day Sun! "The results are incontrovertible: whatever the conversion process at work, the Tesla radiation was transformed -- by the geometry and the chemical nature of the antenna employed - into radiative energy having antigravitic kinetoregenerative properties."
The methods and conclusions of this monograph are breathtaking in their simplicity and astonishing implications that affect all of physics. And the Correas propose the existence of an entirely new energy spectrum different from that of electromagnetic energy, which they meticulously analyze! It is hard to see how anyone can continue to speak of "the orgone" and not read this epoch-making monograph where the orgone spectrum is unveiled. Anyone interested in basic physics cannot afford to ignore what appears to be a clear demonstration of massfree electric radiation and its spectral characteristics.
|Determination of the OR and DOR energies, frequencies and wavelengths driving the atmospheric allotropic cycle of oxygen, ozone and water
Now that ambipolar electric radiation has been characterized in the previous monographs (AS2-13 to AS2-17A), the Correas revisit the issue of the two-part basic cycle of the atmosphere to determine the exact ambipolar radiation influxes that drive it. They demonstrate how a Tesla coil is actually the analogue of the Sun!
"In the present communication we provide the final energetic understanding of the ambipolar radiation fluxes (OR and DOR) responsible for the production of HFOT and LFOT photons that is characteristic of, and even essential for, the allotropic cycle of water and oxygen-ozone."AND THE BLUE SKY IS EXPLAINED:
"Finally, as the most poignant example of the previous statement, we note that the blue light emanating from the last chemical step in the specific formation of water, occurs very near the ambipolar solar radiation mode we have discovered, and indicates how its dominant atmospheric role in producing a blue sky (azure) is the result of an aether electric resonance in the process of water formation."AND - a political barb well deserved by the Establishment:
"We should note, with regard to this communication, that it took over a century to characterize the exact physical properties of the ambipolar electric radiation first discovered by Tesla, and over a half-century to identify those properties as characteristic of the OR and DOR radiations discovered by Reich. As Nietzsche felt while writing Thus Spake Zarathustra, one can only await, with baited breath, the baboons who will peddle the very caricature of what was said herein."
|The cosmic background microwave radiation as evidence for cosmological creation of electrons with minimum kinetic energy and for a minimum of cosmic ambipolar massfree energy
Last but not least in volume 2B - the fiction of the Big Bang is DONE IN!
"The authors examine the microwave cosmic background radiation (CBR) - composed exclusively of LFOT photons - with aetherometric tools developed in the preceding reports, and the results demonstrate that, unlike what is held by the accepted neo-relativist interpretations of the CBR, its true mode lies - not at 7.35 cm and a frequency of 4.08GHz, but at 7.76 cm and a frequency of 3.861GHz. Still more disturbing is the fact that the conventionally accepted temperature distribution of the CBR blackbody is off by more than an order of magnitude with respect to the real and aetherometric temperature scale that is demanded by a Planckian quantization of the spectrum. The CBR temperature mode is found to lie between 0.1863 and 0.1853 degrees Kelvin. This fact alone is sufficient to dismantle any pretensions of (neo-)Relativity to actually and adequately understand the physical significance of the CBR and grasp the physical processes of its production - thus putting into serious doubt the validity of the so-called Big-Bang hypothesis.
The critical contribution of Aetherometry in the present report to the functional, physical and mathematical understanding of the CBR spectrum lies, however, still somewhere else, in the fact that the cosmic CBR can be shown to be the manifestation of a higher energy spectrum of ambipolar massfree energy, lying well within the ORgone energy range which previous experimental investigations (AS2-09 to AS2-17B) have painstakingly identified and delimited. Furthermore, since the massbound (electronic) charges that adsorb this ambipolar ORgone energy as their own electrokinetic energy, are themselves created by the physico-energetic process that produces the cosmic microwave CBR, the latter must be grasped functionally as evidence for the asymmetric cosmological creation of light leptonic mass constructs (first atoms of Matter) with discrete minima of transiently associated kinetic energy reflective of the minima of ambipolar ORgone energy permeating the entirety of the cosmos.
The conclusions from this aetherometric investigation can be summarized as follows. The microwave CBR spectrum composed exclusively of LFOT photons constitutes proof of:
1. the cosmological creation of electrons, with attendant gravitons, and having discrete minima of kinetic energy...
2. the existence of a minimal spectrum (which we identify) of ambipolar electric radiation throughout the cosmos - confirming Reich's notion that there is a minimum of ORgone energy that permeates the entirety of Space.
3. the existence of a physical process that converts free, nonelectric, nonelectromagnetic, nongravitic, 'latent thermal' or 'antigravitic' massfree energy into ORgone energy, or ambipolar electric radiation and, in the process, also converts other elements of the free nonelectric Aether into mass-energy (and thus monopolar electricity) and into gravitational energy.
Armed with these findings, we are bound to conclude that the CBR does not present any direct or indirect evidence that permits its interpretation as a fossil radiation, or its being construed as proof for an originary hadronic era of the universe. On the contrary, the CBR constitutes instead effective evidence for the continued cosmological generation or ongoing production of leptons, and the very eternity of the cosmos."
MODULES NOT YET RELEASED: AS2-18 through AS2-24 in volume 3.
|Modified Orgone accumulator (HYBORAC) as drive for low delta T Stirling Engines
(First published in Infinite Energy #41)
Complete ABSTRACT from the Correas:
"In the present report, the first of a two-part series, the authors demonstrate a method to optimize the solar-sourced anomalous To-T difference registered in Orgone Accumulators (ORACs) invented by W. Reich in 1939-1940, and employ this optimized difference to drive low delta T Stirling engines of the MM6 type, thereby putting into evidence how this thermal anomaly can be exploited to perform 'free' work. For this purpose, we employed a novel ORAC design - a specially-built hybrid arrangement designed to be directly exposed to solar radiation (as filtered by the terrestrial atmosphere) and partly composed of a black-painted ORAC and a Faraday cage - which we termed the HYBORAC, and a few simple modifications of the Stirling motor, to achieve hour-long midday motor speeds on the order of 20 to 140 rpm, with delta T's ranging from 5.7 to 21°C. Prospects of further approximating the engine delta T to the full value of To-T, and increasing the To-T difference to >30°C, are discussed and proposed in the present report. Results from the continuation of this work are presented in the companion essay."
|Modified Orgone accumulator (complete HYBORAC) as nighttime drive for low delta T Stirling Engines
(First published in Infinite Energy #42)
Complete ABSTRACT from the Correas:
"In the first report of this two-part series, we demonstrated that it was possible to drive low delta T Stirling engines of the MM6 type from the solar- sourced anomalous To-T difference registered in modified Orgone Accumulators referred to as HYBORACs, partly composed of a matte black-painted ORAC and Faraday cage. The design optimized response to solar radiation as well as heat retention, yielding motor speeds up to 140 rpm with delta T's on the order of 21°C. In the present report, our focus lies in maximizing the HYBORAC structure so that it can sustain outdoor operation not just when exposed directly to atmosphere- filtered solar radiation, but above all during the nighttime hours when the device cools together with the cooling air and in the absence of solar radiation. It should be noted that this is not simply a problem of maintaining a positive temperature difference (To-T), since the motor action continually pumps sensible heat out from the HYBORAC. But by increasing the retention of heat, we can also maximize utilization of the sensible heat being generated from other energy conversions occurring inside ORACs.
The solution lay in an arrangement that employs both the HYBORAC and inverted BORACs as components of a more traditional ORAC arrangement, into which they can be inserted. With this improved combination - referred to as the 'complete HYBORAC' - we were able to achieve speeds of 150 rpm during daytime (with delta T values reaching 22.5°C), and speeds of 30 to 80 rpm during nighttime (with delta T values of 3.1 to 9°C). Maximum duration of Stirling Motor operation with the complete HYBORAC was 399 minutes (nearly seven hours), frost effectively bringing the motor to a halt even in the presence of a suitable delta T value (3.5°C). The To-T values measured at the top plate of the complete HYBORAC reached 32°C during daytime, with delta T recovery efficiencies of 65 to 86%, whereas nighttime To-T values exceeded delta T by no more than 2°C, and when they became smaller than the delta T (with recovery efficiencies greater than 100%),the motor began to exhaust heat generation inside the complete HYBORAC. From that point until it stopped, nearly two hours elapsed."
1. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "XS NRGTM Technology", Infinite Energy, March-April 1996, Vol.2, No.7, pp.18-21.
2. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Other Applications of the PAGD technology Besides Energy Conversion", Infinite Energy, March-April 1996, Vol.2, No.7, pp.22-27.
3. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, US Patent #5,416,391 "Electromechanical Transduction of Pulses", May 16, 1995, Filed October 15, 1992 (Re-Printed in Infinite Energy, March-April 1996, Vol.2, No.7, pp.27-35). Other patents referenced: Paulo and Alexandra Correa, US Patent #5,449,989 "Energy Conversion System", Sept. 12, 1995, Filed April 15, 1993; Paulo and Alexandra Correa, US Patent #5,502,354 "Direct current energized pulse generator utilizing autogenous cyclical pulsed abnormal glow discharges", March 26, 1996,
4. Michael Carrell, "The Correa Invention: An overview and an investigation in progress", Infinite Energy, May-June 1996, Vol.2, No.8, pp.10-14.
5. Michael Carrell, "The Correa PAGD Reactor: Errata and Supplement", Infinite Energy, July-August 1996, Vol.2, No.9, pp.33-36.
6. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Metallographic & Excess Energy Density Studies of LGENTM Cathodes Subject to PAGD Regime", Infinite Energy, Dec. 1997-Jan. 1998, Vol.3 No.17, pp.73-78.
7. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "The Reproducible Thermal Anomaly of the Reich-Einstein Experiment Under Limit Conditions", Infinite Energy, July-August, 2001, Vol.7, No.37, pp.12-21.
8. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Consequence of the Null Result of the Michelson-Morley Experiment", Infinite Energy, July-August, 2001, Vol.38, pp.47-64.
9. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "The Sagnac and Michelson-Gale-Pearson Experiments", Infinite Energy, Sept.-Oct. 2001, Vol.7, No. 39, pp.32-49.
10. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "A Modified Orgone Accumulator (HYBORAC) as a Drive for a Low Delta-T Stirling Engine, Part-1", Infinite Energy, Jan.-Feb. 2002, Vol.7, No.41, pp. 23-29.
11. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "A Modified Orgone Accumulator (Complete HYBORAC) as a Nighttime Drive for a Low Delta-T Stirling Engine, Part-2", Infinite Energy, Mar.-April. 2002, Vol.7, No.42, pp. 41-48.
12. "An Interview With Dr. Randell L. Mills of Blacklight Power, Inc.",Infinite Energy, Vol.3, No.17, Dec. 1997-Jan 1998, pp.21-35.
13. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Nonequivalence between work performed by charge against gravity and the electric energy of the same 'charge gas'. The gravitokinetoregenerative phenomenon", Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 1, AS2-01
14. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "AS2-01 Addendum, concerning the pendulum formula as applied to the work performed against gravity by the charges trapped in th electroscopic leaf," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 1
15. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Variation of the spontaneous discharge rate of atmospheric electroscopes induced by electric and nonelectric, local and nonlocal, hidden variables," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 1, AS2-02
16. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "A note on Reich's concept of an electroscopic OP and the concept of a nonelectric kinetoregenerative power of the local atmospheric medium," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 1, AS2-03
17. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Electroscopic demonstration of reverse potentials of energy flow able to draw kinetic and electric energies," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 1, AS2-04
18. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "The thermal anomaly in ORACs and the Reich-Einstein experiment: implications for blackbody theory," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 1, AS2-05
19. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Comparative study of the variation in the spontaneous discharge rate of atmospheric electroscopes and electroscopes placed within 'orgone accumulators,'" Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 1, AS2-06
20. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Decoding the thermal and nonthermal equivalents of the org as a unit of aether energy," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 1, AS2-07
21. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Photoinduced arrest of the spontaneous electroscopic discharge and the Hallwacks experiment revisited," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2A, AS2-08
22. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "The allotropic atmospheric cycle of oxygen, ozone and water: foundations of photo- and aetherochemistry," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2A, AS2-09
23. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "The kinetoregenerative phenomenon and the AToS model of a fundamental aether energy element capable of counteracting gravitons," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2A, AS2-10
24. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "A light-irreducible split-aether continuum encompassing production of black (HFOT) and thermal (LFOT) photons," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2A, AS2-11
25. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "AToS theory of the volt and the electron volt - an aetherometric perspective on longitudinal electric waves," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2A, AS2-12
26. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "(Re-)examination of the energy radiation output by Tesla coils, Part 1: Experimental determination of its dual nature," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2A, AS2-13
27. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Aetherometric treatment of the energy radiation output by Tesla coils, Part 2: Massfree and massbound nonelectromagnetic functions and resultant characteristic electromagnetic frequency of the coil," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2A, AS2-14
28. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "The aetherometric approach to solving the problem of magnetism,"Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2B, AS2-15
29. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Aetherometric treatment of the energy radiation output by Tesla coils, Part 3: Primary massfree electric-and-magnetic waves, secondary massbound capacito-inductive waves, and tertiary electromagnetic waves," "Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2B, AS2-16
30. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "The indirect 'orgone effect' of Tesla radiation: ambipolar aether and blackbody radiation spectra," "Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2B, AS2-17A
31. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Determination of the OR and DOR energies, frequencies and wavelengths driving the atmospheric allotropic cycle of oxygen, ozone and water," "Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2B, AS2-17B
32. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "The cosmic background microwave radiation as evidence for cosmological creation of electrons with minimum kinetic energy and for a minimum of cosmic ambipolar massfree energy," Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 2B, AS2-17C
33. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Modified Orgone accumulator (HYBORAC) as drive for low delta T Stirling Engines (First published in Infinite Energy #41), Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 4, AS2-25
34. Paulo and Alexandra Correa, "Modified Orgone accumulator (complete HYBORAC) as nighttime drive for low delta T Stirling Engines" (First published in Infinite Energy #42), Experimental Aetherometry, Volume 4, AS2-26
35. Aspden, Harold, "The Reality of Perpetual Motion", Infinite Energy, Vol.2, No.8, May-June 1996, pp.15-22.
36. Aspden, Harold, "The Adams-Aspden Motor Patent", Infinite Energy, Vol.2, No.10,Sept.-Oct. 1996, pp.50-53.
37. Aspden, Harold, "Gravity and Its Thermal Anomaly: Was the Reich-Einstein Experiment Evidence of Energy Inflow from the Aether?", Infinite Energy, Vol.7, No.41, pp.61-65.
38. Mallove, Eugene, "Demonstrating Aether Energy", Infinite Energy, Vol.7, No.41, January-February 2002, pp.6-8.
39. Brown, Paul M., "The Moray Radiant Energy Device: Operational Parameters, Design Criteria, and Considerations," 1997, by Aztec Publishing, PO Box 40214, Nashville, TN.