Dr. Tom Bearden: Interview on H3O / HRx / Scalar Wave Technology 6/8

Transcript

here's why I think we may be on the precipice of something revolutionary the Natural Evolution of the development of the science is that you have your theories and theories work their way into people with more practical Minds to create the applied science that's correct usually a lack time there time between certainly between Einstein's Einstein's theory of relativity 1905 and working its way into the creation of nuclear energy for instance by way of example I think what you have right now is a rather unusual situation where you have the development of the applied science before the Genesis of the theoretical structure exactly exactly or at least in light of all these other theories that you've that you've been enlightening about um let me just say that it's possible that you have the introduction of the applied science before you have the suturing of all of these fragmentary theories which would help to create a kind of cohesive theoretical structure to provide it with uh well greater theoretical legitimacy if you will exactly and the what you run into is uh now speak of human beings scientists are after all human beings they have all the same reactions of normal human beings there nothing highly Superior about being a scientist uh that means they form a bell-shaped curve just like any other group of people now yeah there's they like the joke that uh 50% of all physicists graduated in the bottom half of their class that's correct then let's talk about what caliber of people they are I know from the bell-shaped curve that they fit there a certain percentage of them up on the higher end of the Curve that are almost Angelic highly moral highly dedicated to Scientific Method uh you know we'll always try to to to take a model for example into account is that modelable by my model or not now the Broadband is not going to question models or talk about model they're just going to be applying and doing their job and using physics as it has been developed to the best of their ability they're going to be good physicists good scientists doing good work but they're not going to be creating you a new model and they're not going to be question and the model you're working in now the lower end of those people are just about like Devils they have absolutely no morals they have no dedication to Scientific Method they wouldn't even recognize the spelling of it they're manipulative they'll do anything they have to do to human systems or otherwise to climb the ladder and get as high up as they can in control and they're driven by greed power Prestige money all the other good stuff who's going to be the big monkey is there driving Motif from the moment they get up in the morning till the time they go to bed at night and then when they dream at night they're still in the same Motif okay the problem with those is they skew the curve because of their manipulations and scheming and conniving and all this they do tend to Scamper up and bias the bell-shaped curve now they don't bias it completely thank God because we still got a lot of good scientists and we still got a scientific method and we still got a scientific Community but they do everything they can to turn it into a dogma and a religion now when the money has to start passing through their hands and there's more of these up at these higher levels where we get our hands on the money that's where the power is in any human system you know control the money you control the system the more they get up higher in that in positions in that then they're able to influence and control a much vaster part of science than we would be comfortable with they're turning it into dogma and that has progressed far too far along the line so the dispropor voice that's correct they have a disproportionate voice the other thing is they attack anything that's out of the box that they're comfortable in and they know they attack it with a viciousness seldom seen in science the recent uh viciousness of the attacks on Cold Fusion is one example uh the attacks on anybody like me for example and I I consider myself a poor example I'm not a super scientist I'm just a guy that looks at models and looks at what they contain and what they don't contain that's basically what what I do uh but they attack anybody who's working out of the box as if he were an utter raving lunatic and as if the science were perfect and it were a religion brought down on the stone tablets with Moses or something that's the problem you're up against Dogma not scientific method scientific method is very clear if the experiment is done and done well and properly and if it is repeatable and it repeats the results and those results fall out outside the present model the scientific method says You must change the model that's not Tom Bearden that scientific method now when you say we're going to attack you fiercely and we're going to say you know the experiment is wrong I don't care how many people replicated it I don't care what you did you're wrong the experiment is wrong and you're a lunatic for even bringing it to my attention get out of my face that is not science that's dogma and you're dealing with people who want to manipulate it right where it is and very happy in their cushy position you're threatening to them you're going to change the situation the status quo you don't like that at all that's your problem interesting you're going to change the situation the status quo you don't like that at all that's your problem interesting and of course you know you can put all kind of quotations from imminent scientist on that you know Fineman for example says you know most of the things that we list as given inside we don't even know what they are we don't know what energy is there's not an adequate definition of force and he said try if you think there is try to find one you won't find it if you really look at the problem I couldn't find a single physicist or a single physics dictionary and I bought the best that was available that adequately Define the potential and the reason was quite simple they don't calculate the potential there is not a university in the United States that has ever calcul at the magnitude of a potential there's not an electrical engineer or a grad student what they calculate is what is diverged from the potential by a unit Point charge that you just arbitrarily stick there in space now before the charge is there and before the interaction what exists there it's not the E field and it's not the potential that you have in your textbook at best that's a real careful scientist will say potential intensity that's a indication of the intensity of the potential not what the magnitude the magnitude thing reaches through all space so what's its magnitude same thing with the field the imprecision that has been fered in there like all electrical engineers talk about drawing power you can't draw power from the wall power is the rate time rate of doing work and the work is time rate of changing the energy or you know like scattering it or dissipating it in a resistor and that's in the local component it has nothing to do with what comes out of the wall the other thing energy flow has nothing to do with the electrons coming out of the wall flowing in his current that's the energy dissipation going on on in the circuit has to do with that the energy flow is outside the wire even the standard pointing Theory goes into that and if feed it reaches on into space out way past the wire pointing never considered anything except the amount that hits the surface charge and gets caught and drawn back into the charge actually hits the field from the surface charges and gets drawn back in to the wire back and forth that little bit gets added to the why it's a tiny bit of the energy that's out there heavyside the independent c-cover of so-called energy flow through space which has got to be changed by the way it disagrees with quantum mechanics the energy flow in observation itself the energy flow uh does not actually conclude just the amount that's caught just the diverged pointing component it also includes a component that does not get caught and does not get diverg and misses the circuit it's enormously greater than the other one but now back in the 1880s you had a problem if you came up and you said that the terminals of every generator and every battery out there that from the terminals there Comes This outpouring of energy far greater than the amount of mechanical shaft energy input to the generator or the amount of chemical energy dissipated in the battery you would have been violently attacked by the small scientific community that there was it was only about about three dozen electrodynamics in the whole world you have been violently attacked as being a perpetual motion nut so I had to be very careful with it now Len understood both the difference between both sets of theory heavyd was better pointing got the direction wrong heavyside corrected him but pointing published prestigiously heavyside was P was never was self-taught brilliant man but self-taught never went to University he published more obscurely he later got a prestigious publication in Royal Society proceedings as were pointing published but uh he spoke of it in terms of angles he's very cautious not to say there's a hell of a lot more energy pouring out of those terminals than we putting in that thing so what's happening lorence took a look at it and said my God you know how do I explain that even the great Lorent could not dare to say you know there's 10 to some number if grab a number 12 I did an estimate 101 circuit was 10 to the 13th but say 10 the 12th time