Dr Tom Bearden - Scalar Wave Technology (Scalar EM theory)

Transcript

later it will explain why the potential is such an important thing the ambient conditional that something is sitting in or is charged to but normally the earth the surface of the earth and the electrosphere above it it charges a different potential and so uh depending on the particular conditions and all anywhere from 150 to probably a maximum about fact that there is no such activity that's been falsified now for almost 50 years in physics particularly with the award of the nobel prize to liam yang for broken uh for the discovery prediction of broken symmetry in 1957 it was so profound to change the physics that they awarded the prize the same year it was proven by woo and crew earlier that year that later that year they awarded the nobel prize i mean it was a profound revolution in physics around like a ball or a top or something it's a much more complicated concept but if i sort of think of it as spin it's sort of like the spin spins 360 degrees over in the complex plane then spins 360 degrees in three space real space well while it's over spinning in the 360 over in the time domain it can absorb energy coming in in the fourth axis because the importance of the time domain we realize that we have the energy entering three space from the time domain the basic charge every charge every dipole and every dipolarity already accomplishes broken symmetry in both in energy flow in three space and in the time domain individually but there's a four space symmetry that's maintained in other words exactly as much energy comes in in compressed form in the time domain to the charge as leaves it in three space in expanded form so we still maintain the conservation of energy law but we have also discovered the basic fundamental giant neg entropy operation of nature every charge has been doing it since the very creation if it's been around the original matter some 14 billion years that's good enough for me so if it's going to fail it's going to fail sometime in the future this mechanism continues you do not have to put any energy in once the broken symmetry is established it goes forever uh that's been in physics since uh 1957. now the way you get it to a single charge from the dipole you realize that in quantum electrodynamics any isolated observable charge is clustered by virtual charges of opposite sign clustering around it they have to take into account the shielding of that charge and they speak of the bare charge plus uh plus the observed charge being different numbers because of the shielding and they calculate that standard thing not tom bearden but if you take one of those virtual charges while it is existing and you take a differential piece of the so-called isolated observable charge you have yourself a composite dipole for a moment that's all right it's real while it does exist it's fleeting but it's real and there's another one in the next moment another one and so with this so i can really treat the charge as a set of dipoles anything i work out for dipole applies to the charge so all the stuff between the agreement between reinterpreting the whitaker decomposition of the scalar potential there's a scalar potential between the ends of every dipole that agrees with a quantum field theory uh approach as mandela and shaw showed in quantum field theory using photon theory but all four polarizations of the photon and also agrees with particle physics it says you get the energy out of the vacuum the vacuum exists in time even if it's not observable the virtual state does exist it's just not observable so if you call three space observable or observable three space then the virtual state actually is a structure internal structure and time it's okay if it's energy up there it's got a structure it's got rates of flow it's got density all that stuff it's got differences in intensity which means a potential it's got a direction there's a time direction either into the charge or out of the charge now this however dramatically opens up things like physics and chemistry because in chemistry in the standard model they assume equilibrium the the standard u1 model assumes equilibrium you do not have these disequilibriums they have not taken into account this fundamental thing we just talked about that every charge and every dipole already does now if i look at a set of experiments with this type of eye for example suppose you tell me that in one of these that i mix an acid and i mix hydroxide and i get the neutralization the chemistry agrees with this the tests show that but i don't get the heat no exothermic reaction no exothermic reaction okay the problem then is the standard model in equilibrium says you will always get heat there's nothing wrong with that standard model as long as that space time remains flat and as long as you didn't have an interaction with it with the vacuum that is the time domain with a virtual state what you have just proved is that that assumption in the standard model no longer applies you have experimentally proved that you now have violated gone outside that model to a higher form of phenomenology and you have involved an interaction with curve space time and with a local uh activity of the vacuum you have involved the super system not the system the standard model kills the super system it only has one third of the of the components that are actually interacting now for most cases when equilibrium is recovered by a decay very quickly that's good enough when it does not decay quickly but is stabilized that is not good enough and will not even describe the phenomenology so what you have further told me is in the acid and the hydroxide i have some peculiar properties built in here wired in in the particular acid and hydroxide i've made that causes them to remain stable in a condition where they normally could not be stable in an equilibrium condition you have stabilized a disequilibrium condition very precisely and that means you have an a locked in interaction with curved space time and with a local vacuum you have a super systems uh situation not a system situation you see the approach we're coming from what looks to me like the approach we're coming from is that the these conventional models in a sense a subset of a larger set that's right so what you're doing is you're talking about graduating to a situation where you're enlarging you're either having to create to discover the other subsets or you're having to larger that you're having to enlarge the members of your existing subset that's right and fortunately the models that will allow you to do this that will fit what you're doing they do exist i'll give you what the models are they're sacs unified field theory that means he takes the vacuum his theory applies from everything from the the quarks and nuclei uh quarks inside the nucleon the gluons to the whole universe and everything in between quantum mechanics and everything he got it all and it's engineerable baby it's engineerable electromagnetically but with a different kind of electromagnetics a higher symmetry electromagnetics there are several other kinds of electromagnetics that already cover a good part of that a good one is o3 electrodynamics which uh the alpha institutes the alpha foundation's institute for advanced study has been uh developing under the leadership of dr myron evans now we have over 100 papers right now carried on a doe website it's restricted to scientists because we didn't want to argue with idiots that said you can't ever have a new model you can't have a higher symmetry electromagnetics and all that sort of thing but uh you know we can probably arrange with dave hamilton to get you guys access to that since you're not interested in starting a big kerdog fight you're interested in what the content is another place you can look is su-2 group symmetry electromagnetics now a leading exponent of that is dr barrett barrett was one of the founders and movers and shakers behind the ultra wide band radar and barrett handles higher symmetry electromagnetics quite well very well so there are models they were developed over in particle physics for situations where the maxwell heavy side theory the u1 stuff falls apart won't work they were developed specifically to include higher symmetry phenomena not contained in the u1 model that's why they were developed but there's been this tremendous resistance to correcting what's taught in our schools in our universities instead we still teach all electrical engineers you one we still teach all the chemists you won and you know we meanwhile no we have better electromagnetic systems and more phenomenology available but the scientific community is dominated by the large output of people uh trained only in u1 electro dynamics so we've got to argue with the whole scientific community almost there's only a small number of people working around these peripheral areas some particle physicists a few guys over here some people pushing the electromagnetics out into higher symmetry uh situations you know but they do exist causes you to ask the question is the resistance to examining these new model is the intellectual entropy um strictly intellectual or is it because if you discover some of these systems and you actually create an applied science for it you can actually create enormous upheaval and existing industry with its enormous investment in equipment and machinery i mean we see that with energy if there was someone who could actually on a large scale produce systems of free energy my god you you talk about the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars of investment in in the electoral infrastructure so i think it's a really interesting kind of side sidebar to all of this is the fact that um the um they feed each other i think i think the actual entropy to really get in and examining these other systems and enlarging our understanding enlarging the knowledge base comes from uh business considerations as much more as intellectual ones well of course and the scientific community right now is very dominant dominated by you know who controls sciences who controls their funding somebody gotta pay the freight i'm speaking as one that doesn't have a salary because i'm too big of a rebel the uh but somebody's got to pay the freight okay how do you get the freight paid if you're a professor at a university you have very little freedom anymore contrary to popular opinion for one the state to the university demands that you go out and get outside money because you know under the uh overhead and burden rate this the university is going to get at least half of it to help them cover their expenses so they're very interested in you getting outside money if you want to get your graduate students funded so you can have graduate students working on their doctorate and all and doing a good job you've got to get outside funding for that and for their projects okay when you start to do that when you go out to get these pack these packages down in research already put together the research that is going to be done is already specified you don't have any choice about it it tells you what you're going to do and they're done up at the level of you know the advice comes from the level of the national academy of sciences and national science foundation and so forth but the advice comes from the very community that's trained in u1 in the classical electrodynamics of which basically the definitive paper was written in 1865 during the time of the civil war it was modified actually was curtailed to lesser models two times later one by a heavyside in the 1880s just after maxwell was dead and then further his version of the equation which is what is taught today as maxwell's equations were then further symmetrized by symmetrical regarding by lorentz in the 1880s and that's what added this image and threw out all the systems out of symmetry it was an arbitrary decision made by the rents in the 1860s because it made the equations easier you see otherwise the equations are so non-linear the variables are not separated you've got to use numerical methods you can't separate the variables and solve the equations in most cases so it was horrible when you didn't have computers today it's not that big a problem this is a problem for an old guy like me but for small for younger guys who go to a good university and get the numerical methods and mathematica and so forth on computers give me a good computer give him a good program and okay numerical methods is no problem he can number crunch the computer will do it he doesn't have to sit there and painfully do it like they had to do it back in the 1880s so they did it for a reason but they threw out the baby with the bathwater they threw out exactly a whole class of maxwellian system permitted by nature that are not in equilibrium with their external environment the external environment being precisely the other two components of the super system the active local vacuum and uh the curved space time see we didn't have the electron hadn't even been discovered then the atom hadn't been discovered none of this non-abelian stuff except maybe denial curiosity none of that was even born yet we didn't have the models what we had was a problem of trying to understand anything at all about electromagnetics and trying to communicate as heavy side pointed out with what were then called electricians not electrical engineers and they were about the education of electrician today and uh he said you'll never get quaternions across to them that uh maxwell wrote his stuff in you got to get it simpler so he chopped it with a broad axe and then when lorenz came in and further cemetery he chopped it again and it only contained those systems assumed to be in equilibrium or very near equilibrium with their external environment so we have built a whole class of systems and procedures and models throughout the physics and throughout chemistry and all these other things depending on electromagnetics based on equilibrium conditions and as long as that system restores its equilibrium very rapidly then the present physics model is quite sufficient and the present uh u1 electrodynamics model is quite sufficient and the present chemistry model is quite sufficient when it doesn't recover symmetry almost immediately very quickly so that there's not much effects at all from disequilibrium if it minimizes all its disequilibrium effects the other models are adequate if it does not minimize disequilibrium effect particularly if it stabilizes the disequilibrium structures and the dynamics then the other models fall apart they are incapable of describing that kind of condition so we've got to go to the models that can handle it and that's the higher symmetry electromagnetics which haven't been factored into chemistry very much yet either so we're we're caught in a situation where we're using 100 and something year old stuff and it's been modified and curtailed there have been one hell of a lot of physics discovered since then there have been a lot of things discovered in electrodynamics since then so that we could model some of this higher physical phenomena and it hasn't been added into the standard electrodynamics model and it hasn't been added into chemistry that's your problem 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 theories work their way into people with more practical minds to create the applied science correct these are the lag time there lack time between certainly between ein tines einstein's theory of relativity of 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 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 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's 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 they like to joke that uh 50 percent of all physicists graduated in the bottom half of their class that's correct then let's talk about what caliber people they are i know from the bell-shaped curve that they fit there's certain percentage of them up on the higher end of the curve that are almost angelic highly moral highly dedicated 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 the 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 questioning 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 their 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 curb 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 that the disproportionate 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 viciousness of the attacks on cold fusion is one example uh the attacks on anybody like me for example and 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 what they don't contain that's basically what i do but they attack anybody who's working out of the box as if he were an utter raving lunatic and as if the signs were perfect and it were a religion brought down on a 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 outside the present model the scientific method says you must change the model that's not tom beard in 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 eminent scientists on that you know feynman for example says you know most of the things that we list as givens 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 defined 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 calculated 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 fostered 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 this current that's the energy dissipation going 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 defeated 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 right it's a tiny bit of the energy that's out there heavy side the independent co-discoverer of so-called energy flow through space which has got to be changed by the way it disagrees with quantum mechanics the energy flow and observation itself the energy flow uh does not actually conclude just the amount it's caught just the diverged pointing component it also includes a component that does not get caught and does not get diverged 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 only about about three dozen electoral dynamics in the whole world you were then violently attacked as being a perpetual motion nut so i had to be very careful with it now the rents understood both the difference between both sets of theory heavyside was better pointing got the direction wrong heavyside corrected him but pointing published prestigiously heavyside was plugged was never self-taught brilliant man but self-taught never went to university he published more obscurely he later got a prestigious publication in uh royal society proceedings as were appointing published but uh he spoke of it in terms of angle he's very cautious not to say there's a hell of a lot more energy pouring out of those terminals and we're putting in that thing so what's happening lorenz took a look at it and said my god you know how do i explain that even the great lawrence could not dare to say you know there's 10 to some number you grab a number 12 i did an estimate one on one circuit was 10 to the 13th but say 10 to the 12th as much energy pouring out of the end of the generators you're putting into the shaft now try to run that by an electrical engine it's true but just try to run it by one laurent said well this other energy never denied it existed it doesn't do anything and he used a clever phrase he said it has no physical significance because it doesn't power anything that's like saying i got a sailboat on the ocean big wind and all the wind misses my sails have no physical significance that's true for my boat for those sails on my boat that's true the rest of that wind doesn't power my boat at all so he said it has no physical significance he gave a little trick to integrate the whole energy flow vector around a closed surface around any volume element of interest at all that throws away everything that goes in and comes out with no diversion it throws away the heavy side component retains a pointing component now that'll agree with your measurements on the circuit because the energy that's dissipated from the circuit which is what you've got to measure has to enter the circuit and that's the pointing component it's not the heaviside component which does not enter the circuit the average electrical engineer it's a rare one very rare i would say less than 10 in the united states even knows there is a heavy side component missing the circuit you never looked at it has no nothing to do with it doesn't believe it if you tell it never has read the original papers never has gone back to see what heavyside actually said in his papers or what pointing actually said in his or what the ritz said in his most of the professors have not read the original papers over 50 percent have not read them they don't think it's necessary anymore perfect job was done it wasn't so in every area we look at there again was the broken symmetry of the dipole batteries and generators do not power circuits never have never will there's not a battery there's not a generator ever made that added a single watt to the power line it's very easy to prove that in particle physics it doesn't even exist in electrical engineering in fact they'll think you're nuts let's explain it from particle physics starting from the award of the nobel prize in 1957 for the broken symmetry of opposite charges now dipole is two opposite charges very close to each other that's what a dipole is so if i've got broken symmetry of opposite charges baby i got broken symmetry anytime i form a dipole i don't have to prove that it's been proven in physics if anybody doesn't believe it go read why uh lee and yang got the nobel prize in 1957 and read the papers read the literature that's gotten unfashionable these days don't read the literature read what somebody wrote about the literature no go to the original sources okay once i have this dipole the very definition of broken symmetry says whatever is virtual the virtual particle interaction coming in with those charges at least a good part of that is being changed over now and is re-radiated back as not as virtual form but as observable form all that is is coming in the time domain which is virtual state structures of time and rate radiating out by integrating by the spin to real stuff just like an old for first order analogy just like an old spinning wheel weeding threads together fibers together into the thread you get them bigger they become observable but then they're three space because you see them that means you catch them in three space so what happens is uh that's what the charge is doing anyway and that's where it's coming from but we know that once we form that source dipole now leave it alone don't ever put another watt back into the circuit at all that dipole will sit there and pour out energy forever including both the heavy side component and the pointing component now clever devils that we are we've been using a hundred and something year old system we whatever we catch in that circuit we want to drive the electrons around in the circle we ignore the holes in the direct sea because they mostly interact with the lattice holes which are tied to big old ions down in the nucleus for example and there's so much having an electron they rock a little bit while electrons are going so what we do is we ignore a whole part of the electromagnetic going on usually in power engineering particularly and what we do whatever we capture potentializing these electrons we look at the back emf between the source dipole every electron flow that's potentializing goes around this way down to the ground side we have to pump its equivalent right back up through that back emf and knock the charges apart so it takes precisely one half the energy it does collect to destroy its own dipole is pulling the energy out of the vacuum the power of the circuit the other half powers the circuit it powers the losses and loads which means less than half in a real circuit with losses less than half is is actually developed as power and a load you got a half used to kill the dipole you got less than a half used power load you got to put back in at least as much to work back on those charges and force them back apart to make the dipole again as it took to destroy it so you got to put more in and you get out the load that's the only reason on god's green earth we're building cop less than one circuit universally closed current loop circuit restores laurent symmetry and forces us into cop less than one forces in the classical equilibrium thermodynamics forces us into the second law of thermo and baby you can't beat it if you have an open system a common home heat pump for example has a under good conditions has a cop of about 4.0 theoretical maximum is 8.22 but the average one with this inefficiencies and all is about four it puts out about four times as much actual energy delivered and you know heating the air pump in the air or whatever or cool in the air as you have to physically put in an electromagnetic form it gets the rest of it by compressing the air and taking out the energy out of the out of this external environment it's an open system perfectly permitted to do cop1 the only reason we don't close loop heat pumps and self-power homes is because they've diabolically designed so you can't have a high efficiency uh process you've got to have the low efficiency they've been high efficiencies when patented and they disappear because when it cools off out there bingo now you back on resistance heating they lose so much efficiency you can't get anything out of them you got to go to a resistor so now you burn power everything has been designed to keep that power meter on your house and keep that a gas pump meter on your gas pump and keep you out of an electric car doesn't have to be designed that way but it's been designed that way delivered it now the electrical engineers don't know it the electrical engineer doesn't even know about the heavy side theory it's a very rare one that has ever read the original papers in the first place and he didn't pay any attention to the fact there's a hell of a lot more energy coming out of the the terminals of a battery or generator than what we're putting in the shaft or the chemical energy we expended never registered now that's appalling after 100 years over 100 1880s it's appalling why is not the national science foundation reacting to this i don't know why is not the national academy assigned well for one thing you get it's prestigious you get elected to the national academy of sciences and you're not fixing to pull the rug out from under your prestige and what you've done no way you're going to see it's done a little better come in the young guys on doing better research make a little more efficient but you're not going to go through out the whole system and start a new one that's the problem we have now really uh it's not diabolical it's it's honest but what it is is the whole scientific community is you know the bulk of it is dedicated to maintaining the status quo and that's what's wrong with us we're still using an archaic science we're still affecting what the chemist is allowed to do because we're giving them a u1 model and we're teaching them u1 electrolytes he never heard most of them of these higher symmetry electromagnetics and certainly i don't know of any chemical textbooks using them there should be they've been around a long time why are we not funding deliberate research to get outside the box to get outside the present model so we can get new chemistry we can get marvelous advances in chemistry such as this thing why aren't we doing that i don't know because we upset somebody's rice bowl when we do and they don't want their rice bowls upset that's basically what it's all about yeah we're getting it in droves i'll give you one more thing and then this will be over when you deal with the super system you now have to understand engines i'm going to start general relativity and general relativity if i change the local energy density of the vacuum in any form whether it's mass or whatever any form of energy that i change the energy density of this local space right here this little position i immediately have a curvature of space-time that's the way it's modeled i'm talking about a model now curvature space-time is not just an etheric kind of idea that'll go away not bite you it's a very active dynamic thing space time is considered to be the active thing i'm glad it is because time is part of it that's really active giving us all the energy so they got it they got it in there but they called it space time they call the part that isn't changing really from the repeated observation but the part that is so but once i have a curvature of space time i now have a quote wheeler's principle if i change the mass energy they speak of the energy in the mass rather than the mass if i change the mass energy in density i change space time i affect space time i cannot avoid that interaction it's absolutely automatic now if i change the space-time curvature and it's a mass sitting there i affect the mass and i change the mass now you can get new mass in a curved space-time a photon has mass the photon interactions with that mass now can add mass or subtract mass you get my drift you can have in this if i take the exact template the exact forms of all the dynamics and all the curvatures i call that a template and that and the dynamics i call that an engine because if i change the space time itself which i can do electromagnetically with these higher symmetry electrode i can't do it with u1 because this assumes a flat space i don't have an engine but if i use one of the others i can have an engine i can make it in space time without a piece of mass even there then i can bring in a piece of mask and it'll baby work on that dude until that mass changes to where how it would affect space-time fits that curvature and that curvature working on if it's what it is so that balance occurs between curve space time and that the engine works forever and you don't have to provide any energy from it it takes it from the whole universe facetime itself so you must understand the engine concept now that i'm talking about the super system i have engines now the engines exist in the vacuum i don't have a linear vacuum i have structures in the back and we can work on no charges move them around change your charge change a negative charge into a positive charge all kinds of things now the lab observer looking from his flat space time at that is going to see the intersection in flat space time of that thing he's not going to see that thing in curved space time if i started with a standard set of something that i can model in a relatively flat space time and i make a peak in it somewhere where it violates that now if i change this whole thing i still got my peak i didn't change what i started from so you will recognize in your chemicals in your molecules that you form you will recognize the peaks of certain things that well it's just sulfuric acid no it's not it would be sulfuric acid if you unkinked the space time got rid of the engine but as long as that engine is residing in that set of uh atoms and all making up that molecule you do not have to have just the model that exists in in the normal stuff for example what would be unstable in equilibrium conditions this is not equilibrium curved space time is a broken equilibrium a very fundamental one and you do not have to have what you have in equilibrium conditions and it can be stable as long as that curve space time is stable the business of charging one in a time domain you can have it charge for an awful long time you can just hold that and stay there and sit on the shelf and all this it doesn't have to decay when it does decay it decays very slowly usually unless you take special measures to convert it but yes what you're doing is really using engines now it can be modeled it can be accurately expressed including the exact molecule you form if we change the chemistry to add engines to add curved space times to add active vacuum going on all at the time if you get a balance between the stuff coming out of the vacuum and the stuff coming from space time that the only place there in equilibrium is where this crazy molecule exists that molecule will exist it'll lock in you see what i mean you got yourself a a a symmetrical condition but look at the symmetry between curves face time and the vacuum it's not the symmetry that we normally look at forget the space time and forget the vacuum look at three spades we're not looking at three space with four dimensions or if you want to you can be in 11 to 12 depending on what you want to use to model it so you can have a molecule which is absolutely unstable in the present situation present model would be totally unstable but if you have violated that model and you have achieved a balance between these other two components of the super system then you can lock it in to stability and what the guy in the lab will see would be a terribly unstable condition it will not be unstable now he's not wrong he just hasn't realized that he's wrong in his model he would be correct if you were using the situation described in his model assumed in his model the background conditions the initial conditions and all that automatically assumed in his model if you were applying those then you could not be doing this and he would be right since you are not using those conditions you have deliberately changed them by adding an engine making an engine once you have the balanced engine between the time domain the curvature of space time actually the time domain and the curve space time and the interaction from the vacuum once you have a balanced equilibrium there that will hold that state even though it would be normally unstable it'll be just stable as a rock under its conditions that is a special form of symmetry not in three space where the normal chemist is looking between the space time curve space time itself and the local vacuum that's where the symmetry is coming in whatever happens to it from space time is balanced by what the opposite being happened that's stabilized hold it right there it's in an equilibrium condition so yes this is the way you have to explain what you're doing now how do you get that done scientifically you don't have a lot of choices of people that can handle that kind of electrodynamics but you do have them they are available you got to be sure you've got a couple of them terry barrett myron evans is out of it because mine has a a genetic problem he's in wales right now anyway and he's being taken care of but he's one of the most brilliant minds on this planet so you could use him for consulting purposes he also is a chemical physicist he knows not only the physics and all this other stuff and all the higher symmetry electromagnetics he's the founder of that but he also knows chemistry so he'd be an ideal consultant terry barrett can handle all his higher symmetry electromagnetics and he can he can hang in there with all of this so you have to have people that know general relativity no unified field theory where there's a higher symmetry electromagnetic developed so that you can unify you can't unify u1 electrodynamics with general relativity they are diabolically opposed one says the flat the space time is flat the other says no it ain't just curve you can't put two things like that together they don't fit so you know in the country boy language they're stupid to try to fit them they don't fit and nature's unified nature doesn't have it separated where they never get together and never operate at the same time that's not true nature has them always operating so what you're doing as far as i'm concerned is magnificent but you're advancing chemistry out of a flat space time no vacuum interaction model into a non-abelian model where you have a curved space a unified field theory model where you have both the curve space time and you have an active vacuum interacting with that system itself with that chemical system itself with those molecules himself if you manipulate the charges baby and change the engine they're using you can change what molecule they will form and be stable and that's what you're doing can all be described with good theory it will not fit the chemical model in most of those chemists heads it never will because you're not doing that you're outside their model working it's okay that's what advanced in science is called and in the scientific method we're supposed to do precisely that if the experiments are replicable and done well if they continue to be replicated and give results that refute the present model all they're telling us is we've got to change our model nature works this way now go model it this way that's what you're telling us that's scientific method that's the advance of science so that's what ought to be done