Joseph W. Newman: South African Patent Application #831296,
"Energy Generation System Having Higher Energy Output Than Input"

 
> ![](0logo.gif) **[rexresearch.com](../index.htm)**
>
> > ---
> >
> > **Joseph NEWMAN**
> >
> > **Gyroscopic Magnetic Particle Motor**
> >
> > ---
>
> ***The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman***  
> **by J. Newman**  
> **[ [PDF](EnergyMachineJosephNewman.pdf) ] 95 MB**
>
>   
>
>
> ---
>
> [**http://www.KeelyNet.com**](http://www.KeelyNet.com)
>
>
> **Newman's Gyroscopic Theory**
>
> The theoretical
> basis of Joe Nemans' Revolutionary Energy Machine challenges
> many accepted laws of physics.
>
> The starting point
> for understanding Newman's ideas is his assertion that the
> fundamental building block of all matter is the gyroscopic
> particle, an infinitesimal unit of matter that spins like a
> gyroscope.
>
> Newman claims that
> the mechanics of magnetism and electricity, which have never
> been fully explained, can be described in terms of how
> gyroscopic particles react and interact.
>
> The idea that a
> single type of particle is responsible for the forces at
> work in the universe is an old one, yet some of the latest
> research in physics involves the investigation of particles.
>
> New and smaller
> particles with previously unknown properties are being
> discovered on a regular basis.
>
> Newman's theories
> also depend heavily on the idea that all matter is
> concentrated energy, which can be released if one has a
> mechanism for unlocking it.
>
> That notion is at
> the heart of Einstein's work and the equation E = mc^2, then
> the argument that he is trying to patent a perpetual motion
> machine has no merit.
>
> Theoretically,
> Newman's machine could run indefinitely, but --- according
> to him --- not because it is CREATING energy to run itself,
> but because it is converting matter to energy.
>
> In radically
> oversimplified terms, this is what happens when Joe Newman
> throws the switch on the Revolutionary Energy Machine:
>
> 1) An electrical
> current is sent through a long (miles long) coil of copper
> wire, magnetizing it and creating a strong magnetic field.
>
> 2) Newman
> describes the mechanics of the magnetic field as "shells of
> force" composed of gyroscopic particles that move in a
> spiral pattern around the wire.   
> Originally IN the wire, the particles expand outward and
> thus create the magnetic field.
>
> 3) When the
> particles form a magnetic field, Newman says, they are
> traveling at the speed of light in two directions --- in the
> spiral pattern around the wire, and in their own normal
> gyroscopic spin.
>
> This gives him the
> right side of the E = mc^2 equation; the particles (mass)
> multiplied by the speed of light squared.
>
> 4) The machine
> operates in pulses; that is, the electrical current is
> continually turned on and off. This causes the magnetic
> field --- in other words, the gyroscopic particles --- to
> expand and collapse.
>
> 5) When the
> trillions of gyroscopic particles that have been released
> collapse back into the wire, some of them collide with other
> gyroscopic particles.
>
> Because of the
> nature of the gyroscopic spin, the collisions cause the
> loose particles to bounce off at right angles; those
> particles emerge at one end of the wire as electrical
> energy.
>
> ---
>
> ***Atlanta
> Journal-Constitution* (7-13-86)**
>
> **Will Joseph Newman's Energy Machine
> Revolutionize the World?**
>
> **by**
>
> **Raad Cawthon**   
>  **Staff
> Writer**
>
> LUCEDALE, Miss. -
> In the piney woods southwest of this southwest Mississippi
> town, off the broken blacktop and two miles down a rutted
> sand and dirt road, through three gates, past the "Keep Out"
> and "Beware of the Dogs" signs, smack in the middle of
> nowhere, sits Joseph Westley Newman, a man who says he can
> change the world.
>
> In this land where
> heat devils beat from the ground in waves, Newman says he
> can bring water to the desert places of the world, eliminate
> poverty, and improve the quality of everyone's life. If only
> Newman's enemies will let him. Newman does not look the part
> of a savior. He sports hair waved across his head in the
> style of a Baptist deacon.
>
> In the heat Newman
> is calm, cool and certain. He carries a gaze direct as a
> laser. He says, "What I have done will revolutionize the
> world." What has Joe Newman done?
>
> He has built the
> Revolutionary Energy Machine. His government, Newman's
> proclaimed enemy, says his machines are frauds. Not so, says
> Newman. Instead they are the bootstraps by which mankind can
> pull itself up. Across the tidy, tile-floored workshop from
> Newman sits a copper-sheathed canister the height and
> diameter of a fire hydrant.
>
> At the far end of
> the workshop, swaddled in miles of copper wire, is another
> machine, a 9,000-pound version the size of a five-person hot
> tub, its circular rim topped with a circle of light bulbs.
>
> These are two of
> Newman's Revolutionary Energy Machines, which he knows will
> free the world from drudgery and make the First, Second, and
> Third World as one.
>
> It is these
> machines and others like them, using Newman's same
> revolutionary theory, that Newman claims produce more energy
> than they consume. That would allow men to light cities for
> pennies, power cars without pollution or gasoline, drive
> machines to make salt water fresh. But it is his own
> government, represented by the National Bureau of Standards
> and the U.S. Patent Office, that Newman says is his and
> mankind's foe.
>
> It is his own
> government that Newman claims has waged a seven-year war to
> keep his invention from improving the world. "All I am doing
> is opening doors," Newman says.
>
> The government,
> through its unwillingness to grant him a patent, says
> Newman's machine, which he has invested about $700,000 in
> developing and defending, does not do what he claims.
>
> "The NBS results
> show that the device behaves in a manner which is entirely
> consistent with the well-established laws of physics," says
> the report, released June 26.
>
> The
> "well-established" laws of physics say a machine cannot put
> out more energy than it consumes.
>
> **Government
> report `a mockery of justice' ---**
>
> Newman says he
> knew what the NBS report would show. As a matter of fact, so
> certain was Newman that he issued a press release before the
> report became public saying it was a "mockery of justice."
>
> The inventor says
> he is certain his machine works, can demonstrate that it
> works, and is willing to defend his machine in public debate
> against anyone from the NBS or the U.S. Patent Office or any
> university or anyone who claims to know what he is talking
> about.
>
> Newman has taken
> his Revolutionary Energy Machine on the road, demonstrating
> it in the Louisiana Superdome and in Atlanta.
>
> In each place he
> challenged an expert on physics to debate his theories in
> public. Nobody showed up. Newman, who was raised in Mobile,
> dropped out of high school and left home at 15, went in the
> armed services, roughnecked in the oil fields, got a degree
> in accounting and economics, and decided - in his early 20s,
> after casting around through several jobs - that he wanted
> to be an inventor.
>
> Over the course of
> the next two decades he registered patents for several
> inventions --- a machine to pick oranges, plastic barbells,
> a new type of knife --- and pursued his self-taught odyssey
> into electromagnetics.
>
> Etched in the
> concrete of Newman's workshop walkway is "Question +
> Thinking = Truth." Newman says that because he is not
> burdened by conventional teachings, his mind is free to
> challenge questions without the constraints conventional
> physicists place on themselves. Newman already has won over
> a number of physicists, electrical   
> engineers and chemists who have seen his Revolutionary
> Energy Machine and heard his explanation.
>
> Dr. Roger
> Hastings, a physicist with Sperry-Univac Corp., has
> conducted hundreds of tests on Newman's machine. His
> opinion? "The future of the human race may be drastically
> uplifted by the large-scale commercial development of this
> invention," he says.
>
> And Nicholaos
> Tsoupas, a physicist who works at Brookhaven Laboratory in
> New York and once taught at Yale University, said, "I know
> for a fact that many scientists consider his invention
> unorthodox and unacceptable, possibly because his theories
> do not fully comport with today's university teachings.
>
> However, Mr.
> Newman has demonstrated that his invention works the way it
> claims. The Patent Office should not have denied him a
> patent." But the Patent Office did.
>
> Newman applied for
> a patent for his machine March 22, 1979. In January 1982 the
> Patent Office denied him the patent, claiming his invention
> "smacked of perpetual motion." Newman appealed the ruling
> and in 1983 filed suit against the Patent Office.
>
> Federal District
> Judge Thomas Jackson, who was hearing the case, appointed a
> special master to evaluate Newman's machine. The special
> master, William Schuyler Jr., a former commissioner of the
> U.S. Patent Office, concluded that the machine did what
> Newman claimed and recommended that a patent be granted.
>
> Jackson, in an
> action that many people familiar with similar patent cases
> claim was almost unheard of, refused to accept the
> recommendation of Schuyler and sent the issue back to the
> Patent Office for more study.
>
> In October 1985,
> Jackson ordered Newman to turn his machine over to the NBS
> for testing. Jackson's order also prevented Newman or any of
> his representatives from attending the tests. But when the
> 30-day period passed and the machine had not been tested,
> Newman's attorney, John Flannery, attempted to retrieve the
> machine. Jackson ordered it impounded.
>
> After finally
> testing it, the Patent Office on June 26 issued a report
> claiming that the machine does not do what Newman says it
> will. "The Bureau of Standards is coming into this tainted,"
> Newman says, noting that he still has not recovered the
> machine the NBS has had since 1985. "I have spent 21 years
> working on this machine and seven trying to get it patented.
> I am devoted to this."
>
> Why give away a
> billion-dollar theory?
>
> So devoted is he
> that he has written a book outlining the secret of his
> machine. The red-covered, hard-bound book is titled in gold:
> "Joseph Newman's Revolutionary Energy Machine."
>
> Inside, the pages
> are packed with diagrams, equations, theories and
> philosophies on the power of electromagnetics. "Anyone with
> any knowledge of electromagnetic energy can read this book
> and build a machine," Newman says.
>
> They also can
> study Newman's theories about how the weather can be
> controlled by directing electromagnetic energy and how
> Newman believes the present educational system trains
> originality out of children.
>
> Why would someone
> develop a theory that he claims will change the world, a
> theory worth billions of dollars, and then give it away in a
> book? "Because the technical process is 10,000 times more
> important than the machine itself," Newman says.
>
> He points to his
> head. "If I keep the knowledge up here, what will happen to
> it if something happens to me? If you understand the
> technical process, then you don't just copy what I have
> done, you can apply it in many different ways."
>
> Newman's machine,
> if it works, truly could change the face of the world.
> Energy would be dirt cheap and non-centralized.
> Multinational oil cartels would be restructured or collapse.
> Utility companies that have invested billions in nuclear
> energy would see the plants as costly millstones, dragging
> them into bankruptcy.
>
> Great stockpiles
> of coal, as well as the companies that mine it, would lie
> almost useless. So it is little wonder that Newman, who says
> he has gotten mysterious, anonymous threatening telephone
> calls lately, thinks there is a tremendous conspiracy,
> worldwide in scope, to prevent his invention from coming
> into widespread usage.
>
> "My machine is a
> threat in terms of changing the financial structure and the
> power structure of the world," he says calmly. "I believe
> this conspiracy goes all the way to the president."
>
> Newman has written
> every president since Lyndon Johnson stating that this new
> energy technology was on the horizon. Most of his letters
> went unanswered, presumably ignored.
>
> However, in 1983
> Newman sent Reagan a package of material about his machine.
> In a letter he asked the administration's help "for the
> people of the world."
>
> Included in the
> package was a videotape of the machine that had aired on a
> New Orleans television news show. Newman got the package
> back with a form letter indicating that it had not been
> opened.
>
> But when he opened
> the package to file the material, Newman found something he
> had not included. "There was a video review sheet from an
> office in the White House," Newman says, showing the sheet.
> "It indicated that not only had the package been looked at,
> but it had been looked at rather closely."
>
> The review sheet
> states, among other things: "Some scientists believe this
> invention could change the world."
>
> "When I called to
> find out what the review sheet was all about, the fellow at
> the White House was furious that I had seen it," Newman
> says. "They wanted to know how I had gotten hold of a copy
> of that sheet."
>
> A White House
> spokesman said hundreds of videos are received by the White
> House annually and that many of them are reviewed by
> volunteers.
>
> "What is on the
> review sheet is not the opinion of anyone on the White House
> staff," the spokesman said. "It is merely a review of
> whatever is on the tape."
>
> **`People are
> trained not to accept change' ---**
>
> But Newman is sure
> that a conspiracy exists. He leans back in a chair in his
> workshop and ruminates. "It's strange that they are capping
> all these oil wells now," he says. "The reasons they are
> giving, the dropping prices and such, are the same ones
> you've heard for three, four years. I don't see one factual
> piece of evidence for this to be happening.
>
> "I'll bet in the
> last two years, if you could find out who's buying the
> copper mines, who's buying material for magnets. . . I'd bet
> you anything that when the wash is out, the oil companies
> have bought them."
>
> Newman says his
> machine is not a perpetual motion machine and that it does
> not create energy, two claims that have hurt its image.
>
> Instead, it is a
> new way of tapping the electromagnetic energy field that is
> already there. Very simply put, the machine works like this:
>
> Power is used to
> rotate two magnets wrapped in copper wire.
>
> The rotating
> magnets and the atoms that align within the copper wire
> create an electromagnetic field that can be tapped.
>
> The revolutionary
> aspect of the machine is that the amount of energy needed to
> align the atoms and rotate the magnets creating the energy
> field is less than the energy created. So there is a net
> gain in power created.
>
> Theoretically,
> with Newman's technology you could produce an unlimited,
> self-perpetuating source of pollution-free energy.
>
> "I expect to have
> one of these machines running a car within six months,"
> Newman says matter-of-factly. The fight for a patent for the
> Revolutionary Energy Machine has become more than a fight to
> get an invention patented.
>
> Newman says the
> battle with the government has given him a new insight into
> the way people are taught to think in this country.
>
> The battle has
> defined for Newman a philosophy. "People have been trained,
> are being trained, not to accept change," he says. "My
> powers of reason are greater than many people's because my
> feet are not bound by traditional thought.
>
> Newman sits back
> and looks out the window of his workshop, past his
> Revolutionary Energy Machine, out into the pine trees. "To
> be a good scientist, you have to be a humble person. You
> have to believe that you don't know everything," he says.
>
> ---
>
> **[ Unknown Title / Publication ]**
>
> **by**
>
> **Warren E. Leary**
>
> AP Science
> Writer
>
> WASHINGTON (AP) --
> Government engineers say a backwoods inventor's amazing
> energy machine has a number of unique features but lacks a
> critical one -- it doesn't work.
>
> The National
> Bureau of Standards said Thursday that more than two months
> of court-ordered testing has failed to prove Joseph W.
> Newman's claims that his controversial machine produces more
> energy than it consumes.
>
> "At all conditions
> tested, the input power exceeded the output power," the
> government's standards-setting agency said in a report.
> "That is, the device did not deliver more energy than it
> used."
>
> Newman, who terms
> himself a self-educated, backwoods inventor from Lucedale,
> Miss., who used common sense to come up with his machine,
> immediately rejected the test results as biased and
> meaningless.
>
> The agency by its
> own admission used unconventional instruments and methods to
> reach its conclusions, said Newman, whose quest for a
> government patent has attracted national attention.
>
> "I do not accept
> these results at all," Newman said in a telephone interview.
> "I predicted this decision. It's just another example of the
> injustice I'm fighting against."
>
> The bureau's
> report said that because of unusual electrical
> characteristics of the machine, it had to design a test plan
> and combination of instruments specifically for Newman's
> non-standard device. But it said it carefully checked the
> instruments to assure the accuracy of the tests.
>
> Newman said he
> would not accept results coming from unconventional testing
> that could not be repeated by others.
>
> "If I built my own
> test equipment and said that it proves my machine worked, no
> one would give me much credit, no one would believe me,"
> Newman said. "But that's what the Bureau of Standards has
> done and they expect people to believe them."
>
> The inventor has
> been trying for six years to get the U.S. Office of Patents
> and Trademarks to issue a patent on an energy machine that
> defies accepted laws of physics.
>
> Patent examiners
> say the invention looks like yet another proposal for a
> perpetual motion machine, one that would produce more energy
> than it uses so that, theoretically, it could run forever.
>
> This has been the
> goal of inventors for centuries, but conventional science
> says it is impossible.
>
> Newman contends
> his device is not a perpetual motion machine, but a
> revolutionary energy source that uses the previously unknown
> magnetic properties of copper coils to release more energy
> than it consumes.
>
> U.S. District
> Judge Thomas P. Jackson, presiding over Newman's suit
> against the patent office, ordered a new trial date after
> getting results of the tests he ordered from the bureau.
>
> John P. Flannery,
> Newman's lawyer, said Jackson set Dec. 8 as the date for a
> non-jury trial to determine if the inventor will be awarded
> the patent.
>
> Flannery said he
> asked the judge to permit Newman to examine the special
> equipment used to test the energy machine, but that Jackson
> refused to order it. If the Patent Office does not allow
> examination of the test devices, Flannery said, he would
> seek another court order to do so.
>
> The Bureau of
> Standards said that during the testing, it found that
> Newman's device "behaves in a manner which is entirely
> consistent with well-established laws of physics."
>
> A device would be
> called 100 percent energy efficient if it simply transmitted
> all the energy coming into it back to the outside, the
> report said, and it would have to show an efficiency of
> greater than 100 percent to make more power than it
> consumed.
>
> The bureau said
> the efficiency of Newman's machine ranged between 27 percent
> and 67 percent, depending upon the test being run.
>
> Never did the
> energy coming out of the machine exceed the battery power
> going into the device to get it running, the report said.
>
> ---
>
> **A Description of the Newman Motor**
>
> **by**
>
> **Roger Hastings, Ph.D.**
>
> This document is
> intended to provide information regarding the energy device
> invented by Mr. Joseph Newman of Lucedale, Mississippi. I
> have prepared the material in response to numerous requests
> for information. The number of these requests has increased
> dramatically since Newman's public demonstration of his
> motor at Washington, D.C., in May, 1985. This paper provides
> a personal history to date of my involvement with Newman,
> presents data which was taken at the Washington
> demonstration, provides an analysis of the data, and
> presents my current thoughts regarding a mathmatical
> description of Newman's motor.
>
> HISTORY
>
> I first met Mr.
> Newman in September, 1981. Newman is an inventor, and he had
> travelled to Minnesota to present a toy invention to Tonka
> Toys Corp. My brother, John, was at the time in charge of
> new products for Tonka, and he interviewed Newman. John and
> Joe wound up discussing their respective theories of matter
> and energy, and Joe's motor. At that time, Joe was looking
> for people to verify the operation of his motor for the
> patent office. He invited John to Lucedale, but John said
> that his brother (me) had a Ph.D. in physics, and therefore
> better credentials to offer for the testing of a motor.
>
> My first reaction
> to the news of Newman's energy producing motor was quite
> negative. I had been a professor for four years, and had
> encountered several people with "world saving" energy
> devices which they wanted evaluated by the University. In
> all cases such devices had proven to be inoperative as net
> energy producers. Newman offered to fly me to Lucedale to
> test his motor, and I responded that he would be wasting his
> money and our time because I would certainly prove him
> wrong. He insisted, and I complied.
>
> The motor that I
> saw on that first visit was a monument to Rube Goldberg, and
> to an incredible personal effort at building such a large
> device. It consisted of five thousand pounds of #5 gauge
> wire wound as a solenoid. Within the solenoid, a 600 pound
> ceramic magnet rotated on questionable bearings. The
> bearings were mounted in a wooden structure. On the shaft of
> the rotor was a mechanical commutator consisting of three
> home made wheels, and brushes whose tension was adjusted
> with rubber bands. The commutator received its power from a
> bank of six volt lantern batteries. As the huge magnet
> rotated, the whole structure creaked and groaned. At that
> time, Newman was taking energy output from a secondary coil
> wrapped around the motor primary solenoid. I measured the
> voltage and current input simultaneously on an oscilloscope.
> The output load was a resistor, and I similarly measured the
> output voltage and current. Multiplying voltage and current
> to find power, I determined that the motor was about 90%
> efficient.
>
> Newman claimed
> that his motor was not performing up to par on that day, and
> said that he would ask me back when he had the device tuned
> up properly. Although I had proven that the motor at that
> time was not producing a net energy gain, several aspects of
> Newman and his motor were fascinating. First, the motor was
> not designed efficiently. Large mechanical losses were
> evident, and a 90% efficiency seemed highly unusual. Second,
> the huge magnet was rotating at some 60 RPM with an input
> power of only a few watts. Finally, Newman himself, while
> unconventional, seemed highly intelligent, definately a
> creative thinker, and intensely dedicated to his scientific
> work. He informed me that he had evolved his theory and
> filed for a patent before he had built a prototype motor. (I
> will discuss his theory later.)
>
> I travelled again
> to Lucedale and indeed Newman had tuned up his motor. From
> that point foreward I consistantly measured efficiencies in
> excess of 100%. At this point I began an effort to attract
> scientific interest in Newman's motor, and to aid him in
> obtaining a patent. I wrote several affidavits and documents
> describing my measurements and generally supporting Newman's
> efforts. I have spent countless hours of my spare time over
> the past four years on this effort, withour renumeration. It
> takes little immagination to understand the benefit to the
> human race which would result from an economical device
> which generates energy with no external input. In my
> opinion, Newman's motor has performed well enough that the
> scientific community should be showing great interest.
>
> Over the years, a
> number of generic questions have repeatedly been asked. Is
> there a hidden energy source? The device can be viewed from
> all sides, and there are no external connections. The motor
> has been transported across country, and works equally well
> at all locations. The motor has been duplicated by at least
> one other person, who claims that it works. Newman would not
> be acting in his own self interest to simultaneously invite
> publicity and commit fraud. It is generally known that
> Newman is sincere and honest.
>
> Why isn't the
> motor running itself without the need for batteries? While
> in concept the motor should be capable of running itself
> without batteries, the technological problems have   
> not been solved which would allow such operation. In a
> sense, however, the motor does run itself. The motor has
> shown the capacity to charge up the batteries which provide
> voltage to the motor. Tests have been run in which up to 15
> amp-hours of output have been drawn from the motor, and in
> which the six volt lantern batteries powering the motor have
> shown no evidence of an energy loss (the battery condition
> was verified in the labs of Ray-O-Vac Battery Co.). Tests
> have been run in which apparently dead batteries have been
> connected to the motor. The motor has charged up these
> batteries to the point where they can power other devices.
> The same batteries can be drained down (e.g. through a
> resistor), then be re-connected to the Newman motor and be
> charged up while they run the motor.
>
> Why isn't Newman's
> motor powering a home or auto? In my opinion such a
> demonstration would convince all skeptics, and create a
> great demand for the motor. Newman has proceeded in this
> direction. He has built at least four prototype motors to
> study the effect of varying motor parameters. He has
> steadily improved upon his large prototype, and has succeded
> in generating up to about 200 watts of power. By contrast,
> an average home requires one to three thousand watts on the
> average, with peak demands of up to 20 thousand watts. In
> this regard, it would be extremely helpful for
> establishments with high tech capabilities to aid Joe in
> scaling up the motor output. His approach has been to reduce
> the physical size of the motor to make it economical, and
> the output power. His greatest technical problem has been
> high voltage switching.
>
> Why does Newman
> keep his technical process a secret? This question was
> answered at Washington in May, when Newman revealed the
> construction details of his motor to the public. He has
> published a book ("The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman",
> available from Newman Publishing, Rt. 1, Box 52, Lucedale
> Mississippi 39452), in which he describes his theory and his
> motor. Joe had kept the process secret to avoid patent
> infringement. Although his patent is still pending in the
> U.S., it has issued in other countries. Presumably his
> patent rights will be protected in the U.S., although it
> should be noted that his motor is being copied by others, so
> that issuance of his patent in the U.S. is of immediate
> importance. Garland Robinnett of CBS news in New Orleans has
> run a number of reports on Newman's struggle with the U.S.
> Patent office.
>
> I do not fully
> understand why the scientific community in this country has
> not shown more interest in Newman's motor. He has had
> support from about 30 independent scientists and engineers,
> most of whom own their own engineering or consulting firms.
> He has also received some financial support from investors,
> who represent a range of interests, including oil and
> electrical power interests. I know of no one who has
> observed Newman's motor and taken measurements who has been
> able to show that his claims are invalid. On the contrary,
> most observers come in as skeptics, and leave as believers.
> Over the years my colleagues have consistantly provided me
> with arguments questioning the validity of my measurements.
> I have responded to these questions by modifying the
> measurement proceedures and creating new tests. In all cases
> the Newman device has passed the tests to my satisfaction.
> In my opinion, Newman has at least discovered some
> interesting and unusual new phenomena, and at most has
> discovered a process which will end man's dependence upon
> limited and polluting energy resources.
>
> ---
>
> **Newman's Theory**
>
> **by**
>
> **Roger Hastings, Ph.D.**
>
> Transcribed By
> George W. Dahlberg P.E.
>
> I do not intend to
> recapitulate the theory presented in Newman's book, but
> rather to briefly provide my interpretation of his ideas.
> Newman began studying electricity and magnetism in the
> mid-1960's. He has a mechanical background, and was looking
> for a mechanical description of electromagnetic fields. That
> is, he assumed that there must be a mechanical interaction
> between, for example, two magnets. He could not find such a
> description in any book, and decided that he would have to
> provide his own explanation. He came to the conclusion that
> if electromagnetic fields consisted of tiny spinning
> particles moving at the speed of light along the field
> lines, then he could explain all standard electromagnetic
> phenomena through the interaction of spinning particles.
> Since the spinning particles interact in the same way as
> gyroscopes, he called the particles gyroscopic particles. In
> my opinion, such spinning particles do provide a qualitative
> description of electromagnetic phenomena, and his model is
> useful in understanding complex electrical situations (note
> that without a pictoral model one must rely solely upon
> mathematical equations which can become extremely complex).
>
> Given that
> electromagnetic fields consist of matter in motion, or
> kinetic energy, Joe decided that it should be possible to
> tap this kinetic energy. He likes to say "How long did man
> sit next to a stream before he invented the paddle wheel?".
> Joe built a variety of unusual devices to tap the kinetic
> energy in electromagnetic fields before he arrived at his
> present motor   
> design. He likes to point out that both Maxwell and Faraday,
> the pioneers of electromagnitism, believed that the fields
> consisted of matter in motion. This is stated in no
> uncertain terms in Maxwell's book "A Dynamical Theory of the
> Electromagnetic Field". In fact, Maxwell used a dynamical
> model to derive his famous equations. This fact has all but
> been lost in current books on electromagnetic theory. The
> quantity which Maxwell called "electromagnetic momentum" is
> now refered to as the "vector potential".
>
> Going further, Joe
> realized that when a magnetic field is created, its
> gyroscopic particles must come from the atoms of the
> materials which created the field. Thus he decided that all
>   
> matter must consist of the same gyroscopic particles. For
> example, when a voltage is applied to a wire, Newman
> pictures gyroscopic particles (which I will call gyrotons
> for short) moving down the wire at the speed of light. These
> gyrotons line up the electrons in the wire. The electrons
> themselves consist of a swirling mass of gyrotrons, and
> their matter fields combine when lined up to form the
> magnetic lines of force circulating around the wire. In this
> process, the wire has literally lost some of its mass to the
> magnetic field, and this is accounted for by Einstein's
> equation of energy equals mass times the square of the speed
> of light. According to Einstein, every conversion of energy
> involves a corresponding conversion of matter. According to
> Newman, this may be interpreted as an exchange of gyrotrons.
> For example, if two atoms combine to give off light, the
> atoms would weight slightly less after the reaction than
> before. According to Newman, the atoms have combined and
> given off some of their gyrotrons in the form of light. Thus
> Einstein's equation is interpreted as a matter of counting
> gyrotrons. These particles cannot be created or destroyed in
> Newman's theory, and they always move at the speed of light.
>
> My interpretation
> of Newman's original idea for his motor is as follows. As a
> thought experiment, suppose one made a coil consisting of
> 186,000 miles of wire. An electrical field would require one
> second to travel the length of the wire, or in Newman's
> language, it would take one second for gyrotons inserted at
> one end of the wire to reach the other end. Now suppose that
> the polarity of the applied voltage was switched before the
> one second has elapsed, and this polarity switching was
> repeated with a period less than one second. Gyrotons would
> become trapped in the wire, as their number increased, so
> would the alignment of electrons and the number of gyrotons
> in the magnetic field increase. The intensified magnetic
> field could be used to do work on an external magnet, while
> the input current to the coil would be small or
> non-existant. Newman's motors contain up to 55 miles of
> wire, and the voltage is rapidly switched as the magnet
> rotates. He elaborates upon his theory in his book, and uses
> it to interpret a variety of physical phenomena.
>
> RECENT DATA ON THE
> NEWMAN MOTOR
>
> In May of 1985 Joe
> Newman demonstrated his most recent motor prototype in
> Washington, D.C.. The motor consisted of a large coil wound
> as a solenoid, with a large magnet rotating within the bore
> of the solenoid. Power was supplied by a bank of six volt
> lantern batteries. The battery voltage was switched to the
> coil through a commutator mounted on the shaft of the
> rotating magnet. The commutator switched the polarity of the
> voltage across the coil each half cycle to keep a positive
> torque on the rotating magnet. In addition, the commutator
> was designed to break and remake the voltage contact about
> 30 times per cycle. Thus the voltage to the coil was pulsed.
> The speed of the magnet rotation was adjusted by covering up
> portions of the commutator so that pulsed voltage was
> applied for a fraction of a cycle. Two speeds were
> demonstrated: 12 R.P.M. for which 12 pulses occured each
> revolution; and 120 rpm for which all commutator segments
> were firing. The slower speed was used to provide clear
> oscilloscope pictures of currents and voltages. The fast
> speed was used to demonstrate the potential power of the
> motor. Energy outputs consisted of incandescent bulbs in
> series with the batteries, flourescent tubes across the
> coil, and a fan powered by a belt attached to the shaft of
> the rotor. Revelent motor parameters are given below:
>
> Coil weight : 9000
> lbs.   
> Coil length : 55 miles of copper wire   
> Coil Inductance: 1,100 Henries measured by observing the
> current rise time when a D.C. voltage was applied.   
> Coil resistance: 770 Ohms   
> Coil Height : about 4 ft.   
> Coil Diameter : slightly over 4 ft. I.D.
>
> Magnet weight :
> 700 lbs.   
> Magnet Radius : 2 feet   
> Magnet geometry: cylinder rotating about its perpendicular
> axis   
> Magnet Moment of Inertia: 40 kg-sq.m. (M.K.S.) computed as
> one third mass times radius squared
>
> Battery Voltage:
> 590 volts under load   
> Battery Type : Six volt Ray-O-Vac lantern batteries
> connected in series
>
> A brief
> description of the measurements taken and distributed at the
> press conference follows. When the motor was rotating at 12
> rpm, the average D.C. input current from the batteries was
> about 2 milli-amps, and the average battery input was then
> 1.2 watts. The back current (flowing against the direction
> of battery current) was about -55 milli-amps, for an average
> charging power of -32 watts. The forward and reverse current
> were clearly observable on the oscilloscope. It was noted
> that when the reverse current flowed, the battery voltage
> rose above its ambient value, varifying that the batteries
> were charging. The magnitude of the charging current was
> verified by heating water with a resistor connected in
> series with the batteries. A net charging power was the
> primary evidence used to show that the motor was generating
> energy internally, however output power was also observed.
> The 55 m-amp current flowing in the 770 ohm coil generates
> 2.3 watts of heat, which is in excess of the input power. In
> addition, the lights were blinking brightly as the coil was
> switched.
>
> The back current
> from the coil switched from zero to negative several amps in
> about 1 milli-second, and then decayed to zero in about 0.1
> second. Given the coil inductance of 1100 henries, the
> switching voltages were several million volts. Curiously,
> the back current did not switch on smoothly, but increased
> in a staircase. Each step in the staircase corresponded to
> an extremely fast switching of current, with each increase
> in the current larger than the previous increase. The width
> of the stairs was about 100 micro-seconds, which for
> reference is about one third of the travel time of light
> through the 55 mile coil.
>
> Mechanical losses
> in the rotor were measured as follows: The rotor was spun up
> by hand with the coil open circuited. An inductive pick-up
> loop was attached to a chart recorder to measure the rate of
> decay of the rotor. The energy stored in the rotor (one half
> the moment of inertia times the square of the angular
> velocity) was plotted as a function of time. The slope of
> this curve was measured at various times and gave the power
> loss in the rotor as a function of rotor speed. The result
> of these measurements is given in the following table:
>
> Rotor Speed Power
> Dissipation Power/(Speed Squared)   
> radian/sec --- watts --- watts/(rad/sec)^2   
> 4.0 --- 6.3 --- 0.39   
> 3.7 --- 5.8 --- 0.42   
> 3.3 --- 5.0 --- 0.46   
> 3.0 --- 3.5 --- 0.39   
> 2.1 --- 2.0 --- 0.45   
> 1.7 --- 1.2 --- 0.42   
> 1.2 --- 0.7 --- 0.47
>
> The data is
> consistant with power loss proportional to the square of the
> angular speed, as would be expected at low speeds. When the
> rotor moves fast enough so that air resistance is important,
> the losses would begin to increase as the cube of the
> angular speed. Using power = 0.43 times the square of the
> angular speed will give a lower bound on mechanical power
> dissipation at all speeds. When the rotor is moving at 12
> rpm, or 1.3 rad/sec, the mechanical loss is 0.7 watts.
>
> When the rotor was
> sped up to 120 rpm by allowing the commutator to fire on all
> segments, the results were quite dramatic. The lights were
> blinking rapidly and brightly, and the fan was turning
> rapidly. The back current spikes were about ten amps, and
> still increased in a staircase, with the width of the stairs
> still about 100 micro-seconds. Accurate measurements of the
> input current were not obtained at that time, however I will
> report measurements communicated to me by Mr. Newman. At a
> rotation rate of 200 rpm (corresponding to mechanical losses
> of at least 190 watts), the input power was about 6 watts.
> The back current in this test was about 0.5 amps,
> corresponding to heating in the coil of 190 watts. As a
> final point of interest, note that the Q of his coil at 200
> rpm is about 30. If his battery plus commutator is
> considered as an A.C. power source, then the impedance of
> the coil at 200 rpm is 23,000 henries, and the power factor
> is 0.03. In this light, the predicted input power at 700
> volts is less than one watt!
>
> MATHEMATICAL
> DESCRIPTION OF NEWMAN'S MOTOR
>
> Since I am
> preparing this document on my home computer, it will be
> convenient to use the Basic computer language to write down
> formulas. The notation is \* for multiply, / for divide, ^
> for raising to a power, and I will use -dot to represent a
> derivative. Newton's second law of motion applied to
> Newman's rotor yields the following equation:
>
> MI\*TH-dot-dot +
> G\*TH-dot = K\*I\*SIN(TH) (1)
>
> where MI = rotor
> moment of inertia   
> TH = rotor angular position (radians)   
> G = rotor decay constant   
> K = torque coupling constant   
> I = coil current
>
> In general the
> constant G may depend upon rotor speed, as when air
> resistance becomes important. The term on the right hand
> side of the equation represents the torque delivered to the
> rotor when current flows through the coil. A constant
> friction term was found through measurement to be small
> compared to the TH-dot term at reasonable speeds, but can be
> included in the "constant" G. The equation for the current
> in the coil is given by:
>
> L\*I-dot + R\*I =
> V(TH) - K\*(TH-dot)\*SIN(TH) (2)
>
> where L = coil
> inductance   
> I = coil current   
> R = coil resistance   
> V(TH) = voltage applied to coil by the commutator which is a
> function of the angle TH   
> K = rotor induction constant
>
> In general, the
> resistance R is a function of voltage, particularly during
> commutator switching when the air resistance breaks down
> creating a spark. Note that the constant K is the same in
> equations (1) and (2). This is required by energy
> conservation as discussed below. To examine energy
> considerations, multiply Equation (1) by TH-dot, and
> Equation (2) by I. Note that the last term in each equation
> is then identical if the K's are the same. Eliminating the
> last term between the two equations yields the instantaneous
> conservation law:
>
> I\*V=R\*I^2 +
> G\*(T,-dot)^2 + .5\*L\*(I^2)-dot =.5\*MI\*((TH-dot)^2)-dot
>
> If this equation
> is averaged over one cycle of the rotor, then the last two
> terms vanish when steady state conditions are reached (i.e.
> when the current and speed repeat their values at angular
> positions which are separated by 360 degrees). Denoting
> averages by < >, the above equation becomes:
>
> <IV> =
> <R\*I^2> + <G\*(TH-dot)^2> (3)
>
> This result is
> entirely general, independent of any dependences of R and G
> on other quantities. The term on the left represents the
> input power. The first term on the right is the power
> dissipated in the coil, and the second term is the power
> delivered to the rotor. The efficiency, defined as power
> delivered to the rotor divided by input power is thus always
> less than one by Equation (3). This result does require,
> however, that the constants K in equation (1) and equation
> (2) are identical. If the constant K in equation (2) is
> smaller than the constant K appearing in equation (1), then
> it may be varified that the efficiency can mathmatecally be
> larger than unity.
>
> What do the
> constants, K, mean? In the first equation, we have the
> torque delivered to the magnet, while in the second equation
> we have the back inductance or reaction of the magnet upon
> the coil. The equality of the constants is an expression of
> Newton's third law. How could the constants be unequal?
> Consider the sequence of events which occur during the
> firing of the commutator. First the contact breaks, and the
> magnetic field in the coil collapses, creating a huge
> forward spike of current through the coil and battery. This
> current spike provides an impulsive torque to the rotor. The
> rotor accelerates, and the acceleration produces a changing
> magnetic field which propagates through the coil, creating
> the back emf. Suppose that the commutator contacts have
> separated sufficiently when the last event occurs to prevent
> the back current from flowing to the battery. Then the back
> reaction is effectively smaller than the forward impulsive
> torque on the rotor. This suggestion invokes the finite
> propagation time of the electromagnetic fields, which has
> not been included in Equations (1) and (2).
>
> A continued
> mathmatical modeling of the Newman motor should include the
> effects of finite propagation time, particularly in his
> extraordinary long coil of wire. I have solved Equations (1)
> and (2) numerically, and note that the solutions require
> finer and finer step size as the inductance, moment of
> inertia, and magnet strength are increased to large values.
> The solutions break down such that the motor "takes off" in
> the computer, and this may indicate instabilities, which
> could be mediated in practise by external pertubations. I am
> confident that Maxwell's equations , with the proper
> electro-mechanical coupling, can provide an explanation to
> the phenomena observed in the Newman device. The
> electro-mechanical coupling may be embedded in the Maxwell
> equations if a unified picture (such as Newman's picture of
> gyroscopic particles) is adopted.
>
> ---
>
> ***Science*
> (10 Feb. 1984), pp. 571-572**
>
> **Newman's Impossible Motor**
>
> *The patent
> office does not believe that Joseph Newman has built a
> generator that is more than 100 percent efficient, but
> New Orleans does.*
>
> **by**
>
> **Eliot Marshall**
>
> At least one
> physicist in Louisiana swears that the CBS News anchorman
> Dan Rather was smiling on 9 January when he reported that an
> inventor near New Orleans has built a generator that defies
> the second law of thermodynamics. Others did not see any
> smile. What they did see, to their surprise, was an earnest
> but fantastic news story that has been running on New
> Orleans' biggest television channel being repeated over the
> network news.
>
> The story is about
> an inventor, a self-educated Missisippian named Joseph
> Wesley Newman. He was pleased with the CBS broadcast because
> it make help him in a fight with the U.S. Patent and
> Trademark Office, which has denied him a patent on the
> grounds of his latest invention, "smacks of a perpetual
> motion machine", meaning by definition it cannot do what it
> claimed. On 25 June, the U.S District Court for the District
> of Columbia will hear a suit Newman has brought against the
> patant office arguing that his device does not aim at
> perpetual motion but converts mass to energy in a finite but
> very efficient manner. He simply wants a patent.
>
> Newman's invention
> is hard to describe, partly because its behavior seems to be
> at odds with the laws of physics and partly because the
> details are being kept secret while the ligation goes on.
> Newman says his own theory of magnetism is "10,000 times
> more important" than the invention itself, which be built to
> demonstrate the concept. He claims to have discovered the
> mechanical principles of a gyroscopic particle of matter
> that orbits in a magnetic field much as an electron orbits
> in an atomic shell. Several readers of his theory say it is
> incomprehensible and would not get attention were it not for
> the illustrative devices. The patent Newman seeks is for an
> "Energy Generation System Having Larger Output than Input".
> Those who have seen it say it is a crude direct current
> motor powered by a bank of lantern batteries with a heavy,
> rotating magnet at its center.
>
> Readings of the
> machine's performance, like those of Dan Rather's
> expression, depend on the reader. As a result of the TV
> coverage, the people of New Orleans may be convinced that
> Newman has invented a simple device that produces more
> energy than it consumes and could end the world's energy
> sqabbles if only an arrogant scientific community would pay
> attention. That is Newman's message. It has been taken up
> and broadcasted in a sort of crusade by Garland Robinette,
> the evening news anchorman at the CBS affiliate in New
> Orleans, WWL-TV.
>
> Last autumn
> Robinette aired an eight-part series on Newman's device,
> charging that jealous academics and frightened executives
> tried to stifle information about it. Robinette concedes
> that his intense coverage of Newman's began on a slow news
> day when he was looking for a cute show-closer. He claims he
> was skeptical at first and saw Newman's invention as a
> curiosity. But the story soon grew into a "monster that I
> couldn't let go" when New Orleans viewers, facing a 200
> percent increase in utility rates, demanded to know more.
> Furthermore, a Missisippi state energy offical and a
> credible scientist had recently vouched for Newman's claims.
> Robinette says that since he began reporting on the
> invention, no one has come forward to rebut Newman. He
> challenges people to come to "get this story off my back".
>
> Newman has
> benefited from the television coverage and from several
> weighty endorsements. For example, the television engineers
> watched him. Last year, Robinette dragged two reluctant
> engineers on WWL-TV staff to Newman's garage in Lucedale,
> Missisippi., about 2 1/2 hours from New Orleans. They werde
> sceptics at first, but, after looking at oscilloscope
> readings and watching the machine recharge batteries, they
> agreed with their anchorman that the claims seemed valid.
>
> Engineer Ralph
> Hartwell described the tests he ran. When he arrived at
> Newman's House, he connected some weak penlight batteries he
> had brought along to a small conventional motor in Newman's
> back yard. It was allowed to run until the batteries were
> drained of power, taking about 1 minute. He then moved the
> dead batteries over to the smallest of Newman's
> demonstration motors, connected them as a power source, and
> started this motor spinning. It ran until it was time for
> the camera crew to leave, for something between 1 ans 2
> hours. Finally, the batteries were taken fram Newman's
> machine back to the conventional motor and reconnected. This
> time the motor ran for about 3 minutes. Hartwell ran
> annother experiment on a large device and concluded that it
> also appeared to generate more power than it used. Other
> measurements were taken with oscilloscopes and current
> meters, but these readings have been questioned. After
> signing a confidential pledge, Hartwell was allowed to
> examine the machine's inner wiring. He is certain that there
> is no hidden source of energy. Although he feels
> uncomfortable about it, he says he could not disprove
> Newman's claim and would like to see a universtity run a
> controlled test.
>
> Newman's key
> endorsement comes from Roger Hastings, a solid-state
> physicist for the Sperry Univac Company in Minneapolis. A
> colleague who knew him as a postdoc fellow at the University
> of Virginia says Hastings was regarded as an adventurous and
> excellent theorist. Hasting's brother, a screener for new
> ideas for Tonka Toys, met Newman when he   
> submitted an invention to Tonka. Although sceptical,
> Hastings (the physician) was persuaded to make a trip to
> Lucedale. "I used to teach physics at North Dakota
> University", says Hastings, "and we would get three or four
> people a year who had some kind of device that was going to
> save the world. I assumed it was the same." Newman talked
> Hastings into fly down for a visit anyway. He returned five
> times, testing and retesting the motors, until he was
> satisfied that he had made no mistake. He eventually signed
> an affidatvit describing the invention in detail and stating
> unequivocally that it runs at greater than 100 percent
> efficency, producing more power than it consumes. "I'm
> sticking my neck out," he says, "because this is an
> important issue that should be resolved."
>
> Endorsements such
> as this are essential for the credibility of the patent
> application. Although Newman has read the works of the great
> electrical thinkers Michael Faraday and James Clerk Maxwell,
> he is not proficent in math or physics.
>
> Newman is
> collecting seval more endorsements. He claims to have won
> the backing recently of, a Geman aerospace engineer and a
> liaison officer between the National Aeronautics and Space
> Administration (NASA) and the European space consortium.
> Gerald Miller, a mechanical engineer, student of advanced
> physics, and electical industiy consultant in California,
> has inspected the devices and says, "I saw things that I
> cannot explain in conventional terms." He found that the
> device produced more energy than it used, adding, "I am
> absolutely certain that there is no hidden energy source.
> Milton Everett, a mechanical Engineer and director of the
> biomass program for the Missisippi Department of Energy and
> Transportation, says, "I think Joe has discovered something
> that the world is going to benefit from. It's nor a
> perpetual motion machine; it converts mass to energy."
> Excluding inverstors, Newman claims to have about 27 such
> endorsers.
>
> But there have
> been and continue to be prominent doubters. Oddly, TV
> anchorman Robinette has given little attention or credence
> to the only thorough analysis ever performed on Newman's
> device. It was aranged by Everett (before he became a full
> convert to Newman's cause) and was paid for by the
> Missisippi energy department. Two electrical engineers from
> Missisippi State University (MSU), --- Karl Carlson and
> Donald Fitzgerald --- tested one of the Newman's devices
> last March. The conditions were unfavourable, because the
> motor kept breaking down every "couple of minutes," says
> Carlson, as a huge spark from the induction coil shorted out
> a switch on the commutator. Thus, while it war fairly easy
> to measure the power going in, it was not easy to tell what
> was coming out. Newman has built a smaller, less quirky
> motor since then.
>
> The pattern on the
> oscilloscope at the output end of a cycle was difficult to
> read because as one observer says, the discharge spark
> appeared as "a bright flash" or "a mess" on the face of the
> screen. Newman sweeps this point aside as a quibble, saying
> it merely indicates his machine's tremendous power. The
> efficiency claimed for this device is anywhere from   
> the impossible (slightly over 100 percent) to the fantastic
> (800 percent and up). A normal electric motor may be 80
> percent efficient, Carlson says, and transformers are
> generally in the 90's. Carlson and Fitzgerald found that
> Newman's machine was between 55 and 76 percent efficient,
> based on their reading of the most favourable oscillograms.
>
> They wrote that
> they found "an output which is definitely less than the
> input." However, they hedged by saying it was impossible to
> measure the mechanical energy lost in the machine, which
> could affect the rating. They declined to call Newman's
> invention a breakthrough but reported that it was remakably
> efficient given its "obvious crude configuration." In a
> standard tag line, they wrote that "further investigation is
> in order." Newman reads this qualified rejection as a
> qualified endorsement, explaining when it comes to praising
> new discoveries, academisc are mean. He speaks of Carlson
> and Fitzgerald with harsher adjectives.
>
> The physics
> faculties of Loyola and Tulane Universities, both in New
> Orleans, have protested Robinette's reports. Daniel
> Purrington, Tulane's physics chairman, says: "We all dispute
> it. A number of us have told him [Robinette] we think what
> he's doing is irresponsible. I talked to him for about 2
> hours about the principles involved." Carl Brans, a theorist
> at Loyola, wrote Robinette a two-page letter of protest.
> "It's just sensational journalism. In our opinion, it's not
> worth the cost," to try to take the measurements that would
> end the discussion.
>
> David Keiffer, an
> experimental physicist at Loyola, along with other faculty
> member, offered to check Newman's device if he would bring
> it to the laboratory. (Newman's patent attorney is a physics
> graduate of Loyola.) But in the preliminary talks, Keiffer
> says, Newman insisted that he be present during the entire
> procedure. Then he and Keiffer got into an argument. Newman
> packed up and left, never to return. The Loyola physicist
> also sought to advise WWL-TV's engineers on testing the
> device, but this proved to be a touchy proposition, because
> WWL is owned by Loyola and was originally founded by
> Loyola's physics department. No one wanted the advice to be
> interpreted as pressure.
>
> "I have a fairly
> good reputation here," Robinette says of his science
> reporting, "and this thing just has the potential to make me
> look like an absolute ignoranmus. So I've tried desperately
> to disprove this and all I've done so far is get more and
> more people who are convinced."
>
> What about the
> negative conclusion reached by the MSU engineers? Robinette
> maintains (like Newman and Everett) that while the engineers
> were testing the machine, they agreed that it was producing
> more energy than it used. But "when they went back, they
> wrote an ambigous response that didn't say it didn't work
> and didn't say it did." Robinette mentions that the MSU
> engineers are retired, as though to diminish their
> reliability. He finds it "very surprising that they never
> called to challenge his report, which gave the
> Newman-Everett version of events.
>
> Some who might
> otherwis voice scepticism seem to sypathize with Newman
> because of the way the patent office rebuffed him. In court
> filings, the patent office concedes that Newman is correct
> that it rejected his claims without fully reading the
> documents he submitted; that his application was handled by
> an examiner --- Donovan Duggan --- who seems to specialize
> in rejecting perpetual machines; that Duggan said he would
> not allow a patent on Newman's device, no matter how much
> supportive evidence was submited; that the office officials
> never tested the Newman device for efficacy and refused to
> observe oscilloscope readings of its input and output; and
> finally,  that the office issued a patent 1979 to a man
> named Howard Johnson for a perpetual motion machine that
> Johnson since then agreed is inoperable.
>
> If there were an
> association of militant patent rejectees, Newman's battle
> with the patent office could be its rallying cause. But
> there is no such association. However, Newman has done
> reasonably well attracting attention by himself, especially
> in New Orleans. In a few months, he will get his day in
> court.
>
> ---
>
> ***Science*
> (16 Nov. 1984), p. 817**
>
> **An Endless Siege of Implausible Inventions**
>
> **by**
>
> **R. Jeffrey Smith**
>
> In the modern
> world of commerce, the U.S. patent and trademark office is a
> street-corner cop with the power to arrest the development
> of any product that promises the impossible. Its book of
> statutes contains the basic laws of physics, the axioms of
> mathematics, the fundamental principles of mechanical
> engineering. With particular enthusiasm, its employees serve
> as guardians of the public in a never-ending battle against
> mechanical devices allegedly capable of perpetual motion.
>
> This, at least, is
> how they see themselves. Inventors such as Joseph Newman are
> more apt to view them as "a bunch of narrow-minded people
> who have conducted themselves outside the federal law and
> the human race". For more than 5 years, Newman, 48, has been
> frustrated in his efforts to obtain a patent for an "Energy
> System Having Higher Output Than Input". In 1982, the patent
> office told him that because such a device is simply
> infeasible, his application was denied after something less
> than a comprehensive, time-consuming review (*Science*,
> 10 February 1984, p. 571).
>
> Recently, however,
> with the help of some unexpected scientific endorsements,
> Newman persuaded the U.S. District Court in Washington,
> D.C., to order that his application be granted a full review
> by an examiner --- in short, a second chance. Newman
> believes that the decision is a slap in the face for the
> patant office and a partial vindication of his claims.
> Actually, the dispute reveals how easy it can be for
> inventors to jerk the patent office around. The ruling, made
> by Judge Thomas Jackson on 31 October, places the office in
> the difficult position of determining whether Newman's
> "energy generation system" -- a powerful electric motor --
> is adequately described in his application, and whether it
> is similar or identical to motors with existing patants.
> Neither topic was given serious consideration on the first
> go-around, for reasons the patent office believes obvious.
>
> The decision
> resulted from an unusual hearing in which a phalanx of
> attorneys in Newman's employ repeatedly cited patent case
> law, while Jere Sears, deputy solicitor in the patent
> office, repeatedly invoked the second law of thermodynamics.
> In its essence, that law states that the energy produced by
> a mechanical device such as Newman's will always be less
> than the energy needed to operate it. In addition to basing
> the case on "all of recorded science", as Sears put it, he
> relied heavily on an affidavit from Jacod Rainbow, a former
> chief research engineer at the National Bureau of Standards
> and well-known debunker of perpetual motion machines.
> Rainbow has several objections to the patent application,
> but his primary claim is that the motor's output of energy
> has been measured incorrectly. Although he has not seen the
> device or tested himself, he is willing to bet "any money"
> that it operates at well under 100 percent efiicency.
>
> As strong as the
> gouverment's argument was, it was sharply undercut by two
> affidavits. One was written by Mort Zimmerman, the president
> of Commercial Technology, Inc., in Dallas. Zimmerman said
> his 400-person firm "has independently ... constructed,
> operated, and tested several crude prototype devices based
> on the Newman invention, and has confirmed for itself that
> these prototype devices which embody the Newman invention
> operate and produce power as claimed by Newman" at more than
> 111 percent efficiency. Zimmerman was enthusiastic enough to
> purchase an option for the right to manufacture and sell
> Newman's motor in north Texas. (Recently, he told *Science*
> that the motor "needs further development for practical
> utilization, and we're not completely convinced that we can
> get there.")
>
> The second
> affidavit was prepared from Lawrence E. Wharton, a physicist
> in the Laboratory For Atmospheric Sciences at the Goddart
> Flight Space Center in Maryland. Initially, Wharton, who
> volunteered his services to the patent office as a sceptic
> of Newman's claims, vigorously attacked Zimmerman's
> statement. Shortly before the court hearing, however, he
> recanted some of his arguments, and declared that the
> motor's efficiency "is in substantial excess of 100 percent"
> and perhaps as high as 600 percent, if Newman's measurements
> are correct. The change of heart came, he said, after Newman
> argued with him in a long telephone conversation.
>
> Both of these
> statements apparently made a strong impression on William
> Schuyler, an attorney and one-time commissioner of U.S.
> patents who was appointed by the judge as a "special master"
> to help resolve some of the technical disputes. In his
> report, Schuyler agreed that the operation of Newman's motor
> "seems clearly to conflict with recognized scientific
> principles relating to thermodynamics and conservation of
> energy." But he insisted ther was an "overwhelming" evidence
> that the motor's output energy exceeded the external input
> energy, adding that "there is no contradictory factual
> evidence." He went so far as to state that Newman was
> entitled to a patent as long as it did not conflict with any
> existing patents.
>
> All of this came
> as a great shock to Sears. It was he, not Newman, who
> nominated Schuyler. "We felt reasonably safe with a person
> of his background," he explains. In a final pleading to the
> judge, Sears asked, "Why are we still paying power bills if
> Newman has actually achieved his claims? The Court should
> exercise some common sense and refrain from joining those
> who apparently believe in the tooth fairy... Manifestly,
> this court has no power to abrogate a natural law."
>
> In his ruling,
> Judge Jackson accepted the major points of Schuyler's
> report, but said he was unwilling to conclude as yet that
> Newman has produced a "truly pioneering invention." That
> decision awaits aanother hearing, now set for January. Sears
> denies that this decision has any implications for the
> general patent review process. But one effect may be to bar
> the office from dealing summarily whith such unusual claims
> in the future -- a development that could sharply increase
> the examination delays experienced by inventors with more
> plausible claims.
>
> To Newman, the
> dispute has become a crusade. Having spent thousands of
> dollars already in lawyer's fees, consulting fees, and court
> costs, he will soon pay to publish a book describing both
> his invention and the patent fight. He says that "the world
> is fortunate that I'm not afraid of a ruckus, I intend to
> fight this untill hell freezes over."
>
> ---
>
> ***Science*
> (July 11, 1986), Vol. 233**
>
> **Newman's " Energy Output" Machine Put to the
> Test**
>
> **by**
>
> **Marjorie Sun**
>
> What's a device
> with a battery pack, a magnet, and a coil wired together?
>
> For the past 6
> years, Joseph Newman, an inventor from Mississippi, has been
> loudly proclaiming that it's a revolutionary machine which
> produces more power than it uses. The National Bureau of
> Standards recently issued its own verdict after analyzing
> Newman's machine: "In none of tests did the device's
> approach 100%.... Our results are clear and unequivocal,"
> the bureau said.
>
> Newman has gone to
> great lengths to try to win a patent on his energy output
> machine. When the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office indicated
> in 1984 that the device did not work, Newman sued the
> agency. He hired a publicist, and the media often portrayed
> him as an underdog pitted against the scientific
> establishment. Then the court ordered Newman to submit the
> machine to the National Bureau of Standards for testing.
> Newman reluctantly complied.
>
> A physicist and
> two electrical engineers from the bureau tested the machine
> in a variety of ways to measure its energy input and output
> and used instrumentation that is common in research
> engineering laboratories. The sole power source of the
> device was 116 9-volt batteries. According to the test
> results, the device's efficiency ranged from 27 to 67%,
> depending on the voltage, the power drawn from the device,
> and the condition of insulating tape on one of the parts.
> (The tape kept burning from sparks generated by the machine,
> which caused the efficiency to drop and had to be replaced
> frequently.)
>
> According to John
> Lyons, director of the bureau's National Engineering
> Laboratory, the device basically converted direct current to
> alternating current. He noted that there are several
> machines already on the market that do the same thing, but
> they run at 90% efficiency or higher.
>
> Newman had court
> permission to observe the bureau's tests, but never appeared
> for any of the experiments, which were conducted between
> March and June. His spokesman Evan Soule said Newman will
> ask the court to order the testing of the test equipment.
> Newman said in an interview, "I have no respect for the
> National Bureau of Standards. This is a conspiracy against
> me."
>
> The testing cost
> the bureau $75,000, which it hopes to recoup from the patent
> office. The patent office will submit the results to U.S.
> District Court for the District of Columbia, which will try
> the case in December.
>
> ---
>
> **Measurement & Analysis of Joseph
> Newman's Energy Generator**
>
> **by**
>
> **Dr. Roger Hastings, Ph.D.**
>
> **Abstract ~**
>
> The author has
> made numerous measurements on the Energy Machines developed
> by Joseph Newman of Lucedale, Mississippi. The machines are
> large, air core, permanent magnet motors. The most important
> design rule specified by the inventor is that the length of
> wire in the motor coil be very long; preferably long enough
> so that the switching time between current reversals is
> shorter than the time required for propagation of the
> current wavefront through the coil. Various models contain
> up to 55 miles of wire, with air core coil inductances of up
> to 20,000 Henries. The permanent magnet armatures have very
> large magnetic moments. Thus the motors exhibit high torque
> with low current inputs. The motors generate large back
> current spikes consisting of pulsed rf in the 10-20 MHz
> frequency range. These spikes provide large mechanical
> impulses to the rotor, energize fluorescent tubes placed
> across the motor, and tend to charge the dry cell battery
> pack. The total generated energy --- consisting of
> mechanical work, mechanical friction, ohmic heating, and
> light --- is many times larger than the battery input
> energy.
>
> Newman's theories
> and machines will be described. Measurements indicating net
> energy gain from the devices will be presented. A
> phenomenological mathematical description of the motor will
> also be presented. Finally, the author will present his
> personal impressions of Newman's work.
>
> **Newman's Theory
> ---**
>
> Joseph Newman is
> an inventor who lives and works at his home in Lucedale, MS.
> He became interested in electromagnetic energy some 25 years
> ago, and began a self-study program. After searching
> standard texts for a mechanical description of
> electromagnetic interactions, he concluded that no such
> description existed. Newman decided that he would have to
> generate his own mechanical theory of electromagnetism, and
> over the following several years he evolved his gyroscopic
> particle theory. This theory, or model states that all
> matter and energy is composed of a single elementary
> spinning particle which always moves at the speed of light.
> The gyroscopic particle has mass, and it can neither be
> created or destroyed. All energy conversions, in this
> theory, involve an exchange of gyroscopic particles. E =
> mc^2 is the expression of this concept, and simply
> represents an accounting of gyroscopic particles during an
> energy conversion.
>
> Electric and
> magnetic fields consist of gyroscopic particles flowing at
> the speed of light along the field lines. When an electric
> or magnetic field is created, the particles initially come
> from the materials which energized the field. For example,
> when a battery is connected to a wire, gyroscopic particles
> flow at the speed of light down the wire, and they tend to
> align the gyroscopic particle flow fields of the electrons
> in the wire. The electricgyroscopic particle flow field
> extends outside the wire creating the circumferential
> magnetic field of the wire. The energy in the magnetic field
> is Nmc^2, where N is the number of particles in the field,
> and m is the mass of an individual particle. This energy, or
> these particles, came from the electrons of the copper.
>
> Thus, Newman
> considers the current flowing in the wire to be a catalyst
> which energy to emanate from the atoms of the wire. He
> claims that he has developed a mechanism whereby field
> energy can be pumped out of the copper atoms in the wire,
> thereby reducing their mass without consuming the voltage
> source which has supplied the catalytic current flow. Since
> the mass is consumed totally, there is no pollution in this
> process. One gram mass, if totally consumed,could supply
> enough energy to power a home for one thousand years. Newman
> describes his theory and its applications in his book, THE
> ENERGY MACHINE OF JOSEPH NEWMAN [1].
>
> **Description of
> Newman Motors ---**
>
> Newman's motors
> may be described as two-pole, single phase, permanent magnet
> armature, DC motors. That is, the armature consists of a
> single permanent magnet which either rotates or reciprocates
> within a single coil of copper wire. The coil is energized
> with a bank of dry cell, carbon zinc batteries. In the
> rotating models, which will be emphasized in this paper, the
> battery voltage to the coil is reversed each half cycle of
> rotation by a mechanical commutator attached to the shaft of
> the rotating armature. Motor operation is sensitive to the
> angle at which the voltage is switched, and this is
> optimized experimentally. On some models, the commutator
> also interrupts the voltage several times per cycle,
> creating a pulsed input to the coil.
>
> The coils are
> constructed with a very large number of turns of copper
> wire. In all models, the coil inductive reactance is much
> larger than the coil resistance at operating speed. However,
> the coil resistance is large enough so that even in the
> locked rotor condition, very little current flows through
> the coil. The motors typically draw less than ten
> milliampere so that small capacity batteries (e.g., 9 volt
> transistor batteries) can be used in series for the power
> supply. Self resonant frequencies (frequency at which the
> coil inductive reactance equals the coil distributed
> capacitive reactance) are typically on the order of the
> armature rotation frequency. The permanent magnet armature
> is very strong, and TIGHT COUPLING TO THE COIL is emphasized
> in Newman's later models [emphasis added]. His early models
> used up to 700 pounds of ceramic magnets, while later models
> used smaller armatures made with powerful
> neodymium-boron-iron magnets. The commutator is protected by
> fluorescent tubes placed across the motor. Enough tubes are
> placed in series so that the battery voltage will not break
> them down. When the coil is switched, the tubes are lit by
> the resulting high voltage, minimizing arcing across the
> commutator.
>
> Newman's motors
> exhibit the following extraordinary characteristics:
>
> 1) High torque is
> realized with very little input current and very little
> input power. The battery input power is typically several
> times smaller than the measured frictional power losses
> occurring when the armature rotates at its operating speed.
> His motors are at least ten times more efficient than
> commercial electric motors (perform the same work with one
> tenth the input power.)
>
> 2) The batteries
> last much longer than would be expected for the current
> input. It has been demonstrated that "dead" dry cell
> batteries will charge up while operating a Newman Motor, and
> subsequently be able to deliver significant power to normal
> loads (e.g., lights). The batteries fail by internal
> shorting rather than be depletion of their internal energy.
>
> 3) Significant rf
> power is generated by the motor (primarily in the ten to
> twenty megahertz range). The rf is a high voltage relative
> to ground, and will light fluorescent or neon tubes placed
> between the motor and ground in addition to lighting the
> tubes placed across the motor coil. The rf current flows
> through the entire system, and has been measured
> calorimetrically to have an rms value many times larger than
> the battery input current.
>
> EXPERIMENTAL DATA
>
> A large amount of
> data has been collected by many individuals on the various
> Newman Motors. While Newman's most recent prototypes are
> perhaps the most interesting because of their reduced
> volume, I will present data on his original prototype large
> machine which has been more extensively investigated.
> Measured motor parameters are listed below:
>
> COIL PARAMETERS:
>
> Weight
> ........................... 9,000 pounds   
> Copper Wire Length ...... 55 miles   
> Coil Inductance ............. 1,100 Henries   
> Coil Resistance .............. 770 Ohms   
> Coil Inside Diameter ...... 4 feet   
> Coil Height .................... 4 feet
>
> ROTOR PARAMETERS:
>
> Rotor Weight
> ..................... 700 lbs. ceramic magnets   
> Rotor Length ..................... 4 feet   
> Moment of Inertia .............. 40 Kg-sq.m.   
> Magnetic Moment ............. 100 Tesla-cu.in
>
> BATTERY
> PARAMETERS:
>
> Battery Type
> ..................... 6 Volt Ray-O-Vac Lantern   
> Total Series Voltage .......... 590 Volts
>
> DYNAMIC
> PARAMETERS:
>
> Torque Constant
> ................ 15,400 oz. in./amp   
> Drag Coefficient ................. 0.005 Watts/sq.rpm.   
> Q at 200 rpm ..................... 30   
> Power Factor, 200 rpm ...... 0.03
>
> The torque
> constant was measured at DC and agrees with calculations.
> The drag coefficient was measured by plotting the motor
> speed versus time after disconnecting the batteries. It was
> found that the decay is exponential with the drag torque
> being proportional to the angular speed. With the motor
> operating at 200 rpm, the following measurements and
> calculations were obtained:
>
> RESULTS: 200 RPM
> at 590 VOLTS
>
> Battery Input
> Current ............ 10 milliampere   
> Battery Input Power .............. 6 Watts   
> Rotor Frictional Losses .......... 200 Watts   
> RF Current (rms) ................. 500 milliampere   
> RF Ohmic Losses in Coil .......... 190 Watts   
> Additional Loads ................. Fluorescent Tubes   
> Incandescent Bulbs   
> Fan (belt driven)
>
> The frictional
> losses are computed from the measured drag coefficient. The
> ohmic losses are computed from the coil resistance. Without
> considering the additional loads, it is seen that the output
> energy of the machine exceeded the input by a factor of 65!
>
> Oscillograph
> photos show that the current waveform is dominated by the
> very large spike which occurs when the magnetic field of the
> coil collapses. The leading edge of this spike is shown in
> Figure 1. The staircase current rise is typical of the
> Newman Motors, with the width of the stairs in all cases
> being approximately equal to the length of the coil winding
> divided by the speed of light. Although the average current
> in the spike is at DC, the actual current waveform under the
> stairs is pulsing at a frequency of about 13 megahertz. The
> time average current in the waveform agrees with the
> calorimeter measurement of the rf current.
>
> **Figure 1**
> [Not shown]. Reproduction of oscillographs showing Newman
> Motor switching current spike. Spike leading edge is shown
> with the magnified time base in second and third
> oscillograph. Rotor speed was 120 rpm.
>
> PHENOMENOLOGICAL
> THEORY
>
> A phenomenological
> theory of operation is suggested here, which involves the
> following sequence of events:
>
> 1) The battery is
> switched across the coil and a current wavefront (gyroscopic
> particles) propagates into the coil at a speed determined by
> the coil's propagation time constant.
>
> 2) Before the
> wavefront completes its journey through the coil, the
> battery voltage is switched open. At this point the coil
> contains a charge equal to the current times the on-time.
>
> 3) When the switch
> is opened, all of this charge leaves the coil in a very
> short time, creating a very large current pulse in the coil.
>
> 4) The magnetic
> field generated by this current pulse (gyroscopic particle
> flow) propagates out to the permanent magnet armature, and
> gives it an impulsive torque.
>
> 5) The magnet
> accelerates, and the resulting magnetic field disturbance of
> the permanent magnet is propagated back to the coil,
> creating a back-emf. However, by the time this occurs, the
> switch is open so that the back emf does not impede the
> current flowing in the battery circuit.
>
> These notions
> agree qualitatively with the measured waveforms. After
> one-half cycle of rotation, a charge on the order of 0.01
> Coulombs will be contained within the coil. From the
> oscillograph this is seen to be dumped in a few
> milliseconds, creating a current of several amps. This
> current continues to flow for some ten milliseconds before
> decaying to zero.
>
> Newman's Motor can
> be described by the following set of equations:
>
> (1) J? + F(?) =
> K(sub t)I sin (?)
>
> (2) LI = RI = V(?)
> - K(sub i)? sin (?)
>
> where:   
> J = Rotor Moment of Inertia   
> F = Friction and Load Torque   
> K(sub t) = Torque Constant   
> I = Coil Current   
> L = Coil Inductance   
> V = Applied Voltage   
> K(sub i) = Induction Constant   
> ? = Rotation Angle
>
> The first equation
> is Newton's second law applied to the rotating magnet, the
> second is the coil current circuit equation. The voltage is
> the value applied to the coil within the commutator. If the
> first equation is multiplied by ? and the second equation is
> multiplied by I, and both equations are averaged over one
> cycle, the sum of the resulting equations gives:
>
> (3) <IV> =
> <?F> + <I^2R> + (K(sub i) - K(sub t) <?Isin
> ?)
>
> where the brackets
> indicate a time average over one cycle of rotation.
>
> The term on the
> left is the power input. The first two terms on the right
> represent the mechanical power output (combined frictional
> losses and load power), and the ohmic heating in the coil
> windings. The last term is zero if the torque constant is
> equal to the induction constant, as would be the case in a
> conventional motor. However, as postulated above, if the
> induction constant is smaller than the torque constant, the
> last term supplies the negative power.
>
> To view this
> another way, assume that the input voltage, through the
> commutator action varies as V = V(sub o)sin (?). If we also
> assume that the rotor angular   
> speed, ?, is nearly a constant, w, the following expression
> applies for the motor efficiency:
>
> <wF> K(sub
> t)w<Isin ?> K(sub t)w   
> (4) E = \_\_\_\_\_\_ = \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ = \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_   
> <IV> V(sub o)<Isin ?> V (sub o)
>
> The following two
> equations can now be solved for the presumed constant motor
> speed:
>
> (5) LI + RI =
> (V(sub o) - K(sub i)w)sin(wt)
>
> (6) <F(w)> =
> K(sub t)<I sin(wt)>
>
> The solution
> depends upon the details of the mechanical load function,
> F(w). If, however, the torque constant and voltage are both
> very large (as they are in Newman's Motor), then the angular
> speed is approximately [2]:
>
> V(sub o)   
> w apr.= \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_   
> K(sub i)
>
> and the expression
> for the efficiency becomes:
>
> K(sub t)   
> E apr.= \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_   
> K(sub i)
>
> If the torque and
> induction constants are equal, the motor is nearly one
> hundred percent efficient. If the torque constant exceeds
> the induction constant, the efficiency\* exceeds 100%.
>
> [\*Note: the
> PRODUCTION efficiency can exceed 100% the CONVERSION
> efficiency cannot exceed 100%]
>
> CONCLUSIONS:
>
> Joseph Newman has
> demonstrated that his Theory is a useful tool by which
> predictions of circuit function can be made without
> mathematics. For example, his gyroscopic particles interact
> as spinning particles (through the cross product of their
> spins), and this qualitatively describes magnetic induction.
> In complicated electromagnetic systems, exact solutions to
> Maxwell's equations may be difficult or impossible to
> obtain, while a phenomenological mechanical picture can be
> visualized to give qualitatively correct results. Mechanical
> models of electromagnetic interactions were considered
> essential by scientists of the 19th century. Maxwell
> originally derived his famous equations by using a
> mechanical model of the electromagnetic field, and stated
> the following [3]:
>
> "The theory I
> propose may therefore be called a theory of the
> electromagnetic field because it has to do with the space in
> the neighborhood of the electric or magnetic bodies, and it
> may be called a dynamical theory because it assumes that in
> that space there is MATTER IN MOTION, by which the observed
> electro-magnetic phenomena are produced .... In speaking of
> the energy of the field, I wish to be understood literally:
> ALL ENERGY IS THE SAME AS MECHANICAL ENERGY.." [Emphasis
> added.]
>
> Regarding Joseph
> Newman's Motor, I have no doubt about its performance or
> about the profound importance of its future applications.
>
> \*\*AT THIS TIME IT
> APPEARS THAT THE FIRST APPLICATIONS WILL BE REPLACEMENTS FOR
> EXISTING ELECTRIC MOTORS. [Editor: Emphasis added.]
>
> Regarding a
> rigorous mathematical description of the underlying
> phenomena, it is clear that much effort, both theoretical
> and experimental, will be required to achieve this end.
>
> REFERENCES:
>
> [1] THE ENERGY
> MACHINE OF JOSEPH NEWMAN, Joseph W. Newman author, Evan
> Soule, editor. Joseph Newman Publishing Company, Rt 1, Bx
> 52, Lucedale, MS 39452 [1st Edition published in 1984.]
>
> [2] The precise
> condition for this approximation to be valid is that the
> locked rotor torque be much larger than the applied
> mechanical torque at speed multiplied by one plus the square
> of the ratio of inductive reactance and resistance. This
> condition applied to some of Newman's Motors, and in
> particular to the most recent small volume devices. In the
> larger motors the voltage is applied with a phase shift
> chosen to optimize efficiency, and it can be shown that
> Equation 8 still applies in the limit of large inductance.
>
> [3] A DYNAMICAL
> THEORY OF THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD. James Clerk Maxwell,
> T.F. Torrance, ed., Scottish Academic Press Ltd., Edinburgh
> (1982). [From Maxwell's Presentation to the Royal Society,
> 1864).
>
> The above was
> written by Dr. Roger Hastings, Ph.D., in 1987 for
> apresentation before a National Conference of the
> International Tesla Society.
>
> ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
>
> Dr. Roger Hastings
> has a Ph.D. in Physics, University of Minnesota, 1975; MS in
> Physics, University of Denver, 1971; BS in Physics,
> University of Denver, 1969.
>
> Dr. Hastings was a
> Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Virginia, 1975-77
> with research in organic superconductors and the physical
> properties of solutions of macro-ions and viruses.
> Currently, Dr. Hastings is a Principal Physicist with the
> UNISYS Corporation. As a consultant, Dr. Hastings also
> designs electric motors for other corporations.
>
> \*The latest
> commutator design enables higher voltages to be utilized.
>
> *Note:* The
> above article was written several years ago. The principles
> described above are generally applicable "across the breadth
> of the technology." However, considerable improvements to
> the commutator design have been made in the recent past.
> These improvements are intended to actually reduce the
> intensity of the sparking by distributing the physical
> connections over a wider area. The reader should bear in
> mind that there are TWO totally different design systems
> (but many sub-configurations within each basic design):
> there is one commutator design when the energy machine is
> intended to function as a GENERATOR and a totally different
> commutator design when the energy machine is intended to
> function as a MOTOR. The latest design improvements to the
> commutator system apply to the machine operating as a MOTOR.
> Subsequent torque can be utilized for mechanical systems or
> can be used in conjunction with a conventional generator.
>
> > ---

 
**Joseph W. Newman:**

**South
African Patent Application # 831,296**

**"Energy
Generation System having Higher Energy Output Than Input"**

---

 
**Background
of
the Invention:**

**1. Field of the
Invention ~**

The present
invention relates generally to devices or systems (including
methods for generating useable energy such as for example
electrical energy from electromagnetic fields, electrical
energy or electromagnetic fields from matter, and more
particularly to devices or systems (including methods) for
producing electrical current flow for use as electrical
power, and magnetic fields of force which cause motion
(obvious work), or electrical current flow or for increasing
electromagnetic potential energy available for use or
mechanical energy available for use.

**2. Prior Art ~**

There have been
many devices proposed over the years for producing
electrical energy, with mechanical friction,
thermo-electricity, photoelectricity, piezoelectricity,
electrochemistry and electromagnetic induction being the
chief forms of primary energy capable of producing
electricity. Of these, the only significant source of
commercial electrical power has been the mechanical actions
of electric generators, and for mobile power the chemical
action of batteries has been important. Useable motion has
resulted from the interactions between the input of
electrical energy and the magnetic and/or electromagnetic
fields of force (electric motors) and heat or light as a
result of input of electrical energy through conventional
mechanical systems, heaters, lightbulbs, etc.

All of the prior
art systems are designed according to rigid mathematical
laws taught both in physics and electrical engineering that
coincide with the hypotheses rigidly accepted by the
industrial and scientific communities concerning the Second
Law of Thermodynamics (1850).

From the foregoing
generally accepted hypothesis it has also been generally
accepted and rigidly taught in physics and electrical
engineering that the electric current flowing in a closed
circuit from a battery, electrical generator, etc., is used
up in the mechanical device being operated by this flow of
electric current, and that all such electric current
producing systems would only put out at most work equal to
the work initially put into the system, or in accordance
with generally accepted laws stating that a particular
electrical system was only capable of a given output of
energy and no ore.

These beliefs have
till this date remained rigid in both the industrial and
scientific communities in spite of proof of Einsteins
equation of E = MC2. Nuclear reactors convert
matter into useable electromagnetic energy in the form of
heat, which converts water into steam to turn conventional
turbines for production of electric current by conventional
electrical generating means. This system is extremely
inefficient, using less than 1% of the energy of the atom
and producing a deluge of contaminated materials that have
caused a serious problem of safe disposal.

Additionally, the
basic electrical generators in use throughout the world
today utilize the principle of causing relative movement
between an electrical conductor (for example a rotor) and a
magnetic field produced by a magnet or an electromagnet (for
example a stator), all using the generally accepted
hypothesis that the greater the electrical conductivity of
the material being moved through the field, the more
efficient will be the electrical generation.

From the foregoing
generally accepted hypotheses, it also has been generally
accepted that there should always be movement between, for
example, the rotor and stator elements, and that only
generally accepted electrical conductors, that is materials
with high electrical conductivity, will effectively serve in
an electrical generation system.

However, in one of
the systems (**[Figure 3](#new3)**) of the
present invention, electrical generation can occur with the
relatively static elements and with materials that are not
generally considered to be of high electrical conductivity,
although of course the present invention likewise can
utilize relatively moving elements as well as materials of
generally accepted high electrical conductivity, if so
desired, as occurs in the systems of the present invention
illustrated in **[Figure 5](#new5)** and **[Figure 6](#new6)**.

The prior art has
failed to understand certain physical aspects of matter and
the makeup of electromagnetic fields, which failure is
corrected by the present invention.

**Brief
Description of Drawings:**

For a further
understanding of the nature and objects of the present
invention, reference should be had to the following detailed
description, taken in conjunction with the accompanying
drawings, in which like parts are given like reference
numerals and wherein:

**[Figure
1](#new1)** is a schematic, side view in generalized,
representational form of a first embodiment of an electrical
generator based on the principles and guidelines of the
present invention.

**[Figure
2](#new2)** is a close-up view in general form of an
electrical charge pickup element that can be used in the
generator illustrated in **[Figure 1](#new3)**.

**[Figure
3](#new3)** is a schematic view in generalized,
representational form of a second embodiment of an
electrical generator based on the principles and guidelines
of the present invention.

**[Figure
4](#new4)** is a schematic view in generalized,
representational form of the negative and positive particles
exhibiting gyroscopic actions that emanate from a magnet to
form an electromagnetic field.

**[Figure
5](#new5)** and **[Figure 6](#new6)** are
schematic views in generalized, representational form of
third and fourth embodiments of a combined electrical
generator and motor utilizing a static, relatively large
coil energized by a relatively low current driving a
rotatable magnet, wherein the embodiment of **[Figure](#new5) 5** the rotatable magnet is
positioned along side of the coil and in the embodiment of **[Figure 6](#new6)** the rotatable magnet is
positioned within the open core of the coil.

**Detailed
Description of Preferred Embodiments**

**Basic
Principles & Guidelines ~**

In accordance with
the principles of the present invention and as generally
illustrated in **[Figure 3](#new3)**, an
electromagnetic field 10 comprises flows of quanta or
particles 20, 30 of electrical energy flowing from each of
the poles 21, 31 of a magnet (or electromagnet) 40 to the
other pole, following the "lines of force" 11 of the
electromagnetic field. These particles 20, 30, believed to
be traveling at the speed of light, are always coming out of
one end 21, 31, respectively, flowing from a relatively
high-energy source to a low-energy source.

These particles
20, 30 are, it is believed, negative and positive charges
and have a spin producing a gyroscopic motion and follow the
mechanical laws of gyroscopic action. The mass of each of
the particles 20, 30 equals the energy of the particles
divided by the speed of light squared. The peripheral speed
of the gyroscopic particles is believed to be the speed of
light.

For purposes of
illustration only and as a matter of nomenclature, the
positive charge particle 20 is going in one direction (N to
S) with a clockwise spin, and the negative particle 30 is
going in the opposite direction with a counter-clockwise
spin. Of course, if a particle such as 20 or 30 is flipped
around 180 degrees, it becomes the opposite charge or type
of particle.

The
electromagnetic field 10 is thus the orderly flow of the
positive and negative charges 20, 30, moving at the speed of
light from the north and south poles 21, 31, to the south
and north poles 31, 21, respectively, and follow the paths
of what is termed in the art as the lines of force 11 of the
electromagnetic field 10.

As is known from
the laws of gyroscopes, a gyroscopic particle or body moves
at right angles to the direction of an applied force.
Therefore, when a force is applied to the electrical energy
particles 20,30, they will move at right angles to that
force.

It should also be
noted from known gyroscopic laws that the electrical energy
particles 20, 30, when they move with their gyroscopic axis
straight into an object, tend to knock that object straight,
but if that object hits the particles at an angle to the
axis other than at zero or 180 degrees, the particles are
moved off at an angle from the straight.

Additionally, it
is noted that a magnetic field caused by a current flowing
through a wire comes from negative and positive particles,
such as 20, 30, with a net flow of such particles going in
the same direction but with opposite spin.

In the system and
method of the present invention, the foregoing principles
serve as guidelines in the present invention.

Reference is
further had to pages DD23 through DD27 of the Disclosure
Document and to Page 8, Line 26 through Page 11, Line 23 of
the prior Application Serial number 25,907 and its Figures
7-10.

From the foregoing
disclosures, many different devices, structures, and methods
are possible to embody the principles and guidelines of the
system of the present invention, which in general will
utilize a material or substance or structure to place a
force at the proper angle to the gyroscopic particles 20, 30
wherein the particles 20, 30 follow a path or paths which do
not cancel one another out, thereby producing electrical
current at appropriate outputs for further use or for
increasing available potential electrical for ultimate use

**First
Embodiment (Figure 1) ~**

One possible,
exemplary embodiment using the principles of the system of
the present invention is schematically shown in the
generalized illustration of **[Figure 1](#new1)**.

As illustrated in
**[Figure 1](#new1)**, there is provided an
electrical current generator 100 comprising an outer keeper
housing 115 and an inner, pressure-containing, closed
housing 116 supported therein by insulated supports 105. A
vacuum exists in the area 106 between the two housings 115,
116, which vacuum is regulated and induced by means of the
vacuum line 104 with its gauge 107 and its control valve
108. The outer housing 115 acts as a keeper for magnetic
fields of force, and can be made for example of soft iron,
while the vacuum in area 106 prevents the leakage or
discharge of static electrical charges that might build up
on the exterior of the inner housing 116.

A gas or
gas-liquid mixture 117 which may also include solid
particles such as for example lead or brass filings, is
included within the inner housing 116 surrounding a series
of aligned magnets 120 carried by insulating braces or
supports 121 and producing a high, combined electromagnetic
field. The magnets 120, which can for example be cryogenic
magnets, have their "north" and "south" poles aligned (as
illustrated by the "Nn" and "Ss") so that their magnetic
fields reinforce one another.

The level of the
gas or gas-liquid mixture 117 in the housing 116 is
regulated by means of the line 122 with its gauge 123 and
control valve 124. Electric current output wires 119 are
provided and extend down to electrically connect with a wire
pick-up system 118 (shown in close-up in **[Figure
2](#new2)**), which can for example be in the form if very
small wires forming a closely spaced network or mesh or of a
porous conducting metal body or sheet, located in and
extended throughout the fluid 117 in the housing 116.

It is noted that a
thimbleful of gas contains a fantastically large number of
extremely tiny bodies that are in continuous, random motion
moving at extremely high speeds. Hence, the fluid 117
continuously applies a force to the gyroscopic particles
(analogous to particles 20, 30 of **[Figure
3](#new3)**) moving at the speed of light in the high
electromagnetic field (produced by the magnets 120) as they
continuously collide with each other, which results in the
fluid 117 becoming electrically charged. The charged fluid
117 discharges its electrical charge to the pick-up wire
network 118 positioned in the fluid, and the electric
current so produced and generated is taken off for use via
the electrical output wires 119.

As an alternative
to having internally contained magnets 120, the
electromagnetic field needed in the fluid 117 could be
produced by a source located outside of the confines of the
fluid 117 as long as the significant field was produced
within the fluid 117.

**Second
Embodiment ([Figure 3](#new3)) ~**

A further
exemplary, generalized embodiment utilizing the principles
of the system of the present invention is shown in schematic
form in **[Figure 3](#new3)**.

The electrical
current generator 200 of **[Figure 3](#new3)**
comprises an extended member 201 of a special material
having its atoms especially aligned to produce electric
current when positioned in an electromagnetic field but
which does not on its own exhibit any substantial magnetic
field outside of its boundary surfaces but substantially
contains the filed within itself. This is in contrast to
"magnetic" materials which likewise have atom alignment but
which also exhibit or produce a substantial magnetic field
in the area surrounding it.

The generator 200
further comprises for example two magnets 202, 203, with
their north and south poles facing each other, with the
member 201 positioned between them, and with the three
elements 201-203 held static with respect to each other.
Because of the special nature of the material of the member
201 and its special atom alignment, it will produce a direct
current through output line 204 as a result of the
gyroscopic actions of the particles of the electromagnetic
field 205 produced by the facing magnets 202, 203, on the
specially aligned atoms in member 201, which phenomenon
occurs even when and even though the member 201 is
completely static with respect to the magnets 212, 203. It
may be desirable in some applications, however, to allow or
produce some relative movement between the generator
elements 201-203.

The output line
204 extends to an appropriate "load" 206 for using the
electrical current generated by the generator 200. A return
line 207 completes the circuit back to the member 201.

Based on
experiments to date, it is believed that brass and lead are
materials that can have their atoms especially aligned to
interact with the gyroscopic particles (analogous to
particles 20, 30) flowing between the magnets 202, 203 and
will substantially contain within their surface boundaries
the magnetic field produced by the aligned atoms or
molecules.

With respect to
producing the proper material with atom alignment for the
member 201, it is noted that most materials seem to align
their atoms in random directions when formed by conventional
methods of production. It can be observed, however, that
certain materials can be made magnetic by putting the
material in an electromagnetic field while cooling from a
temperature of around 1000 degrees C. The magnetism is the
result of atom alignment of the material in a given
direction (See pages DD19 through DD21 of the Disclosure
Document). All materials are affected so as to align
parallel or across lines of force when in a powerful
electromagnetic field. Accordingly, if a material while
being formed is cooled in an extremely powerful
electromagnetic field, the atoms of the material will take
on a particular alignment. The atom alignment direction
could be varied depending on whether the electromagnetic
field was aligned with the material or at a 90 degree angle
to the material. This would result in the atoms of a
material having their particular electromagnetic spin
direction primarily along the same axis.

Merely having atom
alignment, however, is not sufficient. Additionally the
material for the invention should be such that it exhibits
very little if any magnetic field in the area surrounding
it. Thus it should be noted that the exterior
electromagnetic field that occurs from the atom alignment of
the conventional magnet is not duplicated in the material of
the invention, because the electromagnetic energy resulting
from atom alignment in the material of the invention will be
primarily contained within the boundaries of the material.
It is believed that lead, made super-conductive by immersion
in a bath of liquid helium, for example, is such a special
material and cold serve as the material for member 201.

This then results
in having a material that would place a force at the proper
angle on the gyroscopic type particles moving in the
electromagnetic field so as to cause an EMF to be produced
even when the material was sitting still (See also the first
paragraph of page DD23 and paragraphs 4, A through E, of
page DD19 in the Disclosure Documents).

It is believed
that high, contained pressures, as well as other methods,
can also probably produce atom alignment as the atoms of a
conductor or any material will react to sufficient external
force (See the first paragraph of page DD35 of the
Disclosure Document). This possibility also is indicated by
the fact that hard knocks or impacts will demagnetize a
magnet.

The proper
procedure of material production in achieving atom alignment
with internally contained fields of force will cause the
controlled release of electrical energy in electromagnetic
fields of force when the material of the invention is placed
in the lines of force of the electromagnetic field.

**Third
& Fourth Embodiments ([Figure 5](#new5)
& [Figure 6](#new6)) ~**

**A.
Related Principles ~**

(1) Numerous
scientific tests and experiments made by the inventor
indicate that the magnetic field resulting from an
electrical current flowing through a conductor is the result
of atom alignment within that conductor at an extremely fast
speed with an ability to reverse atom alignment just as
rapidly without the magnetic hysteresis associated with
conventional materials considered "magnetic". Prior to this
time it has been believed and taught by the scientific
community that the magnetic field associated with an
electric current carrying conductor was the result of the
electric current itself and not of the conductor material,
for example copper, which was considered to be
"non-magnetic".

Even the inventor
was influenced and misled by these teachings and attempted
to mechanically explain and justify the prior teachings, as
is seen on page DD27 of the Disclosure Document, which is an
important part of this patent application.

As taught in the
present invention, however, what mechanically happens is
that the gyroscopic particles making up the electric current
moving in a conductor interact with the electromagnetic
makeup of the atoms of the conductor, causing them to align
extremely rapidly, thereby then releasing some of their
electromagnetic makeup in the form of a magnetic field
exactly as explained in great detail for conventional
magnetic materials in the Disclosure Document.

This is easily
proven and understood by taking for example a size 14 gauge
conductor one foot long, winding it into a coil, and
connecting the coil to a meter and a 1.5 volt battery. The
total current registered on the meter will be 1.5 volts and
the strength of the magnetic field created from the short
conductor will be extremely small. Next, the same type of
test is run again but with the length of the conductor
increased to 2000 feet, for example. The total current
registered on the meter will now be considerably less, but
the strength of the magnetic field given off from the
conductor will now be extremely large!

This shows that
the magnetic field is not from the electric current flow,
but is the result of the interaction of the gyroscopic
particles that make up the electric current interacting with
the atoms of the conductor! This causes the gyroscopic
particles of the electric current not to be able to make the
circuit back to the battery so quickly, and therefore the
meter shows less current used.

The magnetic field
is the result of the atom alignment of the conductor. The
more atoms in a conductor (up to a point), the stronger the
magnetic field produced from a given amount of electric
current input. Again, this is proven by changing the
diameter of the conducting wires and, with the lengths being
the same, the strongest magnetic field will result from the
conductor with the largest diameter. The reason for this is
that there are more conducting atoms to interact with the
gyroscopic particles of the electric current moving through
the conductor, which results in a greater number of
conducting atoms being aligned, thereby then releasing some
of their electromagnetic makeup, exactly as has been
explained in great detail in the Disclosure Document as
being possible for all matter.

If the magnetic
field produced was strictly based on the amount of current
going through a conductor, as taught in the prior art, then
the strongest magnetic field would result when current went
through a large diameter and short length conductor, because
the current flow through the entire circuit is greatest at
that time. However, experiments prove that the shorter a
conductor is made, the greater the current flow through the
entire circuit and the less strength of the magnetic field
surrounding that conductor. The longer that same conductor
is made (up to a point), the greater the magnetic field
surrounding the total mass of the conductor and the less
current that makes the complete circuit of the entire
system. Reason: more atoms!

(2) Numerous
scientific tests and experiments made by the inventor also
indicate that the magnetic field created when an electric
current moves in a conductor does not use up measurable
energy when performing obvious or unobvious work, force or
power. This is true no matter how strong or how immense the
power of the motor or electromagnets is. Reason: the
magnetic field coming from the conductor is the result of
extremely quick atom alignment within that conductor.
Therefore the energy in the magnetic field is the energy
that makes up the atom of the conductor! This energy is
literally Einsteins equation of E + MC2, and
therefore the energy is believed to be moving at the speed
of light. This energy use cannot be measured by todays
measuring instruments. This has been explained in great
detail in the Disclosure Document and is believed to be true
of all matter.

(3) The same is
true for the electric current that comes from a conventional
battery. The electromagnetic energy coming from the battery
is the energy that makes up the atoms of the material of the
battery. Again, this energy use is not measurable by todays
measuring instruments. Electric meters of all types are
simply mechanical devices that measure the amount of
electric current that comes into that instrument. They do
not measure the amount of mass that has been converted into
electromagnetic energy.

Present technique
in science states that the electric energy flowing from a
battery is used up in the device operated by that flow of
electric current. This is not true at all! The
electromagnetic energy released from the atom makeup of a
battery has a relatively infinite capacity to do obvious
work, force, or power.

This is easily
proven even with a small motor and a 1.5-volt battery. With
a battery connected to the motor to operate it and with a
meter to take readings, the motor is then physically stopped
from turning by holding or restraining the shaft. At that
moment the motor is performing no obvious work, force or
power, but the meter will register a greater flow of
current. The magnets of the motor can be taken out and the
reading will be the same. If the electricity was being used
to operate the motor, the meter would register more current
when the motor was running.

The electric
current not only will operate the motor but, once it flows
through the complete circuit back to the battery, it also
does additional work based on Faradays Laws of Electrolysis
within the battery itself. What has happened is that the
electromagnetic energy released from the atoms of the
material of the battery, once they have completed the
circuit, then take a "short cut" and move large pieces of
the mass of one material of the battery over to the other
material of the battery. The inventor has stated and shown
throughout the Disclosure Document that the effect of
gravity was the unobvious effect of electromagnetic energy.
Once the materials of the battery have combined, the extreme
desire for the two materials to merge is physically reduced.
These materials will attempt this merger in any way possible
and, if the electric current initially released from a
battery is not allowed by mechanical means to complete the
circuit back within itself, the electromagnetic energy then
in the mechanical means will perpetually (in a relative,
theoretical sense) perform obvious work, force or power. The
reason: the force that initiated this flow of current
(electromagnetic makeup of atoms of material) is constant,
similar to hydraulic pressure, with the noticeable exception
that it is moving (it is believed) at the speed of light and
will interact with the electromagnetic makeup of the atoms
of other materials, causing them to release some of their
electromagnetic makeup in the form of a magnetic field. This
then multiplies the capacity for doing obvious or unobvious
work, force or power, which can then react with another
conducting coil or with the electromagnetic energy within
the magnetic field or a conventional magnet and multiply
this effect even further, on and on for a relatively
unlimited source of energy.

The same is true
in not letting the current get back to a conventional
generator. If a mechanical means is set up so that the
electric current is "trapped" without completing a circuit,
the gyroscopic particles of the current have a capacity for
continuous work without increasing the power input into the
generator system. If, however, the circuit is complete and
the electric current moving in the system does absolutely no
obvious work, power or force, the gyroscopic particles
making up the current and retuning to the generator will
then increase the need for more power input into the system.
The reason is in the opposing effect of magnetic fields as
defined in Lenzs Law. This law is simply an observation of
this effect, which before now has never been fully
understood.

4. Numerous
scientific tests and experiments made by the inventor also
indicate that there is a correlation between the
electromagnetic spin orientation of the atoms of
non-conductors, semi-conductors, and conductors, and the
varying results achieved with an electric current in
attempting to move through these materials, or when moving
these materials through a magnetic field attempting to
induce electric current.

The gyroscopic
particles in a moving electric current interact with the
atoms of the material through which the current is moving.
Each atom can efficiently interact with only an exact amount
of electric current, and if exceeded, there is an
interruption of orderly movement. Then the angle of release
of the gyroscopic particles from the atoms are such that the
electromagnetic release of the gyroscopic particles are such
that the electromagnetic release from these atoms are in the
form of heat, exactly as explained in great detail in the
Disclosure Document. This effect is easily observed by the
fact that the resistance decreases relative to an increase
of the cross-section of the material. Reason: more atoms are
within that given area, and for a fixed input of electric
current there are more atoms to receive and interact
efficiently with the gyro-particles making up the electric
current.

Again, the same is
true for resistors designed for deliberately producing heat.
Such resistors are not materials that are considered to be
good conductors of electric current. It is stated and shown
in great detail in the Disclosure Document that the
electromagnetic spin orientation of the atoms of a
non-conductor are different from that of conductor atoms,
and therefore different results will occur from the same
inputs of electromagnetic energy.

This is easily
seen by the fact that, in a resistor, for a given amount of
electric current input, the heat release increases as the
diameter increases. What that means is that the property of
resistance has decreased. On a conductor it is just the
opposite. If the diameter is increased the resistance is
decreased, but so is heat release. Again, this is an
indication that the gyro-particles in the electric current
movement interact with each atom of the material.

This same effect
shows up again in conventional electrical induction from a
conductor interacting with a magnetic field.

Experiments by the
inventor have indicated that the property of conventional
induction is the result of the same property of resistance.

If one increases
the diameter of a conductor, lengths staying the same, one
decreases the amount of electric current relative to the
total number of atoms within the conductors under
consideration. Or, if one takes a given number of wires of
the same diameter and length and moves a magnet across them,
the current produced will be considerably less than if one
takes the same diameter wire, but only one wire, and
increases its length considerably and then forms it into a
coil forming the same number of wires on any one side and
then moves the same magnet across only one side of that
coil; the electric current generated will then be
considerably greater. Reason: the property of resistance.
This is a mechanical effect within the gyroscopic
electromagnetic makeup and orientation of the atoms of all
materials that have the mechanical ability to perform a
given task efficiently up to a point concerning input of
additional electromagnetic energy and then mechanically
causes varying results once this threshold is exceeded.

This and all other
thoughts and innovations in this and the previous
disclosures of the previous application and the Disclosure
Document previously put forth show that there are many
different mechanical ways to release a relatively unlimited
source of energy from electromagnetic energy that makes up
all matter and which results from this invention.

**B.
Working Prototypes ~**

**[Figure
5](#new5)** and **[Figure 6](#new6)**
illustrate rough working prototypes of this aspect of the
invention. These embodiments are only relatively inefficient
prototypes built by hand for the purpose of demonstrating
the invention. It should be self-evident that the prototypes
by various mechanical means and designs can easily be made
extremely efficient, and the illustrated embodiments are
being presented only for general representational purposes.

As is illustrated
in **[Figure 5](#new5)**, there is provided a
combined electrical current generator and an electromagnetic
motor comprising a rotatable mounted permanent magnet 200, a
battery 201, brushes and commutator 202, bearings 203 and
power, mounting shaft 204, and a first, primary magnetic
producing coil 205 and a secondary electrical producing coil
206. The two coils 205 and 206 are juxtaposed together in
parallel disposition with concurrent core center lines, with
the magnet 200 positioned alongside of coil 205 at or near
its core center line with the rotational axis of the shaft
204 positioned orthogonally to the center line.

In the prototypes
a very small battery 201, for example size "N" of 1.5 volts
is used.

When the circuit
is completed, the battery 20 converts an immeasurable amount
of its mass into electrical current (gyroscopic particles
moving at the speed of light) which goes through the
commutator and brushes 202, and then enters magnetic
producing coil 205 made for example from insulated #14 or
#15 gauge copper wire with the total weight of the coil 205
being for example 70 to 90 pounds. This causes the atoms of
coil 205 to align extremely fast and then release some of
their electromagnetic makeup (gyroscopic particles) in the
form of a magnetic field. This field then interacts with the
gyroscopic particles making up the magnetic field coming
from the atoms of the material of the permanent magnet 200.
This causes magnet 200 to attempt to align its magnetic
field movement with the magnetic field movement coming from
the atoms of coil 205, resulting in the rotation of magnet
200 and the shaft 204 to which it is attached. This then
changes the position of the commutator and brushes 202
relative to each others initial positions, which then
causes the electric current coming from battery 201 to be
going in the opposite direction into coil 205, causing the
atoms of coil 205 to extremely quickly reverse their
alignment and the polarity of their magnetic field that they
are emitting. The reversed field then interacts again with
the magnetic field of permanent magnet 200, causing it to
rotate further.

This process is
then continuously repeated, producing continuous rotation of
the shaft 204 which can be used as a source of motive power
in many different ways. A power belt wheel 207, for example,
using a continuous V-belt is illustrated as a general
representation of this motive power source for producing
useful, obvious work. In a prototype test run with a small
1.5- volt type "N" battery, the shaft 204 and the magnet 200
rotated at a high speed for approximately 12 hours before
running down. By improving the particular design features of
the prototype and by using longer lasting batteries, the
rotation time of the shaft 204 can be greatly increased to a
theoretical point approaching "perpetual" for all practical
purposes. At the same time, the alternating magnetic field
produced by coil 205 induces into coil 206 electrical
induction which then causes coil 206 to produce an
alternating current across its "load", which current can be
made to exceed the conventional output of battery 201. The
battery source 201 can be replaced as needed.

It is very
important to understand that the longer the length of the
conducting wire in coil205, the stronger will be the
magnetic field and the less electric current that will
complete the circuit and get back into the battery and
destroy the mechanical source of the electrical current.
This effect can be increased further by increasing the
diameter of the conducting wire in coil 205 and then greatly
increasing its length still further in the coil.

Reason: the
gyroscopic particles making up the electric current interact
with the atoms of coil 205. The more atoms in coil 205,
relative to length, the longer it takes the gyro-particles
of the electric current to influence them and get out the
other end of the coil. It is then easily seen that if the
direction of the current into coil 205 is then reversed,
this then further increases this lag time. Reason: The
gyroscopic particles have inertia and are believed to be
moving at the speed of light and are interacting with the
gyroscopic particles making up the atoms of conducting coil
205. These atoms also have inertia, and when the direction
of current is reversed into coil 205, the incoming current
then collides with the current already in coil 206 going in
opposite directions.

This causes a
brief hesitation during the time the current already in the
coil is being forced to reverse its direction of the atoms
within coil 205 that have already been influenced to become
aligned. This causes a constant force throughout the
circuit, but does not allow very much current to get back
into the battery 201 to destroy the mechanical means that
initiated the release of electric current in the first
place.

Therefore, it
should be further understood that the faster the current
direction reverses into the coil 205, the more efficiently
the matter of battery 201 is converted into pure electrical
energy (E = MC2) without the destruction of the
mechanical situation that initiates the electrical current
release.

It is also
important to understand that the stronger the magnetic field
coming from the mass of magnet 200, the greater will be its
rotational speed. Additionally, the greater the magnetic
field coming from the mass of coil 205, the greater will be
the rotational speed of magnet 200 and, up to a point, the
greater the electric current input from battery 201, the
greater will be the percentage of the atoms making up coil
205 that are aligned. This probably has the same
relationship as does achieving atom alignment in
conventional magnetic materials. Once complete atom
alignment is reached in coil 205, no amount of current will
cause those atoms to increase the strength of the magnetic
field emitting from those atoms.

Therefore, it
should be clear that for a given input of electric current
from battery 201, the most efficient design is one in which
most of the atoms of coil 205 are influenced to atom
alignment by that given electric current, which means
increasing the diameter and the length of the conducting
wire of coil 205 to the point that the strength of the
magnetic field produced is sufficient to cause rotation of
the magnet 200 to a speed that allows none or at least very
little of the electric current that initially comes from the
battery 201 to complete the circuit and get back into
battery 201 and destroy or reduce the mechanical effect that
induced the conversion of the matter of the battery 201 in
electric current in the first place.

Again this desired
effect can be increased by increasing the strength of the
magnetic field given off by the atoms of the permanent
magnet 200.

In the second
embodiment of Figure 6, the structure and operation of the
prototype is substantially identical to that of **[Figure 5](#new5)** with the major exception
being that the magnet 300 and shaft 304 elements (and
related sub-elements 302, 303, and 307) are positioned
inside of and within the core of the primary coil 305, as
compared to the placement of the magnet 200 and shaft 204
elements next to and along side of the coil 205 of **[Figure 5](#new5)**. Therefore, for purposes
of brevity, a detailed description of the elements of **[Figure 6](#new6)** will not be repeated, but
it is noted that the corresponding and analogous elements
and sub-elements are similarly numbered in **[Figure 5](#new5)** and **[Figure
6](#new6)**.

It is also
important to again stress the fact that the prototype
designs shown are presented simply to prove the correctness
of the invention, and it should be clear that the invention
can be made extremely more efficient by utilizing all of the
magnetic field produced by coil 205 and designing the magnet
200 of a shape and strength that efficiently interacts wit
the majority of the magnetic fields from coil 205. The
illustrated prototypes are relatively highly inefficient in
this regard, but even so, the results of the invention
itself greatly exceed the prior art as to the use of
electric current from whatever source and interaction with
an electric motor or whatever work was conventionally
performed.

The applicant
feels it is very important to again stress that, in building
many varying designs of this invention, consideration must
be given to the fact that the energy in the field of force
of any type of magnet is the energy that makes up the atoms
of the material from which it comes! This energy is a real
entity with (it is believed) a gyroscopic action. It is
literally Einsteins equation of E = MC2. And it
is believed that this energy moves at the speed of light and
makes up all matter, and that this energy has a constant
pressure effect back to the atoms of the material from which
it came, similar to hydraulic pressure.

This effect is
additionally more fully understood by stating the following
results obtained from experimentation by the applicant in
the process of this invention.

(a) When the
system is initially attached to a 1.5 volt size N battery
201 or 301 and the magnet 200 or 300 and related rotation
entities are placed close to or in the center of coil 205 or
305, the following results are observed:

If the electric
current produced in coil 206 (306) is then fed back into
coil 205 (305) in accordance with proper polarity, the
rotation speed of magnet 200 (300) will then accelerate. If
fed back into coil 205 (305) in wrong polarity, the rotation
speed of magnet 200 (300) will slow down.

This proves that
the total force from coil 205 (305) interacting with the
magnet 200 (300) is greater when the electrical energy from
coil 206 (306) is fed back into coil 205 (305) than when
only the initial electrical energy from battery 201 (301) is
fed into coil 205 (305).

When two or three
batteries are electrically connected together in series so
as to create for example three or four and one-half volts of
electrical input, this effect is multiplied. Remember that,
up to a point, the greater the electrical input, the greater
the percentage of atom alignment within the coil 205 (305).

This further
proves that the electric current produced in coil 206 (306)
is a result of the gyroscopic particles of energy released
from the magnetic fields that came from the electromagnetic
makeup of the atoms of coil 205 (305), and is not part of
the initial electrical energy released from the atoms making
up the materials of battery 201 (301)! The coil 206 (306)
can be taken out of the system, or its electrical current
fed away from the system, and the rotational speed of the
magnet 200 (300) will not observably change. The rotational
speed of the magnet 200 (300) will noticeably change,
however, when the electric current from coil 206 (306) is
fed back into coil 205 (305)!

Now a different
result:

(b) When the
electric current from battery 201 (301) becomes weaker to
the point that the magnetic field coming from coil 205 (305)
has weakened and shrunk allowing the magnetic field of the
rotating magnet 200 (300) to expand and then noticeably
induce electric current into coil 206 (306) and into coil
205 (305), then reverse results are observed. When the
magnetic field from coil 205 (305) is large, then the
magnetic field from magnet 200 (300) is retained!

If coil 206 (306)
is then short-circuited, the rotation of magnet 200 (300)
will noticeably slow down.

If the electric
current from coil 206 (306) is fed back into coil 205 (305)
in wrong polarity, the rotation of the magnet 200 (300) will
stop. If fed back into coil 205 (305) in correct polarity,
the rotation of the magnet 200 (300) will slow down. At that
point, the rotation of the magnet 200 (300) will not
accelerate, no matter how connected!

These results show
that, at this time, the magnetic field from magnet 200 (300)
noticeably induces a current in coils 206 (306) and 205
(305) that opposes the rotation of the magnet 200 (300).
This effect has already been mechanically explained, and it
has been shown that Lenzs Law was simply an observation of
that mechanical explanation.

These results
further demonstrate that the expanding and collapsing
magnetic fields from coil 205 (305) and 206 (306) do not
noticeably affect each other detrimentally because the
resulting magnetic fields from all the coils are the results
of fluctuating atom alignment within the coils! Remember,
the gyroscopic energy particles making up the magnetic
fields have a hydraulic pressure effect back to the atoms
from which they came. Also remember that the atoms making up
the material of the permanent magnet 200 (300) are
stationary as to atom alignment direction! Therefore, the
pressure effect resulting from an opposing field that the
magnet 200 (300) induced is immediate, as is hydraulic
pressure.

The magnetic field
emitted from the atoms of coil 205 (305), relative to
induction into the atoms of coil 206 (306), however, are
fluctuating and out of step, so to speak, and therefore in
harmony with each other. The pressure effect from the
induction of coil 205 (305) into coil 206 (306) is an action
of the atoms of coil 205 (305) and back into the atoms of
coil 206 (306).

This action is
seen again when the invention is hooked into 115 volt AC,
and battery 201 (301) is not used.

The magnet 200
(300) will not rotate even though the magnetic field from
coil 205 (305) is strong and is alternating. Reason: The
fluctuating magnetic field is so fast that the inertia mass
of magnet 200 (300) cannot get started in one direction
before the magnetic field from coil 205 (305) has reversed,
thereby causing magnet 200 (300) to vibrate only
microscopically at 60 cycles per second.

And, if a 60-watt
bulb is connected to the system of coil 205 (305), it will
light only dimly, and there is a lag time of two or three
seconds before it lights.

If then coil 206
(306) is connected to a meter, there is a reading of 49
volts, and if the meter is replaced by another 60-watt bulb,
it will light only extremely dimly. The 60-watt bulb
connected to coil 205 (305), however, will now become
noticeably brighter! This again shows that the action and
reaction results of the atoms of the coils are not
noticeably detrimental to each other because of the lag time
(out of step, so to speak) resulting in reinforcing the
flipping atom alignment of the coils.

From this further
explanation of the invention it is seen that desirable
results may be obtained by the following:

For example, in **[Figure 6](#new6)** the magnet 300 may be of a
design and/or be located at a distance from the inside
diameter of coil 305 and coil 306, whereby the majority of
the magnetic field from the magnet 300 do not cut the
conducting loops of coil 305 or 306. Yet the alternating
magnetic field produced by coil 305 should efficiently have
the majority of its gyroscopic particles interacting with
the majority of the gyroscopic particles making up the
magnetic field of the permanent magnet 300, but not directly
reacting with the atoms making up coil 305, or magnet 300!

When the magnetic
lines of force of the magnet 200 (300) cross at right angles
with the conducting wires of coil 205 (305), 206 (306), a
braking action is incurred. It should be noted that, as the
inner diameter of coil 205 (305) increases, the percentage
of time of braking effect decreases.

Along this same
line of instruction, the commutator segments 202 (302) can
be made of a large diameter and the area of brushes made
small, whereby, when the brushes cross over the gaps in the
commutator segments, there will be no short circuit at any
tie directly back to the battery 201 (301).

By combining the
slip rings and brushes (the slip rings can be made of a
small diameter) to the side or sides of the brushes and
commutator segments 202 (302), then battery 201 (301) does
not have to rotate with magnet 200 (300).

The no. 14 and No.
15 gauge copper insulated wire of 70 and 90 pounds (31.5 and
40.5 kilograms) used for the motor coil 205 (305) and the
generator coil 206 (306) respectively in the first hand-made
prototypes of the embodiments of **[Figure
5](#new5)** and **[Figure 6](#new6)** for
demonstration purposes only, come in standard buckets of
varying weights from wholesale outlets. It was then wound in
coils as shown and, as taught, the more conducting wire
sued, the better the results. The magnets 200 and 300 were
each initially about a 2-1/2 inches (6.25 cm) cube and can
be any size and strength desired.

In a further,
rough, hand built demonstration, working prototype of the
invention of the type illustrated in **[Figure
6](#new6)**, the primary motor coil 305 was made of No. 5
gauge copper wire in a single, continuous wire form weighing
approximately 4,100 pounds (1,845 kg.) with a coil lop
diameter of 4-1/2 feet (135 cm), while the secondary or
generator coil 306 was made of No. 24 gauge copper wire in a
single, continuous wire form weighing approximately 300
pounds (145 kg) with the same, approximate loop diameter of
4-1/2 feet (135 cm) with both coils 305, 306 coincidently
forming a cylinder of approximately 30 inches (75 cm) in
length. The coils 305, 306 were built around a cylindrical
fiberglass core body of approximately 200 pounds (90 kg)
having a vertical longitudinal center-line axis.

The rotating
magnet 300 was made up of six separate parallel cylindrical
magnetic columns spaced and disposed about the periphery of
a hollow cylindrical fiberglass surface of approximately 20
inches (50 cm) diameter. Each column was 30 inches (75 cm)
long and was composed of a stack of 70 individual ceramic
ring magnets in disc form as made by Jobmaster Magnets
(Randallstown, MD 21133 USA). Each disc had a thickness of
7/16 inch (1.09375 cm), an inner diameter of one inch (2.5
cm) and an outer diameter of 4 inches (10 cm). The discs
were stacked and secured together in 4-inch (10 cm) diameter
fiberglass tubes longitudinally mounted on the inner surface
of the 20-inch (50 cm) diameter fiberglass cylinder. The
composite magnet 300 had a total weight of approximately 400
pounds (180 kg) and a total length of 30 inches (75 cm) and
an approximate diameter of 20 inches (50 cm).

The magnet 300 was
mounted for rotation on a horizontal shaft 304 extending
across the hollow core of the coils 305, 306 crossing
through the center point of the longitudinal center-line of
the cylinder and orthogonal to the longitudinal center-line
of the magnet 300 for rotation within the open center area
of the cylindrically disposed coils 305 and 306 with the
longitudinal center-lines of the coils being vertically
disposed.

With a DC battery
source 301 of two 12-volt lantern batteries and seventeen
6-volt lantern batteries all ins series (totaling 126
volts), a measured voltage of 126 volts and a measured
current of 99 milliamps was noted in the primary coil 305.
Concurrently a voltage reading of 640 volts and an amperage
measurement in excess of 20 milliamps were noted in the
secondary or generating coil 306, with the magnet 300
rotating at a speed of 120 rpm. Thus the system was
outputting and producing in the generating coil 306 useable
electricity in excess of 102 % of that being input in the
motor coil 305! This excess useful electrical energy of
course is in addition to the further useful mechanical
energy available at the exemplary drive takeoff 307 on the
rotating shaft 304, on which the 400-pound, 30-inch long
magnet 300 was rotating at 120 rpm!

Thus the
invention, by utilizing the energy of the gyroscopic
particles in the magnetic field, produces a greater energy
output than the energy input to the system, thus producing
results beyond presently accepted scientific teachings of
the world.

This prototype
achieves exactly what has already been described in great
detail in applicants prior patent applications. In this
prototype there was simply used a stronger magnet and a
larger diameter conducting wire of great length that has a
considerably greater number of atoms aligned when current is
put into the system, and used a greater number of atoms in
the generator coil of fine diameter conducting wire.

While the results
of the energy released from this particular prototype is
highly impressive to others, applicant still has only
scratched the surface of the energy that can be released
using the principles of the present invention.

Again, as has
already been stressed, the most efficient design is one in
which the least amount of input of current causes the
greatest amount of atom alignment.

This data does not
constitute any departure from the applicants previous work,
but is only to further document that which has already been
stressed in the prior patent applications.

Varying the DC
voltage for the battery source 301 shows that obvious
efficiency will continue will continue to rise as the
voltage input goes up!

Also, the leverage
factor advantage of the invention, combined with the inertia
of the 400-pound magnet 300 rotating at 120 rpm (even while
causing the electrical generator to put out over 100% of
energy input) proves the invention to be greatly over 100%
efficient even at this slow rpm.

It is contemplated
that the next prototype will use super-conducting type
material for the coil 305 with a magnet 300 having a
magnetic material comparable to that of cryogenic-type
magnet relative to percentage of atom alignment or size.

This will result
in the size of the invention being much smaller and yet with
the available work output being much greater than the
prototype just described. Reason: The most efficient type
design is one whereby the least amount of current input into
the motor coil produces the greatest atom alignment of said
motor coil and having rotatable magnet also comparable in
strength, relative to size.

The invention can
be made without using the coil 206 (306) and producing just
useful mechanical energy.

Coil 206 (306) can
be merged or wound with coil 205 (305).

The magnet 200
(300) can be an electromagnet, a permanent magnet, a
cryogenic magnet, or any magnet.

The design of
magnet 200 (300) can create a strong but retained magnetic
field.

The design of coil
205 (305) can be used to further retain the magnetic field
of magnet 200 (300).

Alternating
current can be used in place of the DC battery 201 (301), if
the magnet 200 (300) is designed accordingly.

The coils 205
(305) and 206 (306) may be made up of several coils rather
than a single coil.

The magnet 200
(300) may be made up of several individual magnets rather
than from just a single magnet.

From the foregoing
it should be understood that, unlike the teachings of the
prior art, the following is desired in the design of the
coil 205 (305) under the principles of the present
invention:

(a) Current
initially flowing into and through the coil should be small
compared to the energy output of the system;

(b) A relatively
large diameter wire or its equivalent is used for the coil;

(c) A relatively
large number of coil loops or coils is used;

(d) A relatively
long, continuous length of coil wire or its equivalent is
used; and

(e) The greatest
magnetism for a given mass of the magnet 200 (300) is
desired but may be designed to that the magnetic lines of
force will not cut the coils at a right angle.

The present
invention applies to any mechanical device that is operated
by electrical energy. In accordance with the principles of
the present invention, the mechanical device should be
designed wherein the electrical current as much as is
feasible cannot get back to its source, but the circuit is
completed whereby the pressure force is constant throughout
the system.

What has been
invented, built and disclosed is an invention of immense
importance to the well-being of the entire world. There will
be many devices built from what has been shown and taught.
It should now be known that all matter is made up of
electromagnetic energy and that there are many mechanical
ways to release this energy, as has been stated throughout
the five prior related patent applications hereof and the
Disclosure Document. All of these future developments will
be as a result of the present invention, which releases
energy above and beyond conventional energy release
mechanisms prior to this invention

Claims ~

What is claimed
is:

(1) An electrical
energy generation system for generating useable electrical
energy, comprising:

a source of at
least one magnetic field;

useable electrical
energy output means associated with said magnetic field for
making available for sue the useable electrical energy
generated in the system; and

application means
associated with said magnetic field for applying an adequate
force at the proper angle to the gyroscopic type energy
particles making up said magnetic field to cause said
gyroscopic type energy particles to follow a desired
direction producing useable electrical energy at said output
means, the amount of said useable electrical energy being
greater than the amount of any external energy input to said
source and said application means.

(2) The system of
Claim (1), wherein said application means comprises magnetic
means for producing a magnetic field and a closed housing
associated therewith containing a fluid in the magnetic
field produced by said magnetic means, said fluid becoming
charged as a result of its interaction with the gyroscopic
type energy particles making up said magnetic field.

(3) The system of
Claim (2), wherein said magnetic means is a series of
aligned magnets positioned centrally within said housing but
electrically insulated therefrom.

(4) The system of
Claim (2), wherein there is included a further, keeper
housing surrounding said closed housing and electrically
insulated therefrom, said keeper housing tending to keep and
concentrate the magnetic field produced by said magnetic
means within it.

(5) The system of
Claim (2), wherein said output means includes a network of
metallic surfaces immersed in said fluid to pick up the
electrical charges on said fluid.

(6) The system of
Claim (1), wherein said application means comprises a member
having its atoms aligned to produce a net magnetic field
which is at least substantially contained within the surface
boundaries of said member.

(7) The system of
Claim (6), wherein said member is positioned in operative
association with at least one magnet, and said member and
said magnet are held static with respect to one another.

(8) An energy
generation system for generating useable energy, comprising:

at least one mass
of material producing a source of at least one magnetic
field;

useable energy
output means associated with said magnetic field for making
available for use the useable energy generated in the
system;

alignment means
associated with said mass for causing at least some of the
atoms of said mass to alternately align and disalign,
releasing some of the internal energy making up the affected
atoms of said mass; and

utilization means
for utilizing some of the energy released from the affected
atoms of said mass producing useable energy at said output
means, the amount of said useable energy being greater than
the amount of any external energy input to said mass, said
alignment means and said utilization means.

(9) An energy
generation system for generating useable energy, comprising:

at least one mass
of material producing a source of at least one magnetic
field;

useable energy
output means associated with said magnetic field for making
available for use the useable energy generated in the
system;

alternating
electric current means associated with said mass for
producing an electric current in said mass in an alternating
direction, causing an alternating magnetic field to
encompass said mass; and

current retarding
means associated with said mass for at least partially
entrapping said electric current in said mass an effective
amount for producing useable energy at said output means of
an amount greater that the amount of energy input into said
mass from said alternating electric current means.

(10) The system of
either one of Claim 8 or 9, wherein:

the energy
generation system comprises an electrical energy generation
system; and said useable energy output means comprises an
electrical power output means.

(11) The system of
either one of Claims 8 or 9, wherein:

the energy
generation system comprises a motion generation system; and
said useable energy output means comprises useable motion
output means.

(12) The system of
Claim (9), wherein said current retarding means includes at
least one coil of wire of effective size having an effective
number of turns of wire of an effectively large diameter and
an effectively great length for at least partially
entrapping said electric current.

(13) The system of
Claim (9), wherein said current retarding means includes a
rotary magnetic mass designed to react said alternating
magnetic field encompassing said mass of material, said
alternating magnetic field reversing no faster than the
atoms of said mass of material can flip and realign; said
rotary magnetic mass being made long to adjust to this
requirement, the distance of the arc of circle traveled by
the ends of said rotary magnetic mass being great; great
leverage from said alternating magnetic field of said mass
of material being applied to said rotary magnetic mass, and,
in addition to the increased distance of arc traveled by the
ends of said rotary magnetic mass before the magnetic field
of said mass of material reverses, greatly increasing the
time in which a maximum force is exerted by the gyroscopic
type energy particles moving in a magnetic field coming from
the maximum number of atoms aligned in said mass of
material, causing a longer time of acceleration of said
rotary magnetic mass before the atoms of said mass are
required to reverse.

(14) The method of
generating suitable useable energy, comprising the steps of:

(a) providing a
magnetic device that has a material mass into which an
electrical current is introduced, which results in causing
pertinent atom alignment within said material mass, thereby
releasing some of the electromagnetic energy making up the
atoms of said material mass in the form of a magnetic field,
causing the gyroscopic type energy particles of said
magnetic field to then interact with the gyroscopic type
energy particles making up a magnetic field coming from the
atoms of a different material mass; and

(b) having the
magnetic device then cause a release of useable energy
through at least one power outlet and resulting in producing
a greater energy output than external energy input to the
device.

(15) The method of
Claim (14), wherein the material mass into which the
electric current is introduced is a superconducting
material, and said separate magnetic mass is at least
equivalent to a cryogenic magnet.

(16) The method of
Claim (14), wherein step (a) is achieved by the step of
having said material be a conducting material and said
separate magnetic mass be of any desired configuration of
strength or type.

(17) The method of
Claim (14), wherein the material mass(es) are made of a
material or substance that allows for extremely fast atom
alignment without the delay or conventional degrees of
hysteresis loses normally associated with conventional iron
atom alignment.

(18) A method of
generating useable electrical energy from a source of at
least one magnetic field, comprising the following step:

applying an
adequate force at the proper angle to the gyroscopic type
energy particle to follow a desired direction producing
useable electrical energy at an output means of an amount
greater than the amount of any external energy input to the
system.

(19) The method of
Claim (18), wherein there is further included the step of:

maintaining all of
the elements of the system in fixed locations without any
normal, visible movement taking place within the system.

(20) A device that
increases the availability of useable electrical energy or
useable motion, or both, from a given mass or masses by a
device causing a controlled release of, or reaction to, the
gyroscopic type energy particle making up or coming from the
atoms of the mass or masses, which in turn, by a properly
designed system, causes an energy output greater than the
energy input.

(21) The method of
producing useable energy, comprising the following steps:

(a) inputting
energy into a device from an external source;

(b) having
electrical current flow within said device; and

(c) utilizing the
internal electromagnetic energy of at least some of the
matter in the device to add to the energy being input to the
device from the external source to produce useful energy for
use outside of the device having an amount greater than the
energy being input to the device.

(22) A method for
generating useable energy from at least one mass of material
producing a source of at least one magnetic field,
comprising the following steps:

(a) producing an
electric current in said mass in an alternating direction,
causing an alternating magnetic field to encompass said
mass; and

(b) at least
partially entrapping an effective amount of said electric
current in said mass for producing useable energy at said
output means of an amount greater than the amount of energy
input to said mass from said alternating electric current
means.

(23) The method of
Claim (22), wherein in step (b) there is included the step
of providing a separate magnetic source positioned so that
its magnetic lines of force avoid significantly cutting the
material through which the electrical energy flows, avoiding
a braking effect that would retard the desired motion of
said magnetic source.

(24) The method of
Claim (22), wherein in step (b) there is included the step
of:

(c) retarding the
flow of current through said mass to a very great extent,
producing at most a relatively small negative current flow
through said mass.

(25) The method of
Claim (24), wherein step (c) is achieved at least in part by
a step of providing at least one relatively large coil of
wire having a relatively large number of turns of wire of a
relatively large diameter and a relatively great length.

(26) The method of
Claim (24), wherein step (c) is achieved at least in part by
the step of utilizing a retaining means by which the
electric current is at least mostly retained within at least
one member outside of the source of said electric current
and then, as a result thereof, is capable of producing a
continuous electromagnetic product.

(27) A method for
generating useable energy from at least one mass of material
producing a source of at least one magnetic field,
comprising the following steps:

(a) causing at
least some of the atoms of said mass to alternately align
and disalign, releasing some of the internal energy making
up the affected areas of said mass; and

(b) utilizing some
of the energy released from the affected atoms of said mass,
producing useable energy at an output means of an amount
greater than the amount of any external energy input to the
system.

 
---

  
 ![](new1.jpg)


---

  
 ![](new2.jpg)  


---

   
 ![](new3.jpg)  


---

   
 ![](new4.jpg)  


---

   
 ![](new5.jpg)  


---

   
 ![](new6.jpg)

---